Mark, no, the system I'm talking about is PAMELA, developed here in Vienna. You may find references to papers citing PAMELA, authored by F.Barachini and N.Theuretzbacher (one is referenced in the thesis you quoted, see [13]), but I doubt that you'l find one of the papers on the web. It was pre-internet days way back then :-)
If you could produce an RBS ranking based on rules fired in production, I think that PAMELA would be in an excellent position. There's a three-digit number of installations by now, but they're running 24/7. -W On 12/03/2013, Mark Proctor <mproc...@codehaus.org> wrote: > OPS83? > http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2478&context=compsci > > > or YES/L1? (seems information on this is out of print and not online > either) > http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00070YQSU/ref=r_soa_w_d > "YES/L1: Integrating expert systems technology with traditional programming > languages (Research Report RC. International Business Machines Inc. Research > Division)" > > > I definitely find linq interesting, as it's straight out of the research > pages from these projects - I wonder if the linq/database propel know about > these… The first time I saw it was in this paper "procedural match augments > data-driven match" > http://www.aaai.org/Papers/AAAI/1986/AAAI86-037.pdf > > They move the "lhs" logic into the consequence block, using the actual > "when" part as a simple goal trigger - allowing the 'lhs' to be used > procedurally, like linq. This allows them to control when a rule is > evaluated and that it's evaluation is atomic, and can have cleanup work > done. > > Mark > > On 12 Mar 2013, at 06:04, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Indeed, this thesis mentions a few features of the system I was >> talking about :-) >> ([13]) >> -W >> >> On 11/03/2013, Mark Proctor <mproc...@codehaus.org> wrote: >>> There were a number of research efforts that looked at combining >>> procedural >>> and rule base programming. >>> This one is quite interesting: >>> Combining Rule-Based and Procedural Programming in the XC and XE >>> Programming >>> Lanaugages >>> http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.9.1106&rep=rep1&type=pdf >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> On 11 Mar 2013, at 18:03, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.l...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 11 March 2013 16:19, Mark Proctor <mproc...@codehaus.org> wrote: >>>> So thinking really long term here. Can we build a "java layer" that >>>> provide all the rule functionality we need - but fit ontop of the java >>>> language neatly. We'd probably need to allow "rule" keyword and have it >>>> in >>>> Classes, at the method level. All class members and methods would be >>>> available to the rules in that class. >>>> >>>> There is this production rule system where you can write your rules >>>> embedded in compiling units, and alongside the legacy program units, of >>>> a >>>> procedural, modular, strongly type HLL, and where you use expressions >>>> in >>>> the language's own syntax in constraints... >>>> >>>> We've been using it ever since 1986. Rabbi Akiva was right, wasn't he >>>> ;-) >>>> >>>> -W >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> rules-users mailing list >>>> rules-users@lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> rules-users@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
