Rule engine

• US 20040034848A1
• Filed: 08/11/2003
• Published: 02/19/2004
• Est. Priority Date: 08/09/2002
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Progress Software Corporation
• Original Assignee: Corticon Technologies Incorporated (Progress Software Corporation)
• Inventors: Moore, Eric, Abrari, Pedram
• Granted Patent: US 7,565,642 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 717/117
• CPC Class Codes: G06N 5/047 Pattern matching networks; Rete networks

Abstract

Methods and apparatus, including computer program products, for inference processing in a fact-based business automation system, including receiving a rule set as a single package, generating a dependency graph for the rule set, and generating a sequence of processing logic for optimal processing of inputted facts.

Claims

1. A method comprising:

in a processing system, receiving a rule set as a single package;

generating a dependency graph for the rule set; and

generating a sequence of processing logic for optimal processing of inputted facts.

2. The method of claim 1 in which processing comprises single pass execution when there are no logical loops.

3. The method of claim 1 in which processing comprises multi-pass execution when there is logical loops.

4. The method of claim 3 in which processing further comprises providing an endless loop terminating condition.

5. The method of claim 1 in which the rule set is free of logical conflicts.

6. The method of claim 1 in which generating the dependency graph comprises determining logical dependencies across rules contained in the rule set.

7. The method of claim 6 in which generating the dependency graph further comprises resolving logical conflicts using override instructions.

8. The method of claim 7 in which generating the dependency graph further comprises analyzing the rule set with a business logic generation utility optimized for one of a plurality of target programming languages and generating optimized logic for a selected target programming language.

9. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is Java.

10. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is C++.

11. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is Jython.

12. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is JavaScript.

13. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is Visual Basic

14. The method of claim 8 in which the target programming language is C#.

15. The method of claim 8 in which the business logic generation utility'"'"'s generated processing logic comprises a series of calls to a working memory database to retrieve, manipulate and update data.

16. A method for automating business processes comprising:

in a computer system, receiving a rule set as a single package;

determining logical conflicts within the rule set;

resolving the logical conflicts; and

generating a sequence of processing logic from the rule set for optimal processing of inputted facts.

17. The method of claim 16 in which resolving comprises determining override conditions in rule collision events.

18. The method of claim 16 in which generating comprises analyzing the rule set with a business logic generation utility optimized for one of a plurality of target programming languages and generating optimized business logic for the selected target programming language.

19. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is Java.

20. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is C++.

21. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is Jython.

22. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is JavaScript.

23. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is Visual Basic.

24. The method of claim 18 in which the target programming language is C#.

25. The method of claim 18 in which the business logic generation utility'"'"'s generated processing logic comprises a series of calls to a working memory database to retrieve, manipulate and update data.

26. A computer program product, disposed on a computer readable medium, for business processing automation, the program including instructions for causing a processor to:

receive a rule set as a single package;

generate a dependency graph for the rule set; and

generate a sequence of processing logic for optimal processing of inputted facts.

27. The product of claim 26 in which the rule set is free of logical conflicts.

28. The product of claim 26 in which to generate the dependency graph comprises determining logical dependencies across rules contained in the rule set.

29. The product of claim 28 in which to generate the dependency graph further comprises instructions for causing the processor to:

determine logical conflicts between rules in the rule set; and

resolve the logical conflicts with override instructions.