[rules-users] drools queries: strange dependency

[Upali Kohomban]

Thanks a lot again, you made my life easy with the build instructions :)

Yes I'm trying to do an integration. I have some experience with 
ontologies and want to experiment with drools as an alternative.

OWL with reasoners like Fact ++ are pretty much good for the job, except 
for the fact that they handle individual data bits in quite a cumbersome 
way. It was because of this reason that I wanted to experiment on other 
ways of modeling a knowledge structure with better facilities for 
querying large amounts of factual data. I'm giving drools a try, but I'm 
not entirely sure if drools can do things as powerful as a reasoner.

Basically, I'd like to be able to let the data lie (without firing any 
"events" until necessary)  and query the inferences in a first-order 
logic like manner. This is very space-efficient in data-heavy scenarios. 
I know that this isn't the traditional way drools is designed to work. 
I'm trying to solve the inference problem by dynamically adding semantic 
classes to each object to store all the possible inferences about it, so 
they can be queried later. Problem with this approach is that it gets 
out of hand very quickly, because the enumerated number of such 
inferences can be HUGE even for a moderate KB. Backward chaining will 
eventually solve this problem, but it seems that the constructs 
available for that in drools queries are not too matured at the moment. 
For instance they don't seem to support numerical inequality operators 
(or I am wrong, which is also very likely).

Thank you again for the quick help,
Upali






On 11/04/2013 14:14, Davide Sottara wrote:
> You should be able to
> git clone ...
> the droolsjbpm repository, then
> git checkout -t origin/5.5.x
>
> this should switch to 5.5.1-SNAPSHOT (you can check the pom in the root
> folder)
> eventually, mvn clean install should do the trick.
>
> See also the readme.md in github
>
> Btw, it seems that you're working with rule/ontology integrations..
> would you
> be interested in sharing thoughts?
>
> Davide
>
> On 04/11/2013 01:29 AM, upalik wrote:
>> Hi Davide,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the information and your time spent on troubleshooting the
>> scenario with a test case.
>>
>> I'm using 5.5.0; as I mentioned, I'm a newbie. I'll try to get 5.5.1
>> compiled and running (on windows), I'm reading whatever the documentation I
>> can find on how to do this. Github source seems to be on 6.0.0, I'll try
>> with that one if all else fails.
>>
>> I'm loading the rule base using a KnowledgeBuilder, and yes I do check for
>> errors explicitly after building. The rule file with the problem I mentioned
>> does not produce any errors, other than the result that doesn't make sense.
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Upali
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/drools-queries-strange-dependency-tp4023320p4023323.html
>> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


-- 

*Upali Kohomban*, PhD
Research Fellow
CodeGen International
29 Breybrooke Street, Colombo 02, Sri Lanka
*T:* +94 112 470 740 *F:* +94 112 470 749 *W:* http://codegen.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20130411/caa17917/attachment.html