Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!unido!uklirb!shell From: sfp@mars.ornl.gov (Phil Spelt) Newsgroups: comp.ai.shells Subject: Re: KES Timing Result Message-ID: <7655@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de> Date: 19 Mar 91 13:56:05 GMT References: <7642@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de> Sender: shell@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de Reply-To: Phil Spelt Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab Lines: 38 Approved: shell@dfki.uni-kl.de Posted-Date: Thu Mar 21 08:07:32 GMT 1991 In article <7642@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de> srt@aero.org (Scott TCB Turner) writes; >I recently received an evaluation copy of KES from A&E software. KES [Lots of stuff deleated . . . ] >I have neither the time nor energy to do more realistic tests, >but I encourage you to undertake the task if you are interested. > >All test were done on a VAXstation 3100 running VMS. > > Shell Speed (rule firings/minute) > > CLIPS 49,000 > KES 11,500 > ART-IM 5500 > Nexpert 1.1 4000 > G2 1700 > >From this test, KES would appear to be one of the most efficient >commercial expert system shells. Given the comprehensive user >interface and substantial documentation, I think KES bears >consideration for any project, and especially for projects where >processing speed is a consideration (i.e., real-time diagnosis). > > -- Scott Turner Yes, but LOOK at the difference between KES & CLIPS!!! Bigger difference there than anywhere else in the test set. I can't understand why EVERYONE is not using CLIPS. With the source code available for self-modificatin (?) it seems to me to be the best available. (Of course I am TOTALLY unbiased). I am, however, NOT associated with NASA or JCS in any way, just a happy user of CLIPS. Phil Spelt, Cognitive Systems & Human Factors Group sfp@epm.ornl.gov ============================================================================ Any opinions expressed or implied are my own, IF I choose to own up to them.