Re: Expert systems in forth

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:09:13 +0000, Anton Ertl wrote:

melahi_ahmed@yahoo.fr (ahmed) writes:

I'll see how to change the flow of the inference using the action field
of facts and executing them during the inference, like this we can
choose the next rule to use.

>
Potential improvements:
>
Also have rules that work for both truth and falsness.  E.g., for
non-extinct animals, all birds have feathers and only birds have
feathers.  So if you ask the "feathers" question, and you get a "yes",
you know it is a bird, and if you get a "no", you know that it is no
bird.
>
And then you do not need to ask about wings

The bat has wings and can fly and it is a mammal.

and egg-laying unless the
answer is "don't know" (supporting that would be another improvement).

Your example `platypus', it lays eggs, and it is not a bird.

>

s" platypus :- swim , not-fly , eat-meat , hoofs , hair .;" >rules

>
It seems to me that the platypus has claws, not hoofs.  The most
puzzling property of the platypus, though, is that it is a mammal and
lays eggs.
>
- anton

Until now, I assume: no equivalent to unknown.
Three level logic: yes/no/unknown (true/false/unknown)can be
implemented.
Perhaps, Carnaugh tables can be helpful.
I'll try to do it if time permits.
Ahmed
--