ns2 project in France
ns2 project in France how might it be more intelligent Lazy tnatching works for OPS because it is possible to define a total ordering over WM elements. Match ns2 project in France runs faster since it stops searching for instances once one is found. The computed instance is guaranteed to be the same instance chosen from an eager computation. In metarule matching, one can presumably stop assoon as one instance is found too. But this is ns2 project in France not the case.
The semantics of metarules dictates that when there are twoormore conflicting ruleinstances, some particular instance should be redacted. Can we ns2 project in France define a total ordering over rule instances and use lazy matching at the network nodes applied to instances so that only the single rule instanc,e that would be fired is ns2 project in France generated and those that would be redacted would not even be generated? The answer is no. Preference here is not dependent upon lexicographic sort of a totally ordered ns2 project in France WM as in OPS. Preference here means programmer supplied preference based upon arbitrary conditions on bound values in instances that are dynamically computed and that, may not define a total ordering. It is unlikely that lazy match will be effective in systems ns2 project in France with set-oriented semantics as described here.
Our goal is to compute and execute as many instances, and thus asmany working memory transactions, in a single ns2 project in France inference cycle aspossible. We do not seek to compute a single firable rule as quickly as ns2 project in France possible in a single inference cycle by reducing the amount of irrelevant match work as in lazy evaluation.