It was written June 4, 1999, and at that time the advantage was clearly with CLIPS.
If you don't want to read it all, here are the conclusions:
Chapter 3 The conclusions
Both CLIPS and JESS are products with a large support on the internet,
but CLIPS seems to have a broader audience, probably because it exists
longer. This difference in age results in the CLIPS package being more
stable and complete, while JESS users will still experience some minor
bugs. JESS is constantly updated and the author, Ernest Friedman-Hill,
has been very responsive to user/developer feedback and regularly puts
out new releases and bug fixes.
Nowadays, the choice between JESS and CLIPS depends on the
application. If it is web-based or should reside in applet-form, the
choice of JESS is a very logical one (which is even supported by the
authors of CLIPS). For the more classic applications, CLIPS will
probably be chosen because of its reputation of being more stable and
having more support.
The future of JESS depends highly on the evolution of the web, the
Java programming language and its own future stability. These three
conditions make that there is a great possibility that JESS will
become more popular and more frequently used. Especially the
object-oriented possibilities and the easy integration into Java code
makes JESS’ future very promising.
CLIPS, on the other hand, is more likely to implement the new and
sophisticated features first as they come out, since it still has the
advantage in time. CLIPS has also various extensions and variants(like
FuzzyCLIPS, AGENT CLIPS, DYNACLIPS, KnowExec, CAPE, PerlCLIPS, wxCLIPS
and EHSIS to name a few) that give it an advantage with respect to
support of methods like fuzzy logic and agents.
The multifunctional developing environment of CLIPS for operating
systems that support windows is also an advantage, while JESS has just
one window with two buttons (‘clear window’ and ‘quit’), without a
menu. Figures 1 and 2 depict both environments.
To summarize, CLIPS is still more complete and stable than JESS, but
this might change in the future, since the JESS package is being
improved constantly. Besides that, JESS has also the property of using
Java, which in the long run might prove to be a big advantage over
CLIPS.
I went through the same process, about a year ago, trying to find a good .Net system for this. I recall finding a few decent engines, but they were all too general, and required too many assumptions.
In the end I found that writing my own system was pretty easy to do, and it did exactly what I wanted it to, without any extra bull to make it work with some abstract generalized engine.
If you'd consider a rule-processing engine, JBoss Rules (also known as Drools) is the best that I know of. Open Source and free. It's written in Java, but designed for integration. You can incorporate objects in the rules and rule-base applications in your components. You can even build or modify rule-bases on the fly.
发布评论
评论（6）
其他答案中已经提到了 CLIPS 和 JESS，因此我将提供 CLIPS 与 JESS 的链接：
http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/ ~kristof/research/notes/clipsvsjess/
写于 1999 年 6 月 4 日，当时 CLIPS 的优势显而易见。
如果您不想阅读全部内容，请看以下结论：
这些链接可能也会引起您的兴趣：
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLIPS
商业和广告 免费软件专家系统外壳
http://www.kbsc.com/rulebase.html
是否有具有推理功能的开源专家系统？
Both CLIPS and JESS are already mentioned in other answers, so I will supply this link to CLIPS versus JESS:
http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/~kristof/research/notes/clipsvsjess/
It was written June 4, 1999, and at that time the advantage was clearly with CLIPS.
If you don't want to read it all, here are the conclusions:
These links may also be of interest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLIPS
Commercial & Freeware Expert System Shells
http://www.kbsc.com/rulebase.html
Are there open source expert systems with reasoning capabilities?
大约一年前，我经历了同样的过程，试图为此找到一个好的.Net 系统。 我记得找到了一些不错的引擎，但它们都太笼统了，并且需要太多的假设。
最后，我发现编写自己的系统非常容易，而且它完全按照我的意愿行事，不需要任何额外的麻烦来使其与某些抽象的通用引擎一起工作。
了解您的预期用途可能会有所帮助。
I went through the same process, about a year ago, trying to find a good .Net system for this. I recall finding a few decent engines, but they were all too general, and required too many assumptions.
In the end I found that writing my own system was pretty easy to do, and it did exactly what I wanted it to, without any extra bull to make it work with some abstract generalized engine.
It might help to know what your intended use is.
看一下CLIPS——它是用C编码的。
有关CLIPS的更多信息，请访问维基百科。
Take a look at CLIPS -- it is coded in C.
There's more info on CLIPS at Wikipedia.
如果您考虑使用规则处理引擎，JBoss Rules（也称为 Drools）是我所知道的最好的。 开源且免费。 它是用 Java 编写的，但专为集成而设计。 您可以将规则中的对象和规则库应用程序合并到组件中。 您甚至可以即时构建或修改规则库。
If you'd consider a rule-processing engine, JBoss Rules (also known as Drools) is the best that I know of. Open Source and free. It's written in Java, but designed for integration. You can incorporate objects in the rules and rule-base applications in your components. You can even build or modify rule-bases on the fly.
AI::ExpertSystem::Advanced< /a> 或 AI::ExpertSystem ::Simple 是 Perl 解决方案。
AI::ExpertSystem::Advanced or AI::ExpertSystem::Simple is a Perl solution.
您可以尝试 JESS，但它是基于 Java 的。 Amzilogic也提供了一个很好的平台。
You can try JESS, but it is Java-based. Amzilogic also provide a good platform.