All,
I finished today both, the porting of Waltz to jess and the
corrections on our DRL version of the rules. I believe our DRL is now
correct. Was not able to find any problem.
Although, our results are different from jess. In the *simplest*
case (18 lines), I think both our answer is correct and jess' answer is
correct, even being different answers. But, when I tried with larger
data bases, our answer does not seems to be correct as it plots almost
all edges as "Boundary" edges.
The reason for this is that we trigger rules in a different sequence
from jess. From what I could gather and looking at some classes inside
jess, the criteria it uses for triggering rules is:
1. Salience
2. Recency, where tuple recency it uses is the sum of all facts
recencies inside the tuple
3. was not able to determine. Seems to be a not deterministic criteria.
This makes impossible for us to compare performance, as we are
clearly following different execution paths compared to jess.
What are the next steps on this? Should we implement the second
criteria above?
Unless I'm missing something here, the test is extremelly data
sensitive and seems to be designed to work with the resolution criterias
jess/clips use.
Thoughts?
Edson
---
Edson Tirelli
Auster Solutions do Brasil
@ www.auster.com.br
+55 11 5096-2277 / +55 11 9218-4151
