Re: [rules-users] drools queries: strange dependency

hi Davide, Your summary is quite accurate about my case. Thanks for the pointer, I will look in to hybrid chaining once I do a little investigation on why exactly the original problem occurred. I'm still having little issues with the 5.5.1 source compilation (for which your help worked flawlessly to get the source working, but there were test fails during the compilation. I will try myself to fix them before asking questions on that). As i said, the bigger problem is with the rules that are transitive in nature. Let's say there is a is_in rule which is used to derive spacial relationships. For instance, a concrete example is_in (uni_of_michigan, ann_arbor). is_in(ann_arbor, MI). is_in(MI, USA). is_in(A, C) <- is_in(A, B), is_in(B, C). I want to deduce (in general course of reasoning) such stuff as is_in(uni_of_michigan, USA), but if I do it in the regular drools way, I'd end up with a load of unnecessary deductions. This is the biggest problem I have. If you want a more involved concrete example, say I define (for the sake of simplicity) romantic(A) <- scenic(A), secluded(A). scenic(A) <- next_to(A, B), scenic_artefact(B). scenic_artefact(B) <- lake(B) or waterfall(B) or ... and so on secluded(A) <- [ situated further than N km from the nearest city ] Now this last rule is where logic gives way to POJO and databases. It seems to me that this is the most sensible thing to do. Also, this is as far as I want to go at the moment. (Having known the non-boolean reasoning ability of drools from your mail, I can think of many ways I want to use it :) ) I looked into your profile and saw that you have a background on the ontologies. Especially what you have mentioned under Drools - "Open Source Knowledge Integration and Reasoning Platform" in your university profile seems quite intersting and seems to be exactly the things I might be needing in the near future. I was thinking that I'll have to implement non-boolean reasoning using some fuzzy toolkit, if it becomes available with drools I'll be really happy to give it a try. If you have any material to share for further reading on your drools research, I'd be grateful. Thanks, Upali On 15/04/2013 03:10, Davide Sottara wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, I would summarize your requirements as follows: > - you need some "A-box" reasoning, but you are fine with a rule-based > approach > - the object-oriented integration Drools provides is quite convenient > - you have large data sets for which an opportunistic, > "query-oriented" approach > would work better rather than a fully generative "forward chaining" > approach > > Drools "hybrid-chaining" approach could be very useful here - I'm not > sure how > well documented it is, and how you are planning to use it, but it > would be interesting > to see one of your rules - even "stripped" of the details you don't > want to show - > to discuss the behaviour of the engine and its implications. > > I had a use case apparently very similar to yours some time ago.. I'm > working even > now on some experimental forms of rule/object/ontology integration. > The "trait" > feature might be an alternative to the explicit addition of classes > to objects .. it was > enhanced a few days ago to support updates and modifications. > If you have an ontology to begin with, you might also be interested > in the ontology -> class > conversion tool I'm working on even now > > Davide _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users