Re: Powerloom, a first stab... [somewhat OT]

On 3/26/10 Mar 26 -3:51 AM, Gerard Toonstra wrote:
> 
> Thanks Hans, this has certainly been helpful. 
> 
> The justifications example certainly looks very complex to me and your
> second point made
> me realize I'd be better off maintaining my own tree in the host code.
> Then I can choose which
> branches to explore based on a number of different algorithms
> (breadth-first, iterative deepening, best-first, etc.).
> I think I'll go down that route for now at least.
> 
> 
> Before looking at powerloom, I looked at JSHOP2. JSHOP2 can solve
> planning problems, but it requires compilation
> of the KB and the language is certainly not as rich as powerloom's for
> the expression of particular relations and so forth.
> Is powerloom well suited for planning problems in general? I haven't
> found any demos or tutorials that
> show how it's used for those kinds of problems.

If you want hierarchical planning, then SHOP2 may be a better choice.
Note, however, that JSHOP2 has not been maintained for many years and is
likely badly bit-rotted.  Active development is only being done on
SHOP2, the Common Lisp version.  If you would like more information
about this, contact me off this list (in particular, no one has been
pushing releases to Sourceforge since the Sourceforge reorg, although
development is ongoing).

Best,
R
> 
> Rgds,
> 
> Gerard
> 
> 
>> From: [email protected]
>> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:18:24 -0800
>> To: [email protected]
>> CC: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: Powerloom, a first stab...
> 
>> (2) minimality: you can do a "retrieve all" and PowerLoom will try to
>> generate all possible solutions. If you have some kind of cost
>> function, you'd compute that cost for each solution and then select
>> the one with the smallest one (e.g., make the cost an output argument
>> and do a :sort-by :values in the retrieve). However, if there is a
>> potentially large number of solutions, you might want to do something
>> smarter than that by cutting off partial solutions that can't improve
>> on what you already have. That, however, you would have to do in
>> code. You might also have more complex subsumption relationships
>> between solutions which might require a somewhat more sophisticated
>> approach.
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> >>>>> Gerard Toonstra <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > Hi there,
>>
>> > I'm currently evaluating powerloom for research in the context of an
> agent platform.
>>
>> > I've read through all documentation of powerloom so far and I think
> it's certainly powerful enough
>> > to use it for our purposes, certainly for all the standard logic.
>> > I do have a question however on producing solutions and
> alternatives. The only recursion
>> > example I found in Powerloom used transitivity rules
> (parent/ancestor example and the RCC8 KB).
>> > Unfortunately, my problem cannot be used with transitivity.
>>
>> > The problem I have is:
>>
>> > So that's the question basically. Can powerloom produce a list of
> entities that together form the solution,
>> > based on some constraints that are set on the production of this
> list and present each acceptable, but minimal
>> > solution individually? I'm not asking for a piece of code, just what
> I need to look for to realize this.
>>
>> > Rgds,
>>
>> G>
>>
>> > _________________________________________________________________
>> > Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more
> from your inbox.
>> >
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_2
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Get started.
> <http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_3>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> powerloom-forum mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerloom-forum