International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)

STUDY OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FORWARD AND

BACKWARD REASONING
Tilotma Sharma1, Navneet Tiwari2 and Deepali Kelkar3
1

M.Tech (IT), Mahakal Institute of Technology, Ujjain

M.Tech (IT)
2
MCA Department, Mahakal Institute of Technology and Science, Ujjain
3
HOD CS/IT, Mahakal Institute of Technology and Management. Ujjain
When found it can conclude, or infer, the THEN clause,
resulting in the addition of new information to its dataset.
In other words, it starts with some facts and applies rules to
find all possible conclusions. Therefore, it is also known as
Data Driven Approach [1].

Abstract - In artificial intelligence, an expert system is a

computer system that emulates the decision making ability of
a human expert. Expert systems are designed to solve complex
problems by reasoning about knowledge, like an expert, and
not by following the procedure of the developer as is the case
in conventional programming. An expert system has a unique
structure. It is divided into two parts, one fixed, independent
of the expert system: the inference engine, and one variable:
the knowledge base. To run an expert system, the engine
reasons about the knowledge base like a human.

Flowchart of Forward Chaining:

Keywords - Artificial Intelligence, Expert system, inference

engine, knowledge base, reasoning method

I.

INTRODUCTION

The inference engine is a computer program designed to

produce reasoning on rules. In order to produce reasoning,
it should be based on logic. With logic, the engine is able to
generate new information from the knowledge contained in
the rule base and data to be processed.
The engine has two ways to run: batch or conversational.
In batch, the expert system has all the necessary data to
process from the beginning. For the user, the program
works as a classical program: he provides data and receives
results immediately. Reasoning is invisible. The
conversational method becomes necessary when the
developer knows he cannot ask the user for all the
necessary data at the start, the problem being too complex.
The software must "invent" the way to solve the problem,
request the missing data from the user, gradually
approaching the goal as quickly as possible. The result
gives the impression of a dialogue led by an expert. To
guide a dialogue, the engine may have several levels of
sophistication: "forward chaining" and "backward
chaining".
II.

Fig 1: Flowchart of Forward Chaining

The standard definition of a forward-chaining system is

that the system operates by repeating the following
sequence of operations [2] (shown in Fig1):
1. Examine the rules to find one whos If part is satisfied
by the current contents of Working Memory.
2. Fire the rule by adding to Working Memory the facts
that are specified in the rules Then part. (The Then
part may perform other actions as well, but that can be
ignored for now.)
This control cycle continues until no rules have satisfied
If parts.

FORWARD CHAINING

An inference engine using forward chaining searches the

inference rules until it finds one where the IF clause is
known to be true.

271

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
III.

ii. If the condition is known to be unsatisfied,

continue with the loop at Step 2.
iii. If it was not possible to determine whether the
condition was satisfied, continue with the loop at
Step 2.
b. If all the conditions in the selected rule are
satisfied, add to Working Memory the facts
specified in the Then part of the rule, pop the goal
off the stack, and return from this invocation of the
system.
The system terminates with success when the goal stack
is empty. It terminates with failure if the system runs out of
rules to try in Step 2.

B ACKWARD CHAINING

An inference engine using backward chaining would

search the inference rules until it finds one which has a
THEN clause that matches a desired goal. If the IF clause
of that inference rule is not known to be true, then it is
added to the list of goals (in order for goal to be confirmed
it must also provide data that confirms this new rule) [4]. In
other words, this approach starts with the desired
conclusion and works backward to find supporting facts.
Therefore, it is also known as Goal-Driven Approach.
Flowchart of Backward Chaining:

IV.

COMPARISON B ETWEEN FORWARD AND B ACKWARD

CHAINING
1)

2)

3)

4)

Fig 2: Flowchart of Backward Chaining

5)

Backward-chaining systems try to satisfy the goals in the

goal stack. They do this by finding rules that can conclude
the information needed by the goal, and trying to make the
If parts of those rules satisfied [6]. In more detail, the
standard backward-chaining control cycle is (shown in
Fig2):
1. Check the conclusions of the rules to find all rules
that can satisfy the top goal on the stack.
2. Process these rules one at a time:
a. Evaluate the conditions in the rules If part one at a
time:
i. If the condition is currently unknown (that is, if
there is not enough information currently known
to determine whether the condition is satisfied)
push a goal to make that condition known, and
recursively invoke the system.

6)

7)

272

The exploration of knowledge has different

mechanisms in forward and backward chaining.
Backward chaining is more focused and tries to
avoid exploring unnecessary paths of reasoning.
Forward chaining, on the other hand is like an
exhaustive search [3].
Backward chaining systems are good for
diagnostic and classification tasks, but they are not
good for planning, design, process monitoring,
and quite a few other tasks. Forward chaining
systems can handle all these tasks.
Forward chaining system, includes writing rules to
manage sub goals. Whereas, backward chaining
systems automatically manage sub goals [7].
Lots of output Hypothesis + Lots of data up front
=> Use Forward Chaining
Fewer output Hypothesis + Must query for data=>
Use Backward Chaining
Backward chaining engines query for new facts,
whereas forward chaining relies
on the
application asserting facts to the rule engine.
In backward chaining, the search is goal directed,
so rules can be applied that are necessary to
achieve the goal. But in forward chaining the
whole process is not directed towards goal, so
when to stop the rules in not known [5].
If the facts that has to be established lead to a
large number of conclusion, but the number of
ways to reach that particular conclusion is small,
then there is more information out rather than
information in, then backward chaining should be
used. On the other hand, if the number of ways to
reach a particular conclusion is large, but the
number of conclusions likely to be reach using the
facts is small, then forward chaining is preferred.

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
V.

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES
[1 ] RC Chakraborty, Expert Systems, Artificial Intelligence, June 01,
2010.
[2 ] George Luger, William Stubblefield, Artificial Intelligence,
Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving, Third
Edition Addison-Wesley, 1998
[3 ] Knut Hinkelmann, Forward Chaining Vs Backward Chaining,
University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, School of
Business, 2004
[4 ] Donna Kay, A Comparison of Forward and Backward Chaining
Algorithms For use in a Technical Support Expert System Used for
Diagnosing Computer Virus Issues, April 9th, 2009 Computer
Science Department California State University, Chico.
[5 ] John A. Bullinaria, IAI: Production Systems, 2005.
[6 ] Alan Holland, Rule Based Systems, University College Cork, Mar
2010.
[7 ] Alison Cawsey, Forward and Backward Chaining, Department of
Computing and Electrical engineering, Heriot-Watt University,
Edinburgh, UK.

Unfortunately, the only way to know how a rule will

behave is to profile it and understand the business case.
Many people make the mistake of thinking a rule engine
will magically solve their problems. Writing high
performance rules is not easy or intuitive. The best way to
build efficient applications using rule engines is to take the
time to learn how each approach works and use both
techniques. Although it increases the learning curve, the
choice between forward and backward chaining isn't
something that can be summed up in 2-3 sentences. It's
crucial to consider the intent of the rule, size of the dataset
and performance requirements.
Table1
Comparative Study

Attribute

Backward
Chaining
Goal-driven

Forward
Chaining
Data-driven
New data

Processing

Possible
conclusion
Efficient

Aims for

Necessary data

Approach

Conservative/Cauti
ous
Number
of
possible
final
answers
is
reasonable or a set
of
known
alternatives
is
available.
Diagnostic,
prescription
and
debugging
application

Also known
as
Starts from

Practical if

Appropriate
for

Reasoning
Type
of
Search
Who
determine
search
Flow

Top-down
reasoning
Depth-first search
Consequents
determine search
Consequent
antecedent

to

Somewhat
wasteful
Any
Conclusion(s)
Opportunistic
Combinatorial
explosion
creates
an
infinite number
of
possible
right answers.
Planning,
monitoring,
control
and
interpretation
application
Bottom-up
reasoning
Breadth-first
search
Antecedents
determine
search
Antecedent to
consequent

273