I think forward or backward chaining does not make that much of a difference, both would get stuck on the same omission of facts.
But your question is not entirely clear. Backward chaining is not about inferring rules like you seem to imply, which would be complex indeed. Being based on goals means that extra goal facts are asserted in working memory and part or all of the rules have goal-conditions. After that it’s just forward chaining again. Goal facts are added opportunistically, which means that at least one condition of a rule must be met in order to assert goal-facts that correspond to following conditions of the rule. Such a first condition might be a goal condition. Goal conditions therefore drive backward chaining. (I’m not entirely sure it works like this in JESS. It does however work this way in Haley’s Eclipse) Martijn From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mohd. Noor Sent: maandag 19 november 2007 21:28 To: jess-users@sandia.gov Subject: JESS: Forward and Backward chaining Hi All Forward chaining is based on the supplied facts whereas backward chaining based on the goals. How about in the first run during the forward chaining- the rules cannot be fired; could be due to the limited information (of resources), do I have to infer the rules using the backward chaining after that based on the goals approaches ( with refers to complex rules and template that not statically defined) cheers mnoor No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1139 - Release Date: 19-11-2007 12:35 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1139 - Release Date: 19-11-2007 12:35
