On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Davide Sottara<dsotty(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I'm adding support native for uncertainty to drools: the code is in a > sub-project repository called "drools-chance". I'll probably commit an > update next week, supporting the declaration of beans with distributions as > fields. That's great to hear. I'm glad I'm not the only one interested in this functionality. > Full support in the rules, instead, will take some more time. I would like > to understand better what you mean by "uncertain planning": are you > considering actions with uncertain preconditions / effects or both? or are > you referring to randomized search algorithms? > Of course, you can always manage uncertainty explicitly, using additional > facts and calculating the probabilities, but I would not recommend that > unless you need a working prototype very quickly. I'm mainly interested in planning with uncertain effects, similar to what I've found in most probabilistic graphplan implementations (e.g. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~avrim/pgp.html). > Best, > Davide > > p.s. > The paper you found is old and obsolete, definitely not worthy looking at ( > shame on the main author ;) ) Heh, I'm glad you're still involved with the community after all these years. Thanks for not dropping the research. I've seen a lot of interesting graduate research just die as soon as the project/thesis is over. Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users