[rules-users] Re: Re: Newbie: Is this feasible w/ Drools?

[Edson Tirelli]

   Alexander,

   There is an audit feature in the engine that is capable of generating 
a log file showing everything that is occuring inside the engine... from 
rules activation/deactivation/firing to fact assertions/retractions. 
Although, you would need to build something to perform the analysis of 
such data, since I guess the volume of data you will generate will be huge.
   Another possible interesting feature for you is logical assertions, 
since your reasoning (from what I understood) will require a chain of 
justifications/inferences.

   POC = Proof of Concept. So I would recomend getting a small (but 
representative) sample of your rules and try it out. Should be pretty 
quick to do and will give you confidence about what the tool can and 
cannot do.

   []s
   Edson

Alexander Richter wrote:

> Edson,
>
> Thank you for your prompt reply.
> It's good to know that I can dynamically add rules to a rulebase.
>
> With regard to a 'rule hierarchy', I'm actually referring to the fact  
> that our assertions often build on each other. I'd really like to be  
> able to define the rules only once, but be able to see the (sub-) 
> rules and facts that make up an assertion.
> E.g:
> 'Glutathione Biosynthesis' is asserted YES if we have both 'Glutamate- 
> Cysteine Ligase' AND 'Glutathione Synthetase'.
> 'Glutamate-Cysteine Ligase' is asserted YES if we find any of 4  
> different annotations (facts).
> 'Glutathione Synthetase' is asserted YES if we find any of 2  
> different annotations (facts).
>
> We need to see all assertions related to an annotation, all the way  
> up the inference chain. Likewise, since we'd like to define the rules  
> only once (in Drools), it's important to be able to see all the steps  
> that made up the inference chain to 'Glutathione Biosynthesis'.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> P.S. What's a POC?
>
>
>> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:17:25 -0300
>> From: Edson Tirelli <tirelli at post.com>
>> Subject: Re: [rules-users] Newbie: Is this feasible w/ Drools?
>> To: Rules Users List <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>> Message-ID: <45E61B95.8090603 at post.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>>
>>    Alexander,
>>
>>    Seems a really interesting project indeed!
>>    Trying to answer:
>>
>> 1. I'm not sure what you mean by "rule hierarchy". Drools does not
>> support rule "inheritence" if that is what you mean by hierarchy...  can
>> you please ellaborate?
>>
>> 2. Dynamically adding rules to a rulebase will not force a full
>> reevaluation. Only the new rules are evaluated and if they eventually
>> have Patterns that may be shared, they are not even evaluated, as they
>> already were.
>>
>>    The problem I think you will face is that Drools does not support
>> uncertanty reasoning. You will need to code uncertanty by hand if you
>> use drools. I suggest you a POC to check how it goes.
>>
>>    []s
>>    Edson
>> -- 
>>  Edson Tirelli
>>  Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
>>  Office: +55 11 3124-6000
>>  Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
>>  JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>


-- 
 Edson Tirelli
 Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
 Office: +55 11 3124-6000
 Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com