Re: [tlaplus] Re: Using TLC to model check "rule-based expert systems"

I studied expert systems informally 20 years ago so take this with a grain of salt, but from memory the systems decisions would develop various weights based on training. In an expert system a human assists (trains) the system when a decision is incorrect or not preferable.

The system you described seems more like a complex classification system if you can add rules as you go.

This doesn't really answer your question sorry...but I think others have already done so.

On Wed, 1 May 2019, 10:46 Ron Pressler, <ron.pressler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I believe conflicting rules would either result in no behaviors (equivalent to FALSE, i.e. you can verify Spec => FALSE) or in a deadlock, which you can detect with liveness. But the main idea is to express the specification not as a state machine, but as a conjunction of state machines, each corresponding to a rule ("conjoined specifications"). Not generally recommended, but might be useful.

On Wednesday, May 1, 2019 at 1:23:59 AM UTC+1, Jay Parlar wrote:
Thanks, I’ll take a closer look tomorrow. Does this have some mechanism for detecting inconsistent/conflicting rules?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To post to this group, send email to tlaplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tlaplus.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

tlaplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

https://groups.google.com/group/tlaplus

https://groups.google.com/d/optout