On 25/07/17 11:57, javed khan wrote:
Dave, the "Goal" here is a data property which has integer values. Is it
monotonic in this case?
Presumably that means that when the number of goals change you remove
the statement with the old data property value and add a replacement
statement with a different number. If so then that's the situation I've
already described that will work with rules just fine.
Try it and see.
Lorenz, from past post I have seen some where that if you put the inferred
data into another model, then it may solve the problem. Is this the case or
I have just misinterpret the meaning?
You have to think through (and if you want help, then describe to us)
exactly what the data flow is that you are after. Think of rules as just
a building block - how you present data to the rules, what you do with
the resulting inferences and how you handle data changes all depend on
the specific problem you are dealing with. Taking the results of
inference (the deduction model in the case of forward rules) and copying
them somewhere else may or may not be helpful depending on exactly what
you are doing in your overall system.
Dave
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Lorenz Buehmann <
[email protected]> wrote:
I know rules are non monotonic,
No, that's exactly not the case for Jena rules - the computation is
monotonic.
We had this discussion here several times, either it was you or some
other people (e.g. tina sani, kumar rohit etc.) doing the same
project/exercise/homework whatever
The answer is, you have to implement it by yourself in the client code -
which means you have to remove the data that doesn't hold anymore. Or
you always refer to only the data that will be inferred by the rules
ad-hoc and don't write it back to the raw data. Indeed this might be
expensive but we don't know anything about your project. This are
typical design decision that YOU have to make based on YOUR requirements.
