No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Comparative Evaluation of Three Expert System Development Tools: Kee, Knowledge Craft, Art
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2009
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and compare three of the most powerful expert system tools available: KEE from Intellicorp, Knowledge Craft from The Carnegie Group Inc., and ART from Inference Corporation.
These three tools are industrial development environments which are fully supported and well beyond research prototypes. They were implemented on Lisp machines initially, but will soon be available on conventional computers. The three systems are very flexible and offer many ways of representing knowledge.
The first part of the paper is a technical overview of each tool. The second part presents their common features. The third part discusses the advantages and drawbacks of each, according to types of application.
This work has been partially sponsored by the Commission of the European communities within the Esprit Project 932 entitled ‘Knowledged-based Real-Time supervision in Computer Integrated Manufacturing’. We are grateful to Didier Gaget-Soufflot (Graphael, France) and Bernard Raust (CGE/TITN) for their participation in the evaluation of KEE and ART respectivily.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Browston, L., Farell, R., Kant, E., Martin, N.: Programming expert systems in OPS5, an introduction to rule-based programming. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1985, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Carnegie Group: Knowledge Craft 3.O, reference manual, volume 1, 2, 1985, Carnegie Group Inc, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.AGoogle Scholar
Clayton, B.: Art, Automated Reasoning Tool, Programming primer, 1985, Inference Corporation, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Clayton, B.: Art, Automated Reasoning Tool, Programming Tutorial, volume 1, 2, 3, 1985, Inference Corporation, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.Google Scholar
De Kleer, J.: An assumption-based TMS, Draft of report, 1985. Intelligent systems Laboratory, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, California, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Forgy, C.: On the efficient implementation of production systems, Ph. D. Thesis, 1979, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,Google Scholar
Forgy, C.: Ops5 User's Manual, Technical Report CMU-CS–18–135, 1981, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M.: Reasoning with incomplete knowledge in resource limited environments; integrating reasoning and knowledge acquisition, IJCAI 1981, p 313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M.: Constraint-directed search: A case study of job-shop scheduling, Ph. D. Thesis, 1983, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Hayes-Roth, F., Waterman, D., Lenat, D.: Building expert Systems Addison-Wesley 1983, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Intellicorp: Kee, Software development system user's manual KEE version 2.1, 1985. Intellicorp, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Laurent, J.P.: Control structures in expert systems. Technology and Sciences of informatics, vol.3. P 147–162, 1983, Afcte-bordas, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
Richer, M.: An evaluation of expert system development tools, Report °KSL 85–19 1986, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford California, U.S.AGoogle Scholar
Roche, C., Laurent, J.P.: LRO2; Aratificial intelligence and object oriented languages: 10th World Computer Congress, IFIP '86, Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
Vignard, P.: Representation des connaissances, mécanisme dèxploitation et dapprentissage, INR1A, Roquencourt, FRANCEGoogle Scholar
- 11
- Cited by