7:54 a.m.
I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot find any mention of
it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive) relation in Drools?
-----------------------------------------------------------
The classic example from Prolog:
-- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of C.
parent(P,C).
-- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an ancestor
-- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and C
-- is an ancestor of B.
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
-- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an ancestor
-- of frank.
?- ancestor(bob,frank).
-----------------------------------------------------------
In Drools, I can find the parent using
query isParent(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
likewise, I can find the grandparent using
query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
g: Person(name = a)
p: Person(parent = g)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
8:27 a.m.
You could have something along the lines
class Person {
Person parent;
Collection getAncestors() {
Collection<Person> ancestors = new HashSet<Person>();
Person currentAncestor = parent;
while(currentAncestor != null) {
ancestors.add(currentAncestor);
currentAncestor = currentAncestor.getParent();
}
}
}
query isAncestor(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, ancestors contains p)
end
that should do it
dave
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Faron Dutton <fgdutton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot find any
mention of
it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive) relation in Drools?
-----------------------------------------------------------
The classic example from Prolog:
-- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of C.
parent(P,C).
-- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an ancestor
-- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and C
-- is an ancestor of B.
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
-- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an ancestor
-- of frank.
?- ancestor(bob,frank).
-----------------------------------------------------------
In Drools, I can find the parent using
query isParent(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
likewise, I can find the grandparent using
query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
g: Person(name = a)
p: Person(parent = g)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
8:46 a.m.
I wonder whether a custom accumulate function could be used to move your
logic out of the object model?
Not that accumulate was (probably) meant for this sort of function but
the "init" method could create the empty set and "accumulate" perform
your iteration below?
Just the musing of an idle mind.
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of David Sinclair
Sent: 21 January 2009 14:28
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Reasoning over hierarchies.
You could have something along the lines
class Person {
Person parent;
Collection getAncestors() {
Collection<Person> ancestors = new HashSet<Person>();
Person currentAncestor = parent;
while(currentAncestor != null) {
ancestors.add(currentAncestor);
currentAncestor =
currentAncestor.getParent();
}
}
}
query isAncestor(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, ancestors contains p)
end
that should do it
dave
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Faron Dutton
<fgdutton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot
find any mention of
it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive)
relation in Drools?
-----------------------------------------------------------
The classic example from Prolog:
-- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of
C.
parent(P,C).
-- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an
ancestor
-- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and
C
-- is an ancestor of B.
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
-- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an
ancestor
-- of frank.
?- ancestor(bob,frank).
-----------------------------------------------------------
In Drools, I can find the parent using
query isParent(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
likewise, I can find the grandparent using
query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
g: Person(name = a)
p: Person(parent = g)
c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
end
I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
9:14 a.m.
Thanks. I'll look into this.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Anstis, Michael (M.) <manstis1(a)ford.com> wrote:
I wonder whether a custom accumulate function could be used to move
your
logic out of the object model?
Not that accumulate was (probably) meant for this sort of function but the
"init" method could create the empty set and "accumulate" perform
your
iteration below?
Just the musing of an idle mind.
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of David Sinclair
Sent: 21 January 2009 14:28
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Reasoning over hierarchies.
You could have something along the lines
class Person {
Person parent;
Collection getAncestors() {
Collection<Person> ancestors = new HashSet<Person>();
Person currentAncestor = parent;
while(currentAncestor != null) {
ancestors.add(currentAncestor);
currentAncestor = currentAncestor.getParent();
}
}
}
query isAncestor(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, ancestors contains p)
end
that should do it
dave
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Faron Dutton <fgdutton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot find any mention
> of
> it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive) relation in Drools?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> The classic example from Prolog:
>
> -- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of C.
> parent(P,C).
>
> -- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an ancestor
> -- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and C
> -- is an ancestor of B.
> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
>
> -- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an ancestor
> -- of frank.
> ?- ancestor(bob,frank).
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> In Drools, I can find the parent using
>
> query isParent(String a, String b)
> p: Person(name = a)
> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
> end
>
> likewise, I can find the grandparent using
>
> query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
> g: Person(name = a)
> p: Person(parent = g)
> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
> end
>
> I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
2:49 p.m.
you can do something like this to drive backward chaining queries.
Notice it inserts a new fact to drive the query down the graph, but
deletes that driver once all it's children have been evaluated. It uses
the -5 salience to ensure it's done after all the children have been
evaluated. So just insert an initial FindAncestor fact call
fireAllRules() and it'll println if it's an ancesor, you could ofcourse
have it insert a result object, or set a value on the originally
inserted FindAncestor.
rule "query parent"
when
FindAncestor( $name == name, $ancestor : ancestor )
$child : Person( name == $name, $parent : parent )
$parent : Person( this == $parent, this != ancestor)
then
insert( new FindAncestor( $parent, $ancestor ) )
end
rule "retract query parent driver"
salience - 5
when
$f : FindAncestor( $name == name, $ancestor : ancestor )
$child : Person( name == $name, $parent : parent )
$parent : Person( this == $parent, this != ancestor)
then
retract( $f )
end
rule "ancestor found"
when
FindAncestor( $name == name, $ancestor : ancestor )
$child : Person( name == $name, $parent : parent )
$parent : Person( this == $parent, this == ancestor)
then
println( "is ancestor" )
end
rule "retract query ancestor found driver"
salience - 5
when
$f : FindAncestor( $name == name, $ancestor : ancestor )
$child : Person( name == $name, $parent : parent )
$parent : Person( this == $parent, this == ancestor)
then
retract( $f )
end
Mark
Faron Dutton wrote:
Thanks. I'll look into this.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Anstis, Michael (M.) <manstis1(a)ford.com> wrote:
> I wonder whether a custom accumulate function could be used to move your
> logic out of the object model?
>
> Not that accumulate was (probably) meant for this sort of function but the
> "init" method could create the empty set and "accumulate" perform
your
> iteration below?
>
> Just the musing of an idle mind.
>
> ________________________________
> From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of David Sinclair
> Sent: 21 January 2009 14:28
> To: Rules Users List
> Subject: Re: [rules-users] Reasoning over hierarchies.
>
> You could have something along the lines
>
> class Person {
> Person parent;
>
> Collection getAncestors() {
> Collection<Person> ancestors = new HashSet<Person>();
>
> Person currentAncestor = parent;
>
> while(currentAncestor != null) {
> ancestors.add(currentAncestor);
> currentAncestor = currentAncestor.getParent();
> }
> }
> }
>
> query isAncestor(String a, String b)
> p: Person(name = a)
> c: Person(name = b, ancestors contains p)
> end
>
> that should do it
>
> dave
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Faron Dutton <fgdutton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot find any mention
>> of
>> it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive) relation in Drools?
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The classic example from Prolog:
>>
>> -- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of C.
>> parent(P,C).
>>
>> -- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an ancestor
>> -- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and C
>> -- is an ancestor of B.
>> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
>> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
>>
>> -- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an ancestor
>> -- of frank.
>> ?- ancestor(bob,frank).
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> In Drools, I can find the parent using
>>
>> query isParent(String a, String b)
>> p: Person(name = a)
>> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
>> end
>>
>> likewise, I can find the grandparent using
>>
>> query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
>> g: Person(name = a)
>> p: Person(parent = g)
>> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
>> end
>>
>> I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
9:14 a.m.
This was just an example. I am looking for a more generic way since I
do not know, in advance, what rules are needed. Most of the domain
objects I deal with cannot be changed as they come from third-parties.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:27 AM, David Sinclair
<dsinclair(a)chariotsolutions.com> wrote:
You could have something along the lines
class Person {
Person parent;
Collection getAncestors() {
Collection<Person> ancestors = new HashSet<Person>();
Person currentAncestor = parent;
while(currentAncestor != null) {
ancestors.add(currentAncestor);
currentAncestor = currentAncestor.getParent();
}
}
}
query isAncestor(String a, String b)
p: Person(name = a)
c: Person(name = b, ancestors contains p)
end
that should do it
dave
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Faron Dutton <fgdutton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I know this has probably been asked before but I cannot find any mention
> of
> it. How does one reason over a transitive (recursive) relation in Drools?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> The classic example from Prolog:
>
> -- The relation parent(P,C) says that P is a parent of C.
> parent(P,C).
>
> -- The predicate ancestor(A,B) implies that A is an ancestor
> -- of B if A is a parent of B or A is a parent of C and C
> -- is an ancestor of B.
> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,B).
> ancestor(A,B) :- parent(A,C), ancestor(C,B).
>
> -- The query ancestor(bob,frank) asks if bob is an ancestor
> -- of frank.
> ?- ancestor(bob,frank).
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> In Drools, I can find the parent using
>
> query isParent(String a, String b)
> p: Person(name = a)
> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
> end
>
> likewise, I can find the grandparent using
>
> query isGrandparent(String a, String b)
> g: Person(name = a)
> p: Person(parent = g)
> c: Person(name = b, parent = p)
> end
>
> I am unable to formulate the query isAncestor.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
5599
days inactive
5599
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Anstis, Michael (M.) -
David Sinclair -
Faron Dutton -
Mark Proctor