Re: [rules-users] Planner/solver - POSITIVE scoring...

-----Original Message----- From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users- bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Michael Neale Sent: 08 January 2010 01:21 To: Rules Users List Subject: Re: [rules-users] Planner/solver - POSITIVE scoring... yeah that is it. BTW - is it ok to chat about planner here - is there enough interest to create a separate list for it if needed? (or is traffic low enough people aren't troubled?). On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:11 AM, Greg Barton <greg_barton(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: > So, basically what you're saying is, "The impact of a given negative soft constraint is reduced by the occurrence of another positive constraint." > > If that's the case, the rule makes sense to me: total up the occurrences of the negative constraint, total up the occurrences of the positive constraint, and then combine them in a way that describes their relationship. > > In this case, what the positive constraint "favors" is the reduction or elimination of the negative constraint, so subtracting the positive constraint makes sense. (A classic "interference pattern" situation.) > > --- On Thu, 1/7/10, Michael Neale <michael.neale(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >> From: Michael Neale <michael.neale(a)gmail.com&gt; >> Subject: [rules-users] Planner/solver - POSITIVE scoring... >> To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org&gt;, "Geoffrey" <ge0ffrey.spam(a)gmail.com&gt; >> Date: Thursday, January 7, 2010, 12:23 AM >> Hi All - FYI I have been conversing >> with Geoffrey on basic >> solver/planner usage questions, but we are bring the >> discussion here >> in case others can benefit. >> >> So I am looking at using IntConstraintOccurrence, for >> scoring with >> weights, and HardAndSoftConstraintScoreCalculator. So I can >> see how >> NEGATIVE_HARD and NEGATIVE_SOFT scores would work, with >> appropriate >> accumulator rules doing that etc. >> >> What I am not sure about is ConstraintType.POSITIVE - so I >> want to use >> that to "favour" certain aspects of a solution. So would >> the correct >> way to use that to be to have rules that use a positive >> IntConstrainOccurrence, and then do something like: >> >> when >> $softTotal : Number() from >> accumulate( >> >> IntConstraintOccurrence(constraintType == >> ConstraintType.NEGATIVE_SOFT, $weight : weight), >> sum($weight) // >> Vote for >> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1075 >> ); >> $positiveTotal: Number() >> from accumulate( >> >> IntConstraintOccurrence(constraintType == >> ConstraintType.POSITIVE, $weight : weight), >> sum($weight) // >> Vote for >> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1075 >> ); >> >> then >> >> scoreCalculator.setSoftConstraintsBroken($softTotal.intValue() >> - $positiveTotal.intValue()); >> >> >> >> ?? it seems odd - I want to use POSITIVE but I am using it >> to reduce >> the soft constraints broken? The the higher the positive >> score, the >> less softConstraintsBroken property of the score calculator >> is set - >> that seems odd... or should I not use HardAndSoft if I am >> using >> POSITIVE and NEGATIVE scoring? >> >> >> -- >> Michael D Neale >> home: www.michaelneale.net >> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > -- Michael D Neale home: www.michaelneale.net blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users