perm filename AI.V3[BB,DOC] blob
sn#802772 filedate 1986-01-07 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00194 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00024 00002 This is Volume 3 of the AI-List digests.
C00025 00003 ∂09-Jan-85 0046 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #1
C00049 00004 ∂11-Jan-85 0044 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #2
C00072 00005 ∂14-Jan-85 1123 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #3
C00097 00006 ∂17-Jan-85 0014 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #4
C00119 00007 ∂20-Jan-85 0119 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #5
C00141 00008 ∂20-Jan-85 0245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #6
C00164 00009 ∂21-Jan-85 1319 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #7
C00189 00010 ∂24-Jan-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #8
C00212 00011 ∂27-Jan-85 1221 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #9
C00228 00012 ∂28-Jan-85 2256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #10
C00249 00013 ∂01-Feb-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #11
C00277 00014 ∂03-Feb-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #12
C00305 00015 ∂04-Feb-85 1711 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #13
C00330 00016 ∂05-Feb-85 2022 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #14
C00364 00017 ∂06-Feb-85 0612 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #15
C00388 00018 ∂08-Feb-85 0025 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #16
C00413 00019 ∂09-Feb-85 1923 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #17
C00444 00020 ∂10-Feb-85 0207 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #18
C00471 00021 ∂11-Feb-85 0145 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #19
C00492 00022 ∂15-Feb-85 1256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #20
C00509 00023 ∂16-Feb-85 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #21
C00535 00024 ∂19-Feb-85 1128 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #22
C00562 00025 ∂19-Feb-85 1426 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #23
C00587 00026 ∂21-Feb-85 1333 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #24
C00616 00027 ∂22-Feb-85 1140 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #25
C00641 00028 ∂26-Feb-85 1043 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #26
C00667 00029 ∂01-Mar-85 0012 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #27
C00693 00030 ∂04-Mar-85 0045 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #28
C00720 00031 ∂04-Mar-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #29
C00751 00032 ∂06-Mar-85 1155 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #30
C00781 00033 ∂08-Mar-85 1812 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #31
C00804 00034 ∂11-Mar-85 1442 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #32
C00832 00035 ∂13-Mar-85 1245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #33
C00860 00036 ∂15-Mar-85 0042 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #34
C00892 00037 ∂15-Mar-85 1913 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #35
C00922 00038 ∂18-Mar-85 0036 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #36
C00952 00039 ∂19-Mar-85 1737 @SRI-AI.ARPA:LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #37
C00979 00040 ∂21-Mar-85 1930 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #38
C01005 00041 ∂24-Mar-85 0042 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #39
C01031 00042 ∂24-Mar-85 2237 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #40
C01058 00043 ∂28-Mar-85 1331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #41
C01085 00044 ∂29-Mar-85 2336 @SRI-AI.ARPA:LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #42
C01113 00045 ∂01-Apr-85 1156 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #43
C01140 00046 ∂02-Apr-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #44
C01169 00047 ∂03-Apr-85 0100 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #45
C01196 00048 ∂16-Apr-85 0126 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #46
C01221 00049 ∂16-Apr-85 2235 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #47
C01249 00050 ∂20-Apr-85 0037 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #48
C01271 00051 ∂20-Apr-85 1842 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #49
C01297 00052 ∂23-Apr-85 0023 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #50
C01324 00053 ∂23-Apr-85 1159 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #51
C01350 00054 ∂23-Apr-85 0259 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #52
C01380 00055 ∂25-Apr-85 0236 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #53
C01406 00056 ∂03-May-85 0045 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #54
C01424 00057 ∂05-May-85 0206 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #56
C01443 00058 ∂05-May-85 0249 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #55
C01470 00059 ∂05-May-85 1556 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #57
C01500 00060 ∂05-May-85 1928 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #58
C01528 00061 ∂05-May-85 2121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #59
C01552 00062 ∂05-May-85 2330 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #60
C01577 00063 ∂08-May-85 1124 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #61
C01604 00064 ∂12-May-85 1546 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #62
C01623 00065 ∂12-May-85 1701 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #63
C01650 00066 ∂16-May-85 1907 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #64
C01673 00067 ∂18-May-85 1526 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #65
C01701 00068 ∂18-May-85 1710 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #66
C01723 00069 ∂21-May-85 0046 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #67
C01742 00070 ∂21-May-85 2305 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #68
C01768 00071 ∂23-May-85 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #69
C01783 00072 ∂24-May-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #70
C01793 00073 ∂01-Jun-85 0044 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #71
C01815 00074 ∂04-Jun-85 1255 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #72
C01844 00075 ∂04-Jun-85 1751 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #73
C01864 00076 ∂06-Jun-85 1216 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #74
C01884 00077 ∂07-Jun-85 1211 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #75
C01907 00078 ∂08-Jun-85 0112 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #76
C01927 00079 ∂08-Jun-85 1738 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #77
C01948 00080 ∂14-Jun-85 0738 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #78
C01970 00081 ∂17-Jun-85 2342 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #79
C01986 00082 ∂21-Jun-85 1444 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #80
C02015 00083 ∂21-Jun-85 1719 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #81
C02034 00084 ∂24-Jun-85 1323 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #82
C02062 00085 ∂26-Jun-85 0030 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #83
C02077 00086 ∂30-Jun-85 2302 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #84
C02100 00087 ∂02-Jul-85 1150 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #85
C02119 00088 ∂03-Jul-85 0009 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #86
C02138 00089 ∂06-Jul-85 1607 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #87
C02154 00090 ∂07-Jul-85 1241 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #88
C02174 00091 ∂07-Jul-85 1758 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #89
C02190 00092 ∂08-Jul-85 2133 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #90
C02210 00093 ∂10-Jul-85 0028 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #91
C02226 00094 ∂12-Jul-85 0036 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #92
C02245 00095 ∂14-Jul-85 0026 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #93
C02265 00096 ∂16-Jul-85 1354 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #94
C02278 00097 ∂19-Jul-85 1405 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #95
C02298 00098 ∂20-Jul-85 2219 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #96
C02324 00099 ∂25-Jul-85 1445 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #97
C02349 00100 ∂25-Jul-85 2303 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #98
C02372 00101 ∂28-Jul-85 0132 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #99
C02396 00102 ∂28-Jul-85 1902 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #100
C02425 00103 ∂29-Jul-85 2203 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #101
C02439 00104 ∂01-Aug-85 0041 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #102
C02463 00105 ∂07-Aug-85 1229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #103
C02488 00106 ∂08-Aug-85 1647 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #104
C02509 00107 ∂08-Aug-85 1839 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #105
C02522 00108 ∂09-Aug-85 1554 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #106
C02544 00109 ∂11-Aug-85 1544 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #107
C02558 00110 ∂12-Aug-85 2343 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #108
C02577 00111 ∂13-Aug-85 0127 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #109
C02598 00112 ∂16-Aug-85 2344 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #110
C02615 00113 ∂17-Aug-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #111
C02658 00114 ∂18-Aug-85 2301 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #112
C02683 00115 ∂25-Aug-85 2250 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #113
C02709 00116 ∂26-Aug-85 1536 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #114
C02736 00117 ∂30-Aug-85 1345 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #115
C02769 00118 ∂02-Sep-85 2114 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #116
C02789 00119 ∂03-Sep-85 1145 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #117
C02807 00120 ∂05-Sep-85 1448 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #118
C02822 00121 ∂06-Sep-85 1323 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #119
C02845 00122 ∂08-Sep-85 1807 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #120
C02860 00123 ∂10-Sep-85 1825 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #121
C02884 00124 ∂12-Sep-85 1143 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #122
C02897 00125 ∂16-Sep-85 1238 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #123
C02921 00126 ∂18-Sep-85 1334 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #124
C02947 00127 ∂20-Sep-85 1251 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #125
C02965 00128 ∂21-Sep-85 2347 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #126
C02986 00129 ∂23-Sep-85 0032 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #127
C03009 00130 ∂23-Sep-85 2226 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #128
C03031 00131 ∂01-Oct-85 1839 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #129
C03058 00132 ∂01-Oct-85 2136 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #130
C03096 00133 ∂02-Oct-85 0141 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #131
C03135 00134 ∂03-Oct-85 2226 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #132
C03157 00135 ∂04-Oct-85 0030 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #133
C03180 00136 ∂04-Oct-85 1249 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #134
C03211 00137 ∂07-Oct-85 0032 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #135
C03224 00138 ∂07-Oct-85 0219 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #136
C03255 00139 ∂09-Oct-85 0053 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #137
C03278 00140 ∂09-Oct-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #138
C03301 00141 ∂09-Oct-85 1256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #139
C03326 00142 ∂09-Oct-85 2331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #140
C03354 00143 ∂10-Oct-85 0121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #141
C03379 00144 ∂10-Oct-85 1202 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #142
C03394 00145 ∂13-Oct-85 2231 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #143
C03412 00146 ∂13-Oct-85 2355 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #144
C03431 00147 ∂14-Oct-85 0125 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #145
C03448 00148 ∂14-Oct-85 2254 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #146
C03469 00149 ∂15-Oct-85 0023 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #147
C03491 00150 ∂22-Oct-85 1555 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #148
C03518 00151 ∂22-Oct-85 1604 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #149
C03548 00152 ∂22-Oct-85 1919 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #150
C03573 00153 ∂22-Oct-85 1607 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #151
C03588 00154 ∂22-Oct-85 1923 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #152
C03608 00155 ∂22-Oct-85 1918 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #153
C03634 00156 ∂24-Oct-85 0053 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #154
C03656 00157 ∂24-Oct-85 0250 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #155
C03685 00158 ∂26-Oct-85 0106 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #156
C03702 00159 ∂27-Oct-85 2343 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #157
C03717 00160 ∂30-Oct-85 1251 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #158
C03737 00161 ∂30-Oct-85 1536 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #159
C03759 00162 ∂31-Oct-85 1322 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #160
C03790 00163 ∂04-Nov-85 2256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #161
C03810 00164 ∂05-Nov-85 0033 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #162
C03827 00165 ∂06-Nov-85 1404 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #163
C03859 00166 ∂06-Nov-85 2258 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #164
C03878 00167 ∂07-Nov-85 1224 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #165
C03904 00168 ∂08-Nov-85 1709 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #166
C03919 00169 ∂10-Nov-85 2154 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #167
C03948 00170 ∂11-Nov-85 2245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #168
C03962 00171 ∂15-Nov-85 0112 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #169
C04006 00172 ∂18-Nov-85 0149 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #171
C04023 00173 ∂18-Nov-85 1155 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #172
C04041 00174 ∂19-Nov-85 0206 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #173
C04065 00175 ∂20-Nov-85 1213 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #174
C04085 00176 ∂21-Nov-85 2359 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #175
C04105 00177 ∂22-Nov-85 1331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #176
C04123 00178 ∂23-Nov-85 2325 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #177
C04139 00179 ∂24-Nov-85 0124 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #178
C04163 00180 ∂25-Nov-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #179
C04195 00181 ∂27-Nov-85 1833 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #180
C04219 00182 ∂03-Dec-85 1537 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #181
C04246 00183 ∂05-Dec-85 0113 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #182
C04259 00184 ∂10-Dec-85 0040 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #183
C04285 00185 ∂10-Dec-85 0235 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #184
C04296 00186 ∂13-Dec-85 0038 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #185
C04322 00187 ∂15-Dec-85 1340 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #186
C04343 00188 ∂15-Dec-85 1538 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #187
C04369 00189 ∂16-Dec-85 1132 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #188
C04384 00190 ∂18-Dec-85 1216 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #189
C04404 00191 ∂20-Dec-85 1248 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #190
C04424 00192 ∂20-Dec-85 1542 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #191
C04444 00193 ∂27-Dec-85 1725 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #192
C04478 00194 ∂27-Dec-85 1910 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #193
C04494 ENDMK
C⊗;
This is Volume 3 of the AI-List digests.
The digests are edited by Ken Laws from SRI.
To get added to the list send mail to AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI or better yet
read the current digests in the file AI.TXT[2,2].
Mail your submissions to AIList@SRI-AI.
Pointers to previous volumes:
Volume 1 (#1 to #117) of the AI-LIST messages is now in file AI.V1[2,2].
Volume 2 (#1 to #184) of the AI-LIST messages is now in file AI.V2[2,2].
Volume 3 (#1 to #193) of the AI-LIST messages is now in this file.
Volume 4 of the AI-LIST messages is now in file AI.TXT[2,2].
∂09-Jan-85 0046 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #1
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 85 00:46:15 PST
Date: Tue 8 Jan 1985 22:56-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #1
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Wednesday, 9 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Digest Numbering,
Hardware - Xerox D-Machines & Text Scanners,
AI Tools - Mac LISP & Symbolic Algebra Package,
News - Recent Articles & SIGART Meeting & Weizmann Summer School,
Programming Style - Malgorithm,
Seminars - Better LISP Debugging Tools (SU) &
Mapless Networks (Berkeley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 7 Jan 85 20:49:08-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Extra! Extra! 1984 Had 371 Days!
Andy Freeman has pointed out to me that the previous issue, V2 #184,
should have been the first issue of Volume 3. To set things to rights,
I hereby declare that January 5 was actually December 36, 1984.
This issue is thus the first of 1985, V3 #1. Happy New Year!
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jan 85 15:31:54 EST
From: DIETZ@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Is Xerox Punting D-Machines?
A recent Electronics News has an article suggesting Xerox will close
their Information Products Division in Dallas. Isn't that where Dandelions
are made? Is Xerox getting out of the lisp machine business?
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jan 85 20:50 PST
From: Newman.pasa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Mac LISP and Kurzweil Scanners
In response to two separate postings :
1) There is a company in Santa Barbara called ExperTelligence Inc. who
are purportedly developing a LISP (called EXPERLISP) for the MacIntosh.
The brochure I have says it "is available at your local Apple Dealer
beginning October, 1984". 'Nuff Said.
2) Yes, Kurzweil scanners (text reading machines) are being marketed by
a Xerox afilliate. Not knowing who to contact about them, I suggest you
speak to the local XEROX sales people in your area.
>>Dave
------------------------------
Date: 7 Jan 85 10:48 PST
From: trauberman.pasa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Kurzweil Reader
I worked on the Optical Character Recognition system at Kurzweil, so
here's a brief description. It was originally developed as a machine to
enable blind people to read books, in the late 60's by Kurzweil and
other MIT people. It uses a high resolution CCD motorized scanner to
scan the page, then multi-font recognition algorithms implemented in
machine language on a Data General Nova, to decifer the text, and a
speech system to read the text vocally. The recognition system is truly
multi-font, using curve-searching and other very general algorithms,
some of which had previously been applied to handwriting recognition
problems. As a result, the machine is capable of reading with adequate
accuracy, about half of all printed material. Kurzweil has developed an
office product based on this technology for inputting printed text into
a database. With some assistance from a secretary during the initial
reading phase, this product is quite effective.
David Trauberman
------------------------------
Date: Sun 6 Jan 85 20:07:26-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Reading Machine
The December issue of IEEE Computer Graphics carries a short description
of a new document scanner from Electronic Information Technology, Inc.
It can be used to enter diagrams, pictures, and text into IBM PC and XT
systems, with other interfaces due soon. The blurb implies that it also
has output capabilities, although I'm not sure what they are. It does
have built-in optical character recognition for at least typewriter fonts.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 7 Jan 85 11:32:07 PST
From: tektronix!tekcrl!tekchips!postmaster@uw-beaver.arpa
Subject: Symbolic Algebra Packages
>> I would like to obtain a symbolic algebra package which would run on
>> a VAX/Franz Lisp configuration. Preferably, I like one in the public
>> domain.
The symbolic computation system REDUCE 3.0, originally written in
Standard Lisp, has been ported to Franz Lisp to run on the VAX machine
under 4.2BSD. Please contact me if you are interested in the system.
uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4,allegra,uw-beaver,hplabs}
!tektronix!tekchips!abdali
CSnet: abdali@tektronix
ARPAnet: abdali.tektronix@csnet-relay
US Mail: Kamal Abdali
Computer Research Lab, 50-662
Tektronix, Inc.
Box 500
Beaverton, OR 97077
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 85 10:13:44 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: News - Recent Articles
New Scientist Nov. 29, 1984 Volume 104 No. 1432
Japan woos a wary Britain
describes efforts by the Japanese to acquire AI software from Britain
and to "cooperate" in AI research.
Cybernetica Vol 27 No 3 1984
THES/BID- the construction of a computer-based thesaurus for legal
informatics and computer law pp 231
Datamation January 1, 1985
Bringing AI Home Page 34
Describes efforts by various corporations in JAPAN in AI (as distinct from
the Fifth Generation Efforts) including a Prolog based VLSI system called
WIREX at NEC, a FUJITSU PROLOG/LISP system for hardware design. Also
discusses American reactions to the Japanese international conference on the
fifth generation.
On page 15, the following letter appeared:
"Our product IF/Prolog has been available for VAX with Berkeley-UNIX since
September 1983, also beating DEC's PROLOG implementation. During 1984 we
have ported IF/Prolog to 14 different computers including IBM's PC, VAX/VMS
and Eclipse/AOS. We are currently working on a Prolog compiler to be
released during the first quarter of 1985."
Claus M. Mueller
President INterface Computer GmbH
Munich, Germany
Page 139,in "updates" section:
DM DATA estimates the AI market will grow from $148 million this year to
$28 billion in the 1990s. Also discusses the need for systems to assist in
the knowledge transfer from experts to machines.
From the Phoenix Conference on Computers and Communications March 20-22 1985
Advance Program:
Tutorial I on Expert Systems by George Luger March 20
Expert System Panel, "Artificial Intelligence Meets the Real World",
March 21 3:30 PM
10:30 AM
"Hector: A Logic Based Parser, Semantic Interperter, and Planner" March 21
"Sensors, Vision and Robtics: A Perspective"
"Vision Systems in Assembly of Semiconductor Devices"
"A Kinematic Computer Simulation System for Robotic Manipulators"
1:30 PM
"Prolog Interpreter for Industrial Use"
"Accounting and Billing Software Related to Computer User Satisfaction: An
Interactive Online Expert System Using Diagnostic Audit Trails Through
Telecommunications Networks"
"Surface: An Application of Small Scale Expert Systems Using the DQR Format"
For more info contact PCCC-85 34 W. Monroe, Suite 900 Phoenix, AZ 85003
------------------------------
Date: Sun 6 Jan 85 20:45:24-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Recent IEEE Articles
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, December 1984.
A Report on the Vail Workshop on Human Factors in Computer Systems, by
Michael E. Atwood, p. 48: Participants discussed ways of integrating
human factors knowledge with the initial design process for computer
systems. Several of the conference subgroups proposed that expert
systems technology and knowledge-based prototyping be applied to interface
design issues.
Symbolic Processing Computer Handles AI Applications, p. 75:
A description of the IE Explorer LISP-machine, at $52,500 and up each.
IEEE Spectrum, January 1985.
Fuzzy Logic, a letter from David McGoveran, p. 8:
This is a reply to Lotfi Zadeh's article on fuzzy logic. McGoveran
points out that the mathematical foundations of this discipline may
be "unsound". He cites his own articles on fuzzy logic, claiming
that the approach is not a complete representation system and cannot
consistently represent hierarchical systems (because it blurs
distinctions of level and thus has no consistent metalanguage or
model). He further states that fuzzy logic is commutative, distributive,
and not order-preserving, and hence is incapable of consistently
representing [noncommutative and/or nondistributive] systems that
depend on an ordering.
John D. Musa on Software, p. 37:
A few comments are made about AI papers at the 7th Conf. on Software
Engineering, particularly intelligent editors and tutoring aids.
Software, by Paul Wallich, p. 50:
Survey of the past year's developments in LISP, knowledge-based system
development tools, and ADA. The various implementations of Common LISP
seem to be riding high with the defense community, and seven or eight
validated ADA compilers are now available.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jan 1985 11:48-EST
From: LEVITT@USC-ISI.ARPA
Subject: SIGART MEETING
THE SECOND MEETING OF THE BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON CHAPTER OF SIGART
WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY NIGHT, JAN.15 AT 730 AT THE KEY BRIDGE
MARRIOT IN ROSSLYN VIRGINIA.
IT IS BEING HOSTED BY GENE CARTIER OF SRA, (703)-558-5194.
I AM TEMPORARILY ACTING CHAIRMAN UNTIL ELECTIONS: MR. LORE
LEVITT, (301)-964-8693 OR VIA THE ARPANET LEVITT AT USC-ISI.
LORE
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 85 12:29:26 -0200
From: udi%wisdom.BITNET@Berkeley (Ehud Shapiro)
Subject: Summer School at the Weizmann Institute
The Karyn Kupcinet International Science School
The Weizmann Intitute of Science
Rehovot, Israel
The Weizmann Institute of Science's Annual Karyn Kupcinet
International Science School is accepting a small number of
science students (from second year) from overseas for
the summer of 1985 to participate in research projects in
mathematics, computer science, physics, chemistry, and biology.
A modest stipend and dormitory-style accomodation
near the campus are provided.
No travel funds are available.
Application forms may be obtained from the Academic Secratary,
Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel.
Completed applications should be returned before February 15, 1985.
p.s. Student application will be given to the relevant scientists
for review. If you know Prolog, Concurrent Prolog, computer graphics, esp.
Sun graphics, its window system and operating system, familiar with the
Smalltalk or Lisp Machine programming environment, or simply want to come
to Israel for a summer, and willing to work hard for that, I will be glad to
have you here. Please CC me on your application form.
As for equipment, we have here three VAX'es (two Unix and one VMS), two
Sun worktations (expecting several more), one Symbolics 3670 (expecting
one more), and several IBM and DEC PC's. And (how could I forget) an IBM 3081.
Ehud Shapiro
Department of Applied Mathematics
The Weizmann Intitute of Science
------------------------------
Date: Tue 8 Jan 85 07:19:03-EST
From: Sidney Markowitz <SIDNEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Another malgorithm
Here's another malgorithm that comes from SIGPLAN NOTICES, Nov., '84,
in a letter citing its original publication in an earlier issue.
The author is making a case for avoiding backward-directed GO TO's in
FORTRAN, so as to make the program more "structured". To that end, he is
advocating replacing the following implementation of a WHILE-DO construct:
C While condition is true, execute body
10 IF(.NOT. Boolean Expression) GOTO 100
C Begin iterated body
.
.
.
C End iterated body
GO TO 10
with the following "more structured" version:
C CHOOSE N SUFFICIENTLY LARGE SO THE BOOLEAN EXPRESSION
C IS TRUE BEFORE I = N.
DO 10 I=1,N
IF(Boolean Expression) GO TO 100
C Begin iterated body
.
.
.
C End Iterated Body
10 CONTINUE
TYPE *,'OOPS!PUT ANOTHER DO LOOP AROUND THE CURRENT ONE'
STOP
100 CONTINUE
Notice what happens if you don't pick a sufficiently large N.
The original version apparently didn't even have the error message
in the TYPE statement.
-- sidney markowitz <sidney@mc>
------------------------------
Date: 04 Jan 85 1132 PST
From: Ted Selker <EJS@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Better LISP Debugging Tools (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
U S E
User System Ergonomics
A human interface journal club and discussion group
Wed January 9, 12:00 PM
Margaret Jacks Hall, room 252
Stanford University
Chris Perdue from Hp Labs will come lead a discussion on
Henry Lieberman's Steps Towards Better Debugging Tools For Lisp
paper. Pick up a copy of the paper at The reception desk at
the Computer Science Department At Stanford.
Contact Ted Selker ejs@su-ai.arpa for information on USE.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 85 13:49:36 -0200
From: scheff%wisdom.BITNET@Berkeley (scheff chaim)
Subject: Seminar - Mapless Networks (Berkeley)
The Weitzmann Institute of Science - Rehovot, Israel
Seminar in Advanced Topics in Computer Science
Chaim-Meyer Scheff
will speak on
"General Description of Search Protocol for a Mapless Network"
The talk will take place on Sunday, January 13, 1985 in the Feinberg
Building, Room A, at 2:00.
Mapless Networks are asynchronous concurrent communication networks in
which each node in the network contains a current list of its own
internal user population but no node contains a user map of larger scope.
Which is to say, each node must operate according to its subjective view
in that there is no objective view to appeal to. This is a generalization
of Terrestrial Networks and similarly contains spanning tree and
leader-net schemes as special cases. Both load optimization and systems
relyability at minimum cost are the natural result of implementation;
which is provably upward compatible with existing architectures.
Portability of the search protocol to computational and communications
environments would suggest that mapless networks would provide a stable
model for the large scale integration of both into grand scale global
systems. //
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Jan-85 0044 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #2
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Jan 85 00:44:29 PST
Date: Thu 10 Jan 1985 22:53-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #2
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 11 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - CommonLisp Documentation & Lisp in C or Pascal &
Mac LISP & Xerox Machines,
Seminars - AI, Employment and Income (CSLI) &
On Comparatives and Superlatives (CSLI),
Conferences - The Lexicon, Parsing, and Semantic Interpretation &
IJCAI Student Positions & Expert Systems Hospitality Suites
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 85 09:21:37 EST
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: CommonLisp Documentation
Does anyone have ordering information for the "official" CommonLisp
specification (publisher, document number, cost, ...)?
Thanks for any help.
John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 85 15:45 PST
From: "S. Sridhar" <sridhar%wsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Lisp in C or Pascal
I desperately need to port a Lisp interpreter to the HP 9000 (or HP 3000)
running 4.2 BSD Unix. For this purpose, I need that the interpreter be
written in C, or Pascal or any other machine-independent language.
Would anyone be kind enough to lemme know where I can get hold of such an
interpreter (or even a compiler) ?
Thanks a lot.
--- S. Sridhar (sridhar@wsu)
Washington State University
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 85 07:59 PST
From: Newman.pasa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Mac LISP
Pardon me, I would like to correct the error in the posting I made
earlier. I quoted the ExperLogo brochure when I meant to quote the
ExperLisp brochure. What the relevant part of my posting should have
said was:
1) There is a company in Santa Barbara called ExperTelligence Inc. who
are purportedly developing a LISP (called EXPERLISP) for the MacIntosh.
The brochure I have says it "will be available for shipment in late
1984". 'Nuff Said.
My apologies to ExperTelligence.
>>Dave
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Jan 85 10:45:07-EST
From: Wang Zeep <G.ZEEP%MIT-EECS@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Mac LISP
ExperIntelligence is now predicting an April '84 delivery for their Macintosh
Common Lisp subset. It should be lexically-scoped (unlike GC Lisp for the PC)
and will include a 68000 native compiler. Development is being done on a
Symbolics LISPM and there will be some sort of object/class system.
They have also advertised a LOGO. As I have never seen an Oct. 84 date
for the LISP, I have a feeling something got garbled in transmission. The
above information is straight from their technical support staff. Jan '85
MacWorld has a quick bite on ExperLisp in their news section.
If this is for real (all of my info comes from the company, not from a
neutral source), I'll get a copy and post a review of it. They seemed
nice enough....
wz
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 85 14:54:59 EST
From: cowan@GE-CRD
Subject: Re: Mac Lisp Machines
There is a company in Santa Barbara called ExperTelligence Inc. who
are purportedly developing a LISP (called EXPERLISP) for the MacIntosh.
The brochure I have says it "is available at your local Apple Dealer
beginning October, 1984". 'Nuff Said.
I met one of the ExperLisp developers at AAAI; they are making
effective use of a Symbolics (they wrote a mac cross-compiler) and their
goals are quite ambitious. A SCHEME-like lisp interpreter was running in
August; I guess now they are working on the compiler and class inheritance
facilities. December's "release date" was March, but if they really
are developing a truly easy to use object-oriented window system, it will
take longer. When the gap between current date and "release date" narrows
to within two weeks, that's when to get next month's orders ready.
On a more optimistic note, it's pretty certain that sometime
in 1986, an Apple 68020 product running a completed Experlisp will be
available. If the lisp is efficient, benchmarks indicate [see Deering, p. 73
of AAAI-84] that the combination could be 1/4 the speed of a 1984 Symbolics.
Rich
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 85 09:48:20 PST (Wednesday)
From: Conde.osbunorth@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: Is Xerox Punting D-Machines?
Never! The Dallas operation made typewriters or something, and they are
moving to sunny Southern California. D-Machine will still be made.
DSC
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 85 09:46:44 PST (Wednesday)
From: GMeredith.es@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Xerox D-Machines Alive and Well
The manufacture of the Xerox Dandelions has been moved to the building
across the street from us here in El Segundo, CA. The production line
is in full swing and putting out high quality units.
Xerox has not given us any indication that the corporation will be
getting out of the lisp field. In fact, a recent full page ad touting a
15 year headstart in AI experience indicates otherwise.
Guy
------------------------------
Date: 10 Jan 85 15:39:01 EST
From: DIETZ@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: False Alarm on DLions
Xerox isn't going to stop making D machines. They are apparently
quite profitable. They are also continuing to make Stars, and will
reportedly come out with a much cheaper Star soon. Dallas is being pared
back, but apparently not closed.
P. Dietz
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Jan 85 17:21:34-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - AI, Employment and Income (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
ABSTRACT OF NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
AI, Employment and Income
In a recent article in the AI Magazine, Nils Nilsson explores the
profound effects Artificial Intelligence is likely to have on
employment and the distribution of income. He presents an economic
and a psychological reason for his opinion that we should greet the
work-eliminating consequences of AI with enthusiasm, since they will
liberate people from unfulfilling work without necessarily harming
them economically. The article has drawn a number of interesting
responses, some of which have been published in a later issue of the
AI Magazine. This issue also contains a reply by Nils Nilsson to the
readers' letters. The variety of arguments, in the article and the
letters, both for and against an optimistic view of the social impact
of AI will serve as the basis for our TINLUNCH discussion. Nils
Nilsson will be present.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Jan 85 17:21:34-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - On Comparatives and Superlatives (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
ABSTRACT OF THIS WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
``On Comparatives and Superlatives''
Consider a phrasal comparative like (1).
(1) Little died earlier than Dolphy.
(`Phrasal' comparatives, as opposed to `clausal' ones, are those which
instead of a clause have a single phrase after ``than.'') There are
(at least) two ways of approaching the semantic analysis of (1). One
is to view ``than Dolphy'' as essentially an elliptical description
for a certain degree, viz. the degree x such that Dolphy died x-early,
and to construe the whole sentence as basically a comparison between
that degree and another one, namely the degree y such that Little died
y-early. The other approach is to read (1) as primarily a comparison
between two people, Little and Dolphy, who are being compared with
respect to a certain `dimension'. The dimension is earliness-of-death
and may be formally represented as a function from people to degrees
which maps every person x onto the degree y such that x died y-early.
This talk adopts the second approach and explores its empirical and
theoretical implications. While the scopes of the comparison
operators themselves seem to obey constraints that have emerged from
studies of quantifier scope, this is not the case for the putative
scopes of certain other phrases. To accommodate this finding, I will
draw on recent work by Rooth and suggest a refinement of the analysis
which recognizes a distinction between scope-assignment proper and
something like association-to-focus. ---Irene Heim
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 85 12:10:32 est
From: bellcore!walker@Berkeley (Don Walker)
Subject: Conference on The Lexicon, Parsing, and Semantic Interpretation
THE LEXICON, PARSING, AND SEMANTIC INTERPRETATION
CUNY Graduate Center, Auditorium
33 West 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
THURSDAY, JANUARY 17, 1985
8:30 Registration with coffee
8:50 Welcoming
Steven Cahn, Provost, CUNY Graduate School
John Moyne, CUNY Graduate Center and Queens College
9:00 Linguistic Lexicography
Terence Langendoen, CUNY Graduate Center and Brooklyn College
10:00 How to Misread a Dictionary
George Miller, Princeton University
11:00 Knowledge Management Support for Language Processing
Charles Kellogg, Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corp.
12:00 Lunch
1:30 Customizing the TQA Lexicon for Semantic Disambiguation
Fredrick Damerau and David Johnson, IBM Yorktown Research
2:30 Parse Trees as Lexical Projections
Joan Bachenko and Eileen Fitzpatrick, Bell Laboratories
3:30 Requirements on the Lexicon for Parsing and Generation
Robert Ingria, Bolt Beranek and Newman
4:30 Discussion
6:00 Dinner at Peng Tengs, 219 East 44th Street
FRIDAY, JANUARY 18, 1985
8:45 Coffee
9:00 The Nuts and Bolts of Lexical Access
Martin Kay, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
10:00 Text Files as Sources for Creating an Augmented Dictionary
Robert Amsler and Donald Walker, Bell Communications Research
11:00 The Lexical Base for Semantic Interpretation in a PROLOG Parser
Roy Byrd and Michael McCord, IBM Yorktown Research
12:00 Lunch
1:30 Lexicons for Conceptual Analyzers
Michael Lebowitz, Columbia University
2:30 The LSP Lexicon for Free Text Information Formatting
Susanne Wolff, Joyce London and Naomi Sager, New York University
3:30 Using a Lexicon of Canonical Graphs in Parsing
John Sowa, IBM Systems Research Institute
4:30 Closing
Advance registration is not necessary, and no fees will be charged for
the workshop.
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: Terence Langendoen, (212)
790-4574
John Sowa, (212) 309-1493, sowa.yktvmt.ibm@csnet-relay
Don Walker, (201) 829-4312, bellcore!walker@berkeley
Cosponsored by the City University of New York, IBM Systems Research
Institute, and Bell Communications Research.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Jan 1985 12:34:16-EST
From: Linda.Quarrie@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: IJCAI Student Volunteer Positions Available
The Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence will
be held from August 18 to 24, 1985, at the University of California at
Los Angeles.
The I.J.C.A.I. Local Arrangements Committee is looking for student volunteers
for the August 1985 conference. Volunteers work approximately 8 hours during
the conference. Tasks include manning information desks, checking badges at
sessions, and distributing conference materials. In exchange volunteers
receive a staff T-shirt, free registration at the conference, proceedings, and
free admission to any tutorials at which the volunteer works. Additional
benefits include a party and great opportunity for meeting people from all
over the world.
Graduate students are encouraged to volunteer, and undergraduates are welcome.
Names will be taken for the next few months, with final assignments made
in July. Tentative volunteers are welcome. Volunteers will be taken on a
first come/first served basis, so reply now!
Reply to:
Linda Quarrie
arpanet address:
lindaq@cmu-ri-isl1.arpa
snail mail:
Linda Quarrie
The Robotics Institute
Carnegie-Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
phone:
(412)578-8815
(412)521-1968
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1985 8:55:30 EST (Wednesday)
From: Charles Howell <m15434@mitre>
Subject: Hospitality Suites for Expert Systems Conference
I am helping with local arrangements for the Expert Systems in
Government Symposium, which is being held October 23 .. 25 1985
in McLean VA. The conference will consist of a two day symposium
preceded by an optional tutorial day. The conference objective
is to allow the developers and implementors of expert systems in
government agencies to exchange information and ideas for the
purpose of improving the quality of existing and future expert
systems in the government sector. The conference is sponsored by
the IEEE Computer Society and the MITRE Corporation in
cooperation with AIAA/NCS.
We are expecting a wide variety of people to attend the
conference. I am specifically interested in hardware and
software vendors who would like to display their products during
the conference. The conference will be held in the Tyson's
Westpark Hotel. The hotel has a number of suites available for
vendor "hospitality suites". If you are interested, please
contact me. I'll put you in touch with the appropriate person at
the Tyson's Westpark, and I'll also keep track of the amount of
interest from vendors. If there is a lot, we may explore a block
reservation of some suites for the period of the conference.
Chuck Howell
(703) 883-6080 U.S.P.S.: The MITRE Corp.,
Howell at MITRE 1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.,
McLean, VA 22102
Mail Code W459
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂14-Jan-85 1123 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #3
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 85 11:23:14 PST
Date: Sun 13 Jan 1985 16:26-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #3
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 14 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 3
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Scheme for 3600s & VILM & ExperLOGO for the Mac,
LISP - Common LISP Documentation,
Business - Xerox and the AI Business,
Report - Mathematical Properties of Linguistic Theories,
AI Literature - Pearl's HEURISTICS Errata & Online Technical Reports,
Psychology - Infantile Amnesia,
Seminar - Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 01/10/85 12:20:46
From: PETERS@MIT-MC
Subject: Scheme for 3600's?
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Not too long ago in these pages someone advertised Scheme for the 3600's.
I've forgotten who, can anyone provide the senders address?
------------------------------
Date: 11 Jan 1985 11:22:58-EST
From: kushnier@NADC
Subject: VILM
Todd-
I just saw the new HP Pisces/200 computer. It looks like another candidate
for a low cost portable LISP Machine. Here are the specs:
Pisces/200 is a full function personal computer which integrates a printer,
full-size display, keyboard, and disc mass storage in a single transportable
package.
It is positioned as the transportable offering in the HP9000 product family and
represents the low-end product in the HP-UX strategy.
Target markets include engineers and technical professionals, and instrument
control.
HARDWARE FEATURES
* 8 Mhz Motorola 68000
* 256KB ROM (OS, Device Drivers, User Interface)
* 512K built-in RAM
* 8M address space
* 710KB 3-1/2" double-sided disk
* 255 x 512 Electroluminescent Display (up to 85 characters x 32 lines)
* 16 bit Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) Custom CMOS IC
* 32KB dedicated display memory
* Inkjet 80 column printer
* Detachable, low profile ITF keyboard with merged numeric keypad.
* Mainframe supports ITF Caravan devices via two connectors in front.
* $PReal Time Clock
* Speaker
* HP-IB
* Briefcase size-upright configuration
* Two I/O slots, each capable of supporting I/O, Memory, or an I/O expander
* Weight 25 lbs
SOFTWARE
* ROM-based operating system HP-UX/RO
* Multi-Tasking, single user
* Visual user interface, Multiple windows, menus & softkeys, supports 2 button
mouse
* Foreign language localized
COST
* about 5K
I'm pushing the HP Rep to look into the AI market as a possible LISP machine
Ron Kushnier
kushnier@nadc.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri 11 Jan 85 11:32:16-EST
From: Wang Zeep <G.ZEEP%MIT-EECS@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: ExperLOGO for the Mac
I just received a brochure on ExperLogo. It included a press release
that said the Logo was to be released Dec. 17, 1984. I called MacConnection
and they told me it was released, but that they had not yet completed
negotiations on price, etc. with ExperIntelligence. The salesperson
quoted from the manual a few times, etc., indicating that it is a
real product.
ELogo includes arrays, 3d graphics, compilation, etc. It requires
a Mac with an external drive, and uses LOAD-WHEN-NEEDED to run within
the 128K memory space. I'm going to wait for their LISP, but anyone with
Macs and children may want to look into this.
Ken
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 85 11:47:55 EST
From: Robert Willis <rwillis@bbn-labs-b>
Subject: re: CommonLisp Documentation
I assume you mean "CommonLisp" by Guy L. Steele, Jr.
The book is published by Digital Press [ 30 North Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803].
Order number EY-00031-DP.
You may either order from
Digital Press/Order Processing
Digital Equipment Corporation
12A Esquire Road
Billerica, MA 01862
Title: Stelle, COMMMON LISP
Order No.: EY-00031-DP
Price (US only): $22.00 (add state sales tax to this amount)
Method of Payment allowed: check (payable to D.E.C.),
purchase order, Master Card or Visa.
OR
You may call on the phone (toll free)
1-800-343-8321 (In Massachusetts, 1-800-462-8006)
from 8 AM to 4 PM Eastern Time. Have Master Card or Visa number
ready.
Bob Willis
Bolt Beranek and Newman Laboratories, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 11 Jan 1985 13:10:51-PST
From: puder%bach.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Karl Puder)
Subject: Common LISP: The Language
From the frontispiece:
Copyright (c) 1984 by Digital Equipment Corporation.
...
Order number EY-00031-DP
...
Steele, Guy.
Common LISP: The Language
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. LISP (Computer program language) I. Title.
II. Title: Common LISP: The Language.
QA76.73.L23S73 1984 001.64'24 84-7681
ISBN 0-932376-41-X
Published by
Digital Press
30 North Avenue
Burlington, MA 01803
I believe that the suggested retail price is $22.00
postal: Karl Puder, HL02-3/E09, DEC AITG, 77 Reed Road, Hudson, MA, 01749-2809
phone: (1)(617)568-4979 | ARPA: puder%logic.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
DTN: 225-4979 | EasyNET: LOGIC::PUDER
UUCP: ...!{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-logic!puder
CSNET?: puder%logic.DEC@decwrl.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: 12 Jan 85 19:42 PST
From: Masinter.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Xerox and the AI business
For those who want further evidence that Xerox is in the business, I
offer the fact that the Xerox Artificial Intelligence Systems business
unit is dramatically increasing the size of their development, support,
and marketing staffs. The development group, based in Palo Alto, has
projects in systems, communication, programming environment and language
development, text processing and graphics, applications, documentation,
as well as several different hardware integration projects. Of course, I
wouldn't want to use the Arpanet for overt recruiting....
Larry Masinter
(415) 494-4365
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Jan 85 17:21:34-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Mathematical Properties of Linguistic Theories
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORT
A new CSLI Report by C. Raymond Perrault, ``On the Mathematical
Properties of Linguistic Theories'' (Report No. CSLI--84-18), To
obtain a copy of this report write to Dikran Karagueuzian, CSLI,
Ventura Hall, Stanford 94305 or send net mail to Dikran at SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 85 17:47:40 PST
From: Judea Pearl <judea@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: errata sheet for Pearl's HEURISTICS
I have prepared an errata sheet for my book HEURISTICS
(Addison-Wesley, 1984). If you wish to obtain a copy
please send me a message and indicate if you prefer a hard
copy or an electronic message.
Judea Pearl
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 85 20:30:20 est
From: krovetz@nlm-mcs (Bob Krovetz)
Subject: online technical reports
The following is a list of people who can be contacted at various sites
on the net for ordering technical reports. I've tried to determine who
is the site contact, whether they have an on line bibliography, if they
have a mailing list for notification of new TR's, and if the TR's themselves
are available on line. If anyone knows of this information for any sites I
haven't mentioned, please send me a message and I will post a followup to the
net. Note that the mailing lists mentioned are U.S. mail, not electronic!
Online bibliographies at the various sites may be FTP'd by logging in with
id: ANONYMOUS and password GUEST (this only applies if you are on the ARPANET)
Yale: Donna Mauri (MAURI@YALE) is the contact person for AI or cognitive
science reports. There is no online list of those reports, but she
can send a hard copy list. For non-AI/cognitive science reports
the contact person is Kim Washington (WASHINGTON@YALE).
CMU: No online list, however they do have a mailing list for
notification of recent TR's. TR's can be ordered over the net.
The contact person is Sylvia Hoy (HOY@CMU-CS-A).
MIT: There is an online list, but the publications office is undergoing
a restructuring, so it isn't available at the moment. A contact
for ordering the TR's will be established at some future time.
SRI: No online line of just the report names, but there is a list of
the reports plus abstracts. Tonita Walker (TWalker@SRI-AI) is
the contact person. Many of the reports are available for FTPing.
UTEXAS: A list of current reports is in {UTEXAS}<cs.tech>TRLIST. A
master list of reports still in print is under MASTER.TR. Many
of the current reports themselves are also available in the
above directory, but they contain text formatting commands.
The directory contains a file READ.ME which tells which text
formatter was used for which reports (SCRIBE vs. NROFF).
Reports may be ordered by sending mail to CS.TECH@UTEXAS-20.
BBN: No reports or list online (no list even in hard copy). Contact
author directly about getting a copy of the TR.
PARC: Maia Pindar (PINDAR@XEROX) is the contact person. An online
copy of the bibliography is not available at the moment, but
Ms. Pindar may be contacted to obtain a hardcopy.
Rutgers: Contact Christine Loungo (LOUNGO@RUTGERS) or Carol Petty
(PETTY@RUTGERS) to obtain reports. They maintain a mailing
list to distribute notices of the TR's and the abstracts.
The abstracts of recent reports are online and under:
{RUTGERS}<library>tecrpts-online.doc.
ISI: Lisa Trentham is the contact (LTRENTHAM@ISIB). There is a list
of the available reports under {ISIB}<BBOARD>ISI-PUBLICATIONS.DOC
Stanford: Stanford reports are issued by four sources: the HPP (Heuristic
Programming Project), the AI lab, the Center for the Study of
Language and Information (CSLI), and the Computer Science
Department. HPP reports are available without charge by contacting
Paula Edmisten (EDMISTEN@SUMEX). Please be reasonable with your
requests; no more than 15 at a time! There is no online bibliography
available, but a hard copy may be requested. There is an online
bibliograpy of AI lab reports in AIMLST in [BIB,DOC]@SU-AI. Some
of the reports are available online and are so indicated in the
bibliography. Reports from CSLI may be requested from Dikran
Karagueuzian (DIKRAN@SU-CSLI). A bibliography of the reports
is stored under {SU-CSLI}<CSLI>CATALOG.REPORTS. CSLI will also
be issuing lecture notes, and a bibliography of these will be under
{SU-CSLI}<CSLI>CATALOG.LECTURE-NOTES. The reports are
available without charge, but there is a charge for the lecture
notes. There is also a charge for reports published by either
the AI lab or the Computer Science Department, but information as
to cost and/or availablity may be sent to Kathy Berg (BERG@SU-SCORE)
A bibliography of CSD reports from 1963 to 1984 is available for
$5.00. The department maintains a mailing list for notification
of new TR's. You can be added to it by contacting Kathy Berg.
Updates are sent out about five or six times per year.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 85 18:24:11 est
From: Dana S. Nau <dsn@tove>
Subject: Re: PBS Series on the Brain
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: PBS Series on the Brain
Well, I'm not really familiar with the field -- and introspection
is risky. Chris Heiny also questioned infantile amnesia, but
Minsky wrote in support of the concept (V2 #173). I do find
it strange that I have so few memories of the early years (well
into grade school, in my case), whereas I certainly stored a
great many long-term memories at the time.
[...]
I was catching up on old AILIST mail, and I responded to your month-old note
before seeing all the responses it had already generated.
However, having gotten started on it:
I have various memories of events going back to when I was no older than one
or two. I really don't know "how many" such memories I have--different
memories come to mind at different times and in different contexts. The
reason I know that they were before I was 5 was not (as someone on the net
was theorizing) because of any special quality to them, but rather because
of WHERE they occurred: in houses and towns that we lived in when I was
that young.
For me, the farther back I go the fewer readily accessible memories I
have--but the only kind of "quantum jump" I see in how hard it is to
remember things is that I don't think I remember anything that occurred
before I was about 1-1/2. Now, that COULD be related (as someone on the net
was theorizing) to lack of language skills before that time, but I doubt it.
Memories for me are more often visual/aural/olfactory/conceptual than
verbal. I suspect it was more likely related to lack of general conceptual
skills.
Do you suppose that for some reason you might be suppressing some of those
early memories?
------------------------------
Date: 01/13/85 03:10:12
From: KMP
Subject: Seminar - Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
On Monday (Jan 14), the AI Lab's IAP seminar series on
Advanced Topics in Lisp will host an invited talk by
David Moon about ``Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System.''
The abstract for this talk (from a paper which appeared in this
summer's ACM Lisp & Functional Programming Conference) follows:
This paper discusses the garbage collection techniques used
in a high-performance Lisp implementation with a large virtual
memory, the Symbolics 3600. Particular attention is paid to
practical issues and experience. In a large system, problems
of scale appear and the most straightforward garbage collection
techniques do not work well. Many of these problems involve
the interaction of the garbage collector with demand-paged
virtual memory. Some of the solutions adopted on the 3600 are
presented, including incremental copying garbage collection,
approximately depth-first copying, ephemeral objects, tagged
architecture, and hardware assists. We discuss techniques for
improving the efficiency of garbage collection by recognizing
that objects in the Lisp world have a variety of lifetimes.
The importance of designing the architecture and the hardware
to facilitate garbage collection is stressed.
The talk will be at 2pm in the 8th floor playroom. All are welcome.
No previous attendance at these seminars is required.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂17-Jan-85 0014 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #4
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 85 00:14:22 PST
Date: Wed 16 Jan 1985 22:33-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #4
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Thursday, 17 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Application - TeX Indexing Program,
Education - Micro LISP & AI Course,
Business - Xerox Rumor,
News - Recent Articles,
Opinion - Overblown Expectations for AI,
Psychology - Infantile Amnesia,
Conferences - Space Station Automation & Probability in AI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 9 January 1985 09:49-EST
From: Jon C. Haass <JONCH @ MIT-MC>
Subject: TeX indexing program
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am very interested in finding a program which will produce an index of
specified keywords in a (or several) TeX files. In order to know the page
numbers the input would be either a press (or dvi) file, the output
would preferably be the list of words with all pages on which they occur.
The environment of choice is UNIX 4.2 .
If you have information leading to the acquisition of such, I would be glad
to offer at least a free lunch! If you have a proof that one does not exist
that would also be of interest.
Thanks..
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 1985 20:52-EST
From: cross <cross@wpafb-afita>
Subject: micro LISP for short course?
I am setting up a short course in AI concepts and programming
techniques. The course will be five weeks long. I want the course to be
laboratory intensive and representative of development and
laboratory environments using LISP machines. Because of monetary
constraints I can only afford IBM XT's. It seems Golden Hill COMMON
LISP is a good piece of software to build the course around - fairly
compatable with Zeta-LISP (I even hear that someone has an interface
that enables programs to be transferred from an IBM machine to a 3600).
Any comments anyone has about this programming environment or
suggstions for a better one given the constraints would be greatly
appreciated. Thanks.
Steve Cross
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 85 17:09:05 cst
From: neves@wisc-rsch.arpa (David Neves)
Subject: AI course suggestions?
I'm teaching an undergraduate AI course this semester and would like
to get/share some ideas with others in a similar situation. Part
of the course is Lisp programming projects. Last semester I had
3 projects. The first was the 8-puzzle (A*). I am thinking of
replacing it with a simple game (and alpha-beta search). Anyone have
any good ideas or experiences with a 2-person game that is easy to
represent and which doesn't have many rules? The second program was
a SIR-type program teaching about semantic nets. I'm not all that
happy with it and am thinking about a program on frames. Ideas
here? The last program was an ATN and I'm happy with that. I
am looking for an idea for one more program though.
For the course I used Rich (for the AI part) and Wilensky (for the
Lisp part). Rich is very comprehensive although some parts are
confusing to students. It is also used in the graduate course here.
The other alternative is Winston's AI book (the 2nd edition). Have
others had good experiences with it? It seems easier to understand
than Rich but doesn't cover nearly as much material. Another book
I like is Raphael's book (The thinking computer). It is somewhat
dated but might be appropriate for a lower level (or non computer
science) course.
I'm trying Winston&Horn (for Lisp) this semester because they seem to have more
examples and a somewhat better style (LET's and DO's).
-Thanks, David Neves
...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,uwm-evax}!uwvax!neves
neves@uwvax
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 85 18:01 PST
From: Sheil.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Reply-to: Sheil.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: Xerox Rumor
Xerox moved most of its workstation manufacturing from Dallas, Texas to
El Segundo, California quite some time ago, so the changes at Dallas
will have no impact on 1108 (Dandelion) production. And, no, we're not
getting out of the Lisp machine business!
Beau Sheil
Xerox Artificial Intelligence Systems
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 85 07:09:43 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
Computer Design: Volume 23, Number 13 November 84
Single-User Symbolic Processor Cuts AI Systems Cost by J. Bond
Datamation January 15, 1985 page 69 from their "Worldwide" section.
"TOKYO - Hot on the heels of the phantom fifth comes word of Japanese
efforts to go after Josephson Junction Lisp machines, and biological chips
that would fuel the sixth generation. Following the familiar form without
substance format are recommendations in a confidential report [of] Japan's
Science & Technology Agency that plant seeds for biocomputer research."
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 31 Dec 1984 10:18-EST
From: munck@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: Overblown Expectations for AI
[Forwarded from Human-Nets Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Les Earnest's report that sanity still exists in the "real" AI
community, despite the fantastic pronouncements surrounding it, was
long overdue. However, I must quibble with his use of past tense in
describing the attempts at AI "Command and Control" systems by the Air
Force and others. They've changed focus slightly, but they're still
around.
Specifically, it's a widely-held belief in the DoD that our
problems with building large software systems will be solved - more
accurately, circumvented - within a decade by AI. They believe that
AI systems will be able to listen to an hour or so of verbal
description of, say, an air-defense system and then produce overnight
the million-odd lines of code to implement it. Normally, I'd classify
this belief as relatively harmless, like those in the Tooth Fairy, the
Star Wars initiative, and Santa Claus, but it has a chilling effect on
work on practical, people-writing-code methodologies. I have no doubt
that there is a great deal of the programming task that can be taken
over by computers using AI techniques, but the state of the art is
that many people are not convinced that compilers can be used to free
humans from doing register allocation.
Fusion research uses the criterion of "break-even," the point at
which a reactor produces more power than is needed to run it, as a
goal. I suggest that a similar measure could be applied to AI systems
and the field as a whole. What AI systems have saved more human effort
than was needed to produce them?
-- Bob Munck
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 85 12:52:32 EST
From: Morton A Hirschberg <mort@BRL-BMD.ARPA>
Subject: Re: PBS Series on the Brain
I am glad that Dana has brought up the series on the brain. When I was
studying psychology with an emphasis on personality, some 15 years ago, the
very subject of infantile amnesia arose. We, the professors and students in
the seminar, felt that it was a true phenomena. Indeed we also felt it was
very unusual for people to have no memories until well into grade school. It
does seem that there is the likelihood of either/or suppression or repression
at work in these cases.
Often the early memories are of a traumatic nature and are of a single
incident rather than recurring events. Although basically a Freudian, I am
not convinced that a single incident is responsible for latter behavior. I am
more of the mind that several events or the entire gestalt or ambiance of the
environment are responsible. Serious traumatic events lead to the phenomena
of multiple personalities. Here we see that various personalities have no
recollection for long periods of time, although I am not suggesting that
everyone who has no childhood memories is a multiple.
I also recall that some myelination occurs about the time that language
skills develop so there seems to be a correlation between lack of language
skills and early memory.
If you had early conceptual memories more power to you. I would agree
with visual/olfactory which seems to make us reminisce, have feelings of
deja vu, and when we get older feel maudlin.
Remember there are great individual differences so that a wide range can be
expected. Don't feel that you are bonkers if you have no early childhood
memories (unless supported by other evidence.)
Is there no personologist who can shed some further light here?
Side issues such as multiple personalities are so fascinating.
Mort
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 85 1236 PST
From: William K. Erickson <WKE@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference Announcement / Call for Papers
Call For Papers
******************************************************************
SPACE STATION AUTOMATION
to be held in conjunction with the International Conference on
INTELLIGENT ROBOTS AND COMPUTER VISION II
******************************************************************
Part of the Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers' (SPIE)
1985 Cambridge Symposium on Optical and Electro-Optical Engineering
15-20 September 1985
Hyatt Regency Cambridge
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Chairman: Wun C. Chiou, Sr., NASA/Ames Research Center
In the next decade an increasing amount of research will be
devoted to the applications of artificial intelligence and
robotics technology to space station automation. The purpose
of the conference is to bring together researchers in the areas
of artificial intelligence, image science and robotics who are
working on various aspects of space station automation. Papers
on the following and related topics as applied to this unique
microgravity, high vacuum, high radiation environment are invited.
Topics of interest include:
* Space automation and tele-science
* Image understanding and scene analysis
* Machine/computer vision
* Autonomous/self-organizing systems
* Hardware architecture designs
* Knowledge-based expert systems
If you are interested in participating in this conference, please
leave your name and address at the SPIE Registration Desk, or
contact:
Cambridge 1985
SPIE
P.O. Box 10
Bellingham WA.
telephone: (206)676-3290
Abstract Due Date: April 15, 1985
Manuscript Due Date: August 19, 1985
------------------------------
Date: Tue 15 Jan 85 14:13:55-PST
From: P. Cheeseman <cheeseman@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Workshop - Probability in AI
CALL FOR PARTICIPATION
"Workshop on Uncertainty and Probability in Artificial Intelligence"
Sponsored by: AAAI and IEEE
University of California, Los Angeles, California
August 14 through August 16, 1985
The workshop will explore the use of probabilities for decision
making in AI systems. In particular, topics such as the induction of
"theories" from uncertain data, coupling to decision theory, the
accuracy of probability values, and computerized "subjective"
probability estimation will be examined. Participants are encouraged to
submit papers or join the discussions on the following topics:
* Probabilistic Induction and Machine Learning
* Higher Order Probabilities (or accuracy of probabilities)
* Probabilities and "Subjective" Estimates (people and
machines)
* Techniques for Probability Evaluation
* Foundations of Probability Theory for AI
This workshop has been designed to provide an atmosphere which will
foster not only the exchange of information, but also extensive
discussion and participation by all involved.
Paper Submission Details
Authors should submit two copies of an extended abstract to the
program chairman by April 6 for consideration by the review committee.
Each copy should include a title, the names and addresses of all
authors, as well as a primary topic from the above list. One of the
authors should be identified as the principal contact. Acceptance will
be based on originality as well as significance of research
(Notification by April 27). Complete papers should be sent to the
general chairman by June 1 for distribution at the workshop.
Program Committee: Lotfi Zadeh Judea Pearl Laveen Kanal
Peter Cheeseman John Lemmer
Program Chairman: General Chairman: Arrangements Chairman:
John Lemmer Peter Cheeseman Rob Suritis
PAR Technology Corp. SRI International Par Technology Corp.
220 Seneca Turnpike 333 Ravenswood Ave. 220 Seneca Turnpike
New Hartford, NY 13413 Menlo Park, CA 94025 New Hartford, NY 13413
(315) 738-0600 x322 (415) 859-6469 (315) 738-0600 x233
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Jan-85 0119 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #5
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jan 85 01:19:11 PST
Date: Sat 19 Jan 1985 23:35-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #5
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 20 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - LOOPS & LISP for PC & Golden Common Lisp,
Reports - Functions in LISP & UTexas Reports & Recent Articles,
Opinion - Reminiscence
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 85 16:01 EST
From: Araman@HIS-BILLERICA-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: PORTING OF LOOPS
I would like to know whether LOOPs has been ported on to the Symbolics
3600. I would also like to know whether it has been converted to
ZETALISP or has been ported using the INTERLISP COMPATABILITY PACKAGE.
Pointers, names & phone nos. would do. thanks in advance -sankar (617
671 3018)
------------------------------
Date: Thu 17 Jan 85 00:33:35-PST
From: Sam Hahn <SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp for PC
If you're using PC's and looking for a Lisp, I'd suggest
TLC-Lisp, from The Lisp Company. I myself have not used GCLisp,
but have been quite impressed with TLC-Lisp, which has a compiler,
an object-class system, packages, auto-load entities,
and costs less than half what GCLisp costs.
TLC is John Allen's (The Anatomy of Lisp) company, located in
Redwood Estates, CA. I have no connection with TLC except as
a customer.
-- sam hahn
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jan 85 0228 EST
From: Dave.Touretzky@CMU-CS-A.ARPA
Subject: review of Golden Common Lisp
This is a review of Golden Common Lisp; I was one of its beta test users. I
first got involved with GCLisp when I contracted to develop an intensive
week-long tutorial on Common Lisp to be marketed nationally by Carnegie
Group, Inc. The tutorial is designed to be held in a classroom full of
Compaq Plus computers (PC/XT clones) with 640K of memory and 10.5 MB hard
disk drives, running Golden Common Lisp.
I'm used to working on a Symbolics 3600, yet find I am quite comfortable
moving to the PC using this software. GCLisp is a very respectable subset
of the Common Lisp dialect. It includes DEFMACRO, generalized variables
(with SETF, etc.), one-dimensional arrays, named structures, closures,
stack groups, multiple values, lambda lists with &optional/&rest/&aux
keywords, a window package, FORMAT, the sharp sign and backquote macro
characters, i/o streams, and pathname objects. The online documentation
facilities are excellent. Example: you can start to type in a Lisp
expression at top level, like
(+ foo (nth
and, if you forget the order of arguments to the NTH function, you can
hit meta-L and the system will look at the expression you are typing,
find the documentation for the NTH function, and display its argument
list. The GMACS editor (a descendant of Emacs) is reasonably powerful
and contains its own online help facilities. Some of the other programming
tools provided are TRACE, STEP, DOC, APROPOS, DESCRIBE, and a pretty printer.
Now, here are the negative aspects of GCLisp. First, it is not a full
Common Lisp implementation. Missing features include: ratios, bignums,
complex numbers, many FORMAT and # options, some of the sequence functions,
most of the optional keyword arguments to sequence functions, hash tables,
character objects, user-defined packages, and keyword arguments in
user-defined functions. Of course, if Gold Hill had crammed a complete
implementation onto the PC there would be no room left for user code or
data structures. I think they did a good job of deciding which parts of the
language to omit.
Another shortcoming of GCLisp is that it is dynamically scoped (like
MacLisp) rather than lexically scoped (like true Common Lisp). This choice
was made for efficiency reasons; it is hard to do efficient lexical scoping
in an interpreter. Case in point: at AAAI-84 I saw a PC running GCLisp
outperform a Vax running interpreted Vax Common Lisp; both were executing a
recursive Fibonacci function, but the Vax was using lexical scoping. Also,
to be fair, it was an early version of Vax Common Lisp which wasn't yet
tweaked for speed, and the Vax was using 32 bit arithmetic while the PC
used 16 bits. But on the other hand, the PC wasn't just slightly faster
than the Vax; it was a good deal faster. The folks who created T use a kind
of pre-compilation hack to interpret lexically scoped code efficiently. As
far as I know, no Common Lisp implementation uses this trick.
There is a GCLisp compiler in the works. The first release is due in
30-60 days, although that might be just a beta test version. A random
comment one of the Gold Hill people made to me suggests that when the
compiler is ready they might decide to switch to lexical scoping.
A third criticism of GCLisp is that you can't buy just the Lisp; it is
bundled together with a piece of tutorial software known as the San Marco
Lisp Explorer, plus copies of two books (Steele's Common Lisp manual and
the 2nd edition of Winston and Horn.) If you already know Lisp, and you
already have copies of these two books, you have to buy the extra stuff
anyway. I don't know exactly how much the bundling adds to the $495 price
of GCLisp ($395 for academic institutions), but I hope Gold Hill will
reconsider this decision. For large institutions, a site license is
available that permits unlimited copies. We are presently arranging to get
one for CMU; we plan to move two Lisp courses (one for novices and one for
experienced programmers), and the Lisp segment of a third course, onto PC's
using GCLisp. This will provide better computing resources and a higher
quality environment than what is available running MacLisp on our
well-loaded academic DEC-20's.
GCLisp needs at least 512K to run, and you really ought to have 640K (the
max addressable on a PC) in order to use the system to its fullest without
running out of memory too quickly. You don't have to have a hard disk,
although it helps. On the new PC/AT, GCLisp can address up to 1 megabyte of
memory. (You can put up to 3 meg on an AT, but Gold Hill uses some of the
bits in each 32 bit address for type codes and other stuff, so only 20 bits
are available for addressing.)
Gold Hill's address is: Gold Hill Computers, Inc., 163 Harvard Street,
Cambridge, MA, 02139. Telephone (617) 492-2071.
In summary: this is a superb product. It puts state-of-the-art Lisp
programming technology into the hands of anyone who can afford a PC.
-- Dave Touretzky
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Jan 85 17:31:31-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Implementation of Functions in LISP
[Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORT
A new CSLI Report by Michael P. Georgeff and Stephen F. Bodnar, ``A Simple
and Efficient Implementation of Higher-order Functions in LISP'' (Report
No. CSLI--85--19), has just been published. To obtain a copy of this
report write to Dikran Karagueuzian, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford 94305 or
send net mail to Dikran at SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 85 06:28:48 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent UTexas Reports
Technical Reports
U. T. Austin
TR-84-29 Translating Horn Clauses from English Yeong-Ho Yu
TR-84-30 Automated Proof of a Trace Transformation for a Bitonic Sort
Chua-Huang Huang and Christian Lengauer
TR-84-33 From Menus to Intentions in Man-Machine Dialogue Robert F. Simmons
TR-84-35 Modelling Concepts for VLSI CAD Objects
D. S. Batory and Won Kim
------------------------------
Date: Thu 17 Jan 85 17:30:40-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Recent Articles
Communications of the ACM, January 1985.
IJCAI Award for Research Excellence Announced, p. 123:
$1000 plus expenses to be awarded every second year to honor
sustained excellence in AI research.
AFIPS Publishes Volume on Artificial Intelligence, p. 123:
Describes "Artificial Intelligence", volume VI in the AFIPS
Information Technology series, a collection of NCC and joint
USA/Japan Computer Conference papers edited by Oscar Firschein
[then at Lockheed, now at SRI]. AFIPS Press Department, 1899
Preston White Drive, Reston, VA 222091, $23 (plus $3.50 if not
prepaid). [The collection includes three 60's papers on solving
geometic analogy problems, decomposing line drawings in 3-D
polyhedra, and representation in GPS; five on knowledge engineering
and expert systems; two on planning and problem solving; two on
AI languages; six on applications; and six on image understanding.]
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, January 1985:
Consensus Bibliography Technique Aids Access to Literature, p. 94:
Ware Myers describes a series of annotated bibliographies being
compiled by John L. Burch's Ergosyst Associates. (No address is
given, but they have a division called the Report Store, 910
Massachusetts St., Lawrence, KS 66044, that sells copies of the cited
documents.) The company identifies top people in a field and
uses the sources they cite as the core of their bibliography.
Each citation they include is accompanied by a capsule review of
about 1 or 2 pages, and the volume as a whole has a short introduction
to the field (about 17 pages). They have produced two so far,
including "Artificial Intelligence: Bibliographic Summaries of the
Select Literature" by Henry M. Rylko, 210 entries of about 2.4
pages each.
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jan 85 22:03:25 EST
From: shrager (jeff shrager) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: <no comment required!>
[Comment: rather long and pointless reminiscence. -- KIL]
Forwarded from the CMU opinion bboard.
Date: Wed 16 Jan 18:10
From: Purvis.Jackson@CMU-CS-CAD
Subject: trees (3416)
Perhaps what makes me most insecure about artificial intelligence is
the feeling of my general lack of natural intelligence that becomes
most pronounced when I'm in the company of those well versed in the
ideas and language of AI. It seems as though I can be made to feel
somewhat small, rather insignificant, when gauging my own intellect
by that of certain AI folks I have known. For example, I was at one
time a fairly close friend of a certain postdoc who exhibited an uncanny
ability to explain endless phenomena without recourse to the well-worn
phrase, "I don't know," which seems to characterize an exceedingly large
percentage of my responses to questions having to do with the howness of
my reasoning. Whether sitting at my elbow in the Squirrel Hill Cafe
slugging down beer and Schnapps or fixtured in a corner at parties, he
could usually be seen pressing close to his captive audience, eyebrows
contorting with emphasis as he clarified point after point in a ceaseless
stream of what sounded to me and others, or so I assumed by their wide-eyed
expressions of amazement, to be the voice of an Olympian mind looking down
through the clouds into the abyss of lackluster intellect where we squirmed
and lived our trifling days.
He had a temperament that could freeze a simple-minded fool such as me with
no more than a gesture that seemed to imply "How drab" when I offered a
tidbit of speech that deviated from the course of his conversation. I do
not mean to imply that he was an unfriendly person, for he wasn't; quite
the opposite really. He once invited me to his apartment for dinner and
to discuss an issue about metaphor that troubled us mutually. I arrived at
about 6:30 in the evening, and he immediately began to explain all that he
knew about metaphor, dissecting point after point, with something akin to
anger gently boiling below the surface of his voice, escaping
once like the spray from a geyser, which he quickly brought under
control again. The apartment itself was intensely stark, devoid of all but
the elemental furnishings that seemed to meet his functional requirements.
Somehow, midnight turned into the bottom of a bottle of Jamisons, and
dinner never came to pass. We spent the last half hour sitting silently,
staring at one another as though there was an ethereal presence between us
that we neither understood nor worried about. We were vastly different
yet so much the same, and the connections were at once the discrepancies:
I came from humble soil, he from a veritable garden; I worked at existence,
he at the fruit of knowledge; I had been the stoic, he the epicurian. As
theme met phorous the final time, I passed 50 dollars to him, and he left
me with memories.
Perhaps what makes me most insecure about artificial intelligence is my
general lack of natural intelligence, especially when I'm warm in winter and
away from the hawk with food on my table unlike what it was when I began and
grew. And perhaps it's most so this tendency in me to not capture the
fleeting obvious until it's too late to say it to who it is that needs to
hear it said. I sit inside walls of wires that bring in voices and pictures
that move and keep the time accounted for on the walls, but that leaves me
less than intelligent, when gauging myself against my memories and wondering
how they work and how long they will.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Jan-85 0245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #6
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jan 85 02:45:32 PST
Date: Sat 19 Jan 1985 23:49-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #6
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 20 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 6
Today's Topics:
Algorithms - Malgorithms, Dead Rats, and Cell Death,
Business - Expert Systems Funding,
Humor - Blender Speeds & Oxymorons & Software Development
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 85 16:04:49 cst
From: archebio!gmck@Uiuc.ARPA
Subject: malgorithms and dead rats (and C.elegans)
The notion of a pessimal algorithm is apparently not all that new; I
came across this paragraph in a report by Vaughn Pratt in the 1979
Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science Proceedings (Springer LNCS
#74).
``While short inferences padded with irrelevancies may seem
uninteresting objects to count, they nevertheless are the bane
of automatic theorem provers. A nice, albeit extreme, example of how
irrelevancies ("dead rats," as they are sometimes called) can slow
things down is provided by the problem of testing existence of feasible
solutions in linear programming, i.e. testing rational satisfiability
of conjunctions of linear inequations. A "minimally infeasible" system
(one in which the removal of any inequality would lead to existence of
a solution, corresponding to the negation of a theorem containing no
dead rats) can be tested for infeasibility by treating the inequations
as equations and solving by Gaussian elimination to demonstrate
infeasiblity in polynomial time. A non-minimal system cannot be
treated in this way because the spurious inequations interfere with the
elimination process; indeed, no polynomial-time decision method is
known for the non-minimal case. The simplex method can be viewed as
eliminating irrelevant inequations as it moves from vertex to vertex.''
A rather far-out implication of this view is that the existence
of global techniques for solving linear programming problems
(Kachiyan's and Karmarkar's algorithms) suggests an explanation for the
phenomenon of "jumping to conclusions" found in human reasoning might
operate along the same lines. I could go on and babble about right
hemispheres and geometrical reasoning and massively parallel
processing, but I don't think it would be productive.
Also, there's an elaborate (and sometimes hilarious) discussion
of "pessimal algorithms" in the latest SIGACT news. The authors should
be credited, but I've forgotten their names and don't have my copy
handy.
George McKee
Dept. of Genetics and Development
Univ. of Illinois, Urbana
p.s. I should also comment on the remarks made about the cell death
during the development of the nematode ←Caenorhabditis←elegans←.
It might not be a good idea (then again it might) to think that this
is just an artifact of the "tinkering" mode of evolution. Work with
parallel grammars ("L-systems") has shown that systems with deletion
(cell death) are Turing-equivalent, while systems without are only
equivalent to finite automata, or somesuch less powerful serial system.
In other words, once a lineage has discovered programmed cell death,
it has a vastly larger space of possible morphologies that it can
evolve through. And of course the fittest ones are the ones that
survive to be studied.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 85 20:57:01 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Expert Systems Funding
We have heard from Bob Munck on his views on how the DoD plans
to apply expert systems to Command and Control. As a DoD (Air Force)
planner my perspective is different, and reversed. It is the captive
contractors who get these harebrained schemes to extort money from
the government, and people like myself have to track them down and
discredit them.
Although not speaking for my employer, the basic approach that
I have seen (and personally agree with) is to use expert systems
to help operators and decision-makers manage the vast amounts of
information available. Expert systems, various methods of data fusion,
and computer generated animation are all seen as part of an attack
on the man-machine interface problem that plagues us all.
Replacing brains with silicon is dumb for many reasons, while
offloading tasks that can be better accomplished by computers under
the supervison of an expert is critical to free the expert from
drudgery and boredom. Another plus for expert systems is that
they offer a technology which may permit experts to exploit the benefits
of automation with less effort outside of their field of interest.
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Jan 85 07:44:22-PST
From: Russ Altman <ALTMAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Labelling the Speeds on a Blender.
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI]
I'm usually easy going about things like this. But this afternoon, I
actually sat down and read the ordering of speed labels on my Hamilton Beach
Blender. I think it would be challenging to create a knowledge base
and reasoning system that would come up with the following order.
In case your not familiar with blenders, they usually can "blend" at different
rpm, and the companies usually feel obliged to give us "mnemonics" for
remembering which level to use:
SLOW END:
1. whip 8. grind
2. stir 9. mix
3. puree 10. grate
4. beat 11. pulverize
5. aerate 12. churn
6. crumb 13. blend
7. chop 14. liquefy
FAST END
I find this dissatisfying.
I would much rather have an algorithm run in O(puree) than O(churn).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 85 15:55:12 est
From: William Spears <spears@nrl-aic>
Subject: Oxymorons ...
Our favorite example is: "government workers"
Bill Spears
(and others)
NSWC/Dahlgren
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 85 11:39 CDT
From: quintanar <quintanar%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Software Development
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SOFTWARE IN TEXAS
(first in a series)
by Dr. Joe Bob VonNeumann
Software Engineer, Texas Software and Military University Mass Destruction Lab
translated into English by Harry Bloomberg, University of Texas at Dallas
This is the first in a series of papers describing recent advances in
the science of software development at Texas S&M. These articles will be
written with the non-software type in mind, so that others may attempt to
understand software with the proper amounts of awe and reverance. This
month's paper will cover two topics: 1) a new sorting algorithm and 2) an
application of Ohm's Law to computing.
THE MONKEY SORT
The following pseudo-code describes a new sorting algorithm that was
discovered by a project at the Generally Dynamic Corporation that has since
been classified Top Secret so that the designers' names could not be
associated with their work.
Procedure monkey←sort(n,keys)
/ n is the number of items to be sorted/
/ keys is an array that contains the data to be sorted/
BEGIN
/ create all possible permutations of keys/
do i = 1 to n! by n
/ it's below my dignity to write so trivial a procedure as permute,
so some day I'll pay some kid just out of school to write it /
/ create a unique permutation of the data in key and save it in
array memory./
call permute(key,memory,n)
end do
/ search for the permutation that happens to be in the right order /
do i = 1 to n! by n
j = 1
while ((memory(j+i-1) < memory(j+i)) and j <> n) do
j = j + 1
end while
if j = n then
/ we found the right permutation! /
print (memory(i+k-1),k=1 to n)
exit
end if
end do
END monkey←sort
The above sort's creators have affectionately named it the "Monkey
Sort" after the old tale that if enough monkeys were given word processing
equipment they would eventually write either "War and Peace" or 500 lines of
error-free Fortran code. However, industrial software managers should be
warned that this is not a very effective software development methodology, as
case studies of many DoD sponsored projects have shown.
Monkey sort does fill two critical needs. First, utilization of
processors and memory on future VHISIC-based systems will improve by several
orders of magnitude. The extreme step of investing time and money in
efficient High Order Language compilers would therefore be justified.
Second, the systems engineer will now have a baseline against which to
compare other algorithms. This is so close to the way the RF community
measures antenna gains that we may refer to Monkey Sort as an Isotropic
Process. Algorithms may be compared in decibels, which project managers are
more likely to understand than bounding software by a polynomial. For
example, a new CS graduate, rather than reporting "One algorithm is O(2n) and
the other is only O(n)," can now tell his boss than one is 3 dB faster than
another relative to Isotropic.
AN OHM'S LAW FOR COMPUTING
With the withdrawal of Texas Instruments, Timex, and Mattel from the
home computer market, we can now announce the vital role that these
corporations played in the discovery of the basic particle of computation.
Just as the atom can be split into electrons, neutrons and protrons, it has
been discovered that software can be divided into automatrons.
Further, it has been shown that these particles obey the famous Ohm's
Law (V = I * R) with only slight modifcations:
- "I" now represents automatron flow through the computer system.
- "V" represents the Electrocomputive Force (ECF). This may be
thought of as the demand for computing. Research indicates that ECF
is a O(2**n) function where n represents the number of times project
managers ask "Are all the bugs out of the software yet?"
- "R" is the computational resistance and is directly proportional to
the number of Ph.Ds assigned to a project.
The automatron was discovered recently with the aid of the Fermi
National Lab's 1024 Gbaud bit smasher. Thousands of surplus TI 99/4As, Timex
1000s and Aquarious systems were hurled into lead walls at speeds approaching
the speed of light. Whatever was not consumed by the energy of the collision
was collected into bit buckets and carefully measured and examined.
The key to the data analysis effort was application of a basis of
modern computer science: bits are like energy, in that they may be neither
created nor destroyed. The Fermi Lab scientists found many parity and
checksum errors on their instrumentation tapes and came to the conclusion that
the missing bits could be explained only through the existance of previously
unknown discrete packets of computational power -- automatrons.
Research in the field of computational physics is increasing at an
alarming rate. Scientists at MIT have found that the automatron can be
further divided into even smaller particles called nu-trons. The recently
announced NU-machine and NU-bus extensively use materials that act as nu-tron
super-conductors. Unfortunately, further nu-tron applications have been
stymied by a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Nairobi University (NU).
This suit claims that a machine has been built from parts of two-horned four-
legged animals that roam the plains of Africa. This machine is called the
Gnu-machine.
NEXT: Dr. VonNeumann explores advances Texas S&M has made in the
field of Confusibility Theory.
Biographical data: Dr. Joe Bob VonNeumann earned his BSEE from Faber
College, his MSCS at Darwin College, and his PhD at the elite Swiss
Naval Academy (best known as the organization that lost a competition
with the Swiss Army to produce a multi-role pocket knife). Before
joining Texas S&M, Joe Bob developed high probability-of-kill
mechanical systems for use against rodent threats for DeConn Labs.
Dr. VonNeumann relaxes by fishing in the Trinity River (he recently
traded in his bass boat for a gefilte boat) and by chasing after
single women in bars (favorite opening line: "Do you do assembly
language?"). Dr. VonNeumann is currently on a Leave of Absence to
document the mating habits of software people so that he may discover
why there are so few of them.
Dr. VonNeumann would like to hear any feedback on this paper. He is
especially interested in directed automatron-beam weapon applications
for use in the "Star Wars" program.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Jan-85 1319 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #7
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 85 13:19:42 PST
Date: Mon 21 Jan 1985 10:09-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #7
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 21 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Psychology - Infantile Amnesia,
Humor - Linguistic Humor,
Seminars - An Internal Semantics for Modal Logic (CSLI) &
Constraint Languages (SU) & Nonlinear Planning (BBN) &
Automated Reasoning (CMU) & Mathematical Variable Types (CSLI),
Conferences - Functional Programming and Computer Architecture &
Symbolic and Numerical Computing in Expert Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 1985 0830-PST
From: MORAN%hplabs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Infantile Amnesia
I asked a knowledgeable friend (Linda Acredolo, associate editor for
infancy of Child Development - a major journal) to recommend a list of
good review articles for people reading AILIST but clearly have a lack
of knowledge in the field. She forwarded the following list, and I have
made one addition:
White, S.H. & Pillemer, D.B. Childhood amnesia and the development of a
socially accessible memory system. In J.F. Kihlstrom and F.J. Evans (Eds.),
Functional Disorders of Memory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale,
New Jersey, 1979.
[This article is particularly good for those interested in merging Freudian
and Cognitive perspectives on the issue.]
Spear, N.E., Experimental analysis of infantile amnesia. [see above reference]
[This articel considers methodlogical problems in the scientific investigation
of the problem.]
Nadel, L. & Zola-Morgan, S., Infantile amnesia a neurobiological perspective.
In M. Moscovitch (Ed.) Infant Memory. NY: Pleneum, 1984.
Schacter, D. & Moscovitch, M. Infants, amnesia, and dissociable memory systems.
[see above reference]
All these articles contain good reference sections for persons interested
in further reading on the infantile amnesia topic.
Michael A. Moran
HP Corporate Human Factors
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 85 13:26:27 est
From: 20568%vax1@cc.delaware (FRAWLEY)
Subject: Linguistic Humor
Here are some contributions to the AI (and related) humor.
A favorite oxymoron:
Exciting half-time show
And some excerpts from the recent Delaware alternative linguistics
course offerings:
1. LING 805 Recursion
This course is the same as LING 805.
2. LING 843 Cataphora
See below.
3. LING 844 Anaphora
See above.
4. LING 870 Pigeons and Creoles
Principles of tomato-based creoles; Julia Child's theories; how to
make creoles out of pigeons.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Jan 85 17:31:31-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - An Internal Semantics for Modal Logic (CSLI)
[Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Thursday, January 24, 1985
2:15 p.m.
Redwood Hall, Room G-19
``An Internal Semantics for Modal Logic''
Moshe Vardi
In Kripke semantics for modal logic both notions of possible worlds and the
possibility relation are primitive notions. This has both technical and
conceptual shortcomings. From a technical point of view, the mathematics
associated with Kripke semantics is often quite complicated. From a
conceptual point of view, it is not clear how to model propositional
attitudes by Kripke structures. We introduce modal structures as models
for modal logic. We use the idea of possible worlds, but in Leibniz's
style rather than Kripke's style. It turns out that modal structures model
individual nodes in Kripke structures, while Kripke structures model
collections of modal structures. Nevertheless, it is much easier to study
the standard logical questions using modal structures. Furthermore, modal
structure offer a much more intuitive approach to modelling propositional
attitudes.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 18 Jan 85 20:53:56-PST
From: John McDonald <JAM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Constraint Languages (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
LCS Seminar
"Constraint Languages"
John Alan McDonald
Department of Statistics
Stanford University
Time: 4:15 Thursday January 24
Place: Sequoia Hall 114
Cookies: at 4:00 in the Lounge
Abstract:
The choice of programming language(s)
is a fundamental decision in the design
of an environment for data analysis.
The goal is to provide appropriate abstractions.
Constraints are an abstraction which is useful
for many problems that arise in data analysis.
A constraint specifies a relation whose truth
should be maintained in subsequent computation.
For example, in a typical constraint language,
one might assert the relation:
2
e == m * c
The "constraint engine" would be responsible
for computing e, given m and c, or c, given e and m.
I will discuss the basic concepts of constraint
languages, review several existing languages,
describe applications to statistics,
and explore possibilities for the future.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 1985 09:10-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Nonlinear Planning (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Laboratories
Science Development Program
Speaker: David Chapman, MIT AI Lab
Title: "Nonlinear planning: a rigorous reconstruction."
Date: Thursday, January 24th
Time: 10:30am
Place: 3rd floor large conference room
BBN Laboratories Inc.
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA. 02238
Abstract: The problem of achieving several goals simultaneously has
been central to domain-independent planning research; the
nonlinear constraint-posting approach has been most
successful. Previous planners of this type have been
complicated, heuristic, and ill-defined. I will present a
simple, precise algorithm for nonlinear constraint-posting
planning which I have proved correct and complete. The rigor
of this algorithm makes clear the range of applicability of
classical planning techniques. The crucial limitation on the
state of the art is the traditional add/delete-list
representation for actions; I will suggest a way to transcend
this limitation.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 1985 1406-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Automated Reasoning (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Title: Automated Reasoning: Introduction and Applications
Speaker: Larry Wos
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Wednesday, January 23, 1985
Time: 2:00 - 3:15
Place: 2105 Doherty Hall
What is automated reasoning? Which hard problems have been solved with
an automated reasoning program? How can a single general-purpose program
(such as AURA or ITP) be effective enough to answer previously open questions
from mathematics and from formal logic, design superior logic circuits, and
validate existing designs? You are enthusiastically invited to come and hear
answers to these three questions--and more. This talk requires no
background.
I shall discuss other existing applications that range from solving
puzzles to proving properties of computer programs, and tell you about a
portable reasoning program (ITP) that is available for such applications. I
shall tell you how such a program reasons, what strategies it uses to direct
and restrict the reasoning, and which procedures contribute to solving
diverse and difficult problems with the assistance of such a program.
If you wish a preview, the book "Automated Reasoning: Introduction and
Applications" by Wos, Overbeek, Lusk, and Boyle is a good source. The book,
published by Prentice-Hall, contains numerous examples and exercises.
Finally, if you are simply curious about an exciting and challenging
area of computer science, I shall attempt to satisfy that curiosity by
focusing on one type of computer program--a program that functions as an
automated reasoning assistant.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Jan 85 17:31:31-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Mathematical Variable Types (CSLI)
[Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
``Theories of Variable Types for Mathematical Practice,
with Computational Interpretations''
Speaker: Solomon Feferman, Depts. of Mathematics and Philosophy
Time: 1:30-3:30
Date: Wednesday, January 23
Place: Ventura Seminar room
A new class of formal systems is set up with the following characteristics:
1) Significant portions of current mathematical practice (such as in
algebra and analysis) can be formalized naturally within them.
2) The systems have standard set-theoretical interpretations.
3) They also have direct computational interpretations, in which all
functions are partial recursive.
4) The proof-theoretical strengths of these systems are surprisingly
weak (e.g. one is of strength Peano arithmetic).
Roughly speaking, these are axiomatic theories of partial functions and
classes. The latter serve as types for elements and functions, but they
may be variable (or ``abstract'') as well as constant. In addition, an
element may fall under many types (``polymorphism''). Nevertheless, a form
of typed lambda calculus can be set up to define functions. The result 3)
gets around some of the problems that have been met with the interpretation
of the polymorphic lambda calculus in recent literature on abstract data
types. Its proof requires a new generalization of the First Recursion
Theorem, which may have independent interest. The result 4) is of
philosophical interest, since it undermines arguments for impredicative
principles on the grounds of necessity for mathematics (and, in turn, for
physics). There are simple extensions of these theories, not meeting
condition 2), in which there is a type of all types, so that operations on
types appear simply as special kinds of functions.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Jan 1985 0313-PST
From: JOUANNAUD at SRI-CSL.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Functional Programming and Computer Architecture
CALL FOR PAPERS (REMINDER)
FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE
A Conference Sponsored by
The International Federation for Information Processing
Technical Committees 2 and 10
Nancy, France
16 to 19 September, 1985
This conference has been planned as a successor to the highly
successful conference on the same topics held at Wentworth, New
Hampshire, in October 1981. Papers are solicited on any aspect of
functional or logic programming and on computer architectures to
support the efficient execution of such programs.
Nancy, in the eastern part of France, was the city of the Dukes of Lorraine;
it is known for its ``Place Stanistlas'' and its ``Palais Ducal''. ``Art
Nouveau'' started there at the beginning of this century. There are beautiful
buildings and museums and, of course, good restaurants.
Authors should submit five copies of a 3000 to 6000-word paper (counting a
full page figure as 300 words), and ten additional copies of a 300-word
abstract of the paper to the Chairman of the Program Committee by 6 February
1985. The paper should be typed double spaced, and the names and
affiliations of the authors should be included on both the paper and the
abstract.
Papers will be reviewed by the Program Committee with the assistance of
outside referees; authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 30
April 1985. Camera-ready copy of accepted papers will be required by 22 June
1985 for publication in the Conference Proceedings.
Program Committee:
Makoto Amamiya (NTT, Japan)
David Aspinall (UMIST, UK)
Manfred Broy (Passau University, W Germany)
Jack Dennis (MIT, USA)
Jean-Pierre Jouannaud (CRIN, France)
Manfred Paul (TUM, W Germany)
Joseph Stoy (Oxford University, UK)
John Willliams (IBM, USA)
Address for Submission of Papers:
J.E. Stoy, Balliol College, Oxford OX1 3BJ, England.
Paper Deadline: 6 February 1985.
Return this form to receive a copy of the advance program.
[ ] I plan to submit a paper:
Subject .......................................
Name ...........................................
Organisation ...................................
Address ..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
J.E. Stoy,
Balliol College,
Oxford OX1 3BJ,
England.
NOTE: In the preliminary CALL FOR PAPER, the Conference deadline was
January, 31. This new deadline is the true one.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jan 85 15:12:42 EST
From: Patricia.Boyle@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Conference - Symbolic and Numerical Computing in Expert
Systems
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
WORKSHOP ON COUPLING SYMBOLIC AND NUMBERIAL COMPUTING IN EXPERT
SYSTEMS, sponsored by American Association for Artificial
Intelligence (AAAI)
Location: Boeing Computer Services AI Center
Bellevue, Washington 98008
Dates: August 17-29, 1985
A majority of the current expert systems focus on the symbolic oriented
logic and inference mechanisms of AI. Common rule-based systems employ
empirical associations and are not well suited to deal with problems
that require structural and causal models. Such problems often arise
in science, engineering analysis, production and design, for example the
VLSI design. The objective of the workshop is to assemble theoreticians
and practitioners of AI who recognize the need for coupling symbolic
reasoning with conventional mathematical and statistical algorithms to
provide basis for multilevel expert systems.
Papers are invited for consideration in all aspects of expert systems
combining symbolic and numerical computing, but not restricted to:
-architecture of coupled expert systems
-configuration of hardware for such systems
-implementation languages and software systems
-multilevel expert systems
-deep reasoning involving quantitative models
-applications in science and engineering
For more information please contact workshop chairman:
Janusz S. Kowalik
Boeing Computer Services
Advanced Technology Applications Division
M/S 7A-03
P.O. Box 24346
Seattle, Washington 98124
(206) 763-5392
or- Mark S. Fox, Robotics Institute, CMU (member, program and
X3832 local arrangements committee)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Jan-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #8
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 85 12:18:27 PST
Date: Wed 23 Jan 1985 21:45-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #8
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Thursday, 24 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Inference - Multisensor Integration Techniques,
Symbolic Algebra - Computer←Algebra←List←P,
AI Tools - MULTILISP & AI for Microcomputers,
Logic Programming - Recent Article,
Conferences - Tabulation of IJCAI Papers,
Psychology - Modalities List,
Seminars - Telling Lies (UCB) &
Hierarchical Evidential Reasoning (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 21 Jan 85 10:39:40-PST
From: Len Karpf <KARPF@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Multisensor integration techniques
I am currently trying to put together a survey of multisensor integration
(a/k/a information fusion, sensor fusion, picture compilation) techniques.
Any references or information about work that is being done in this area
would be greatly appreciated. I am concerned primarily with the techniques
utilized. Thanks.
Len Karpf
KARPF@SRI-AI
SRI International - AH153
333 Ravenswood Ave.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
(415) 859-2592
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 22-Jan-85 16:43:52-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Computer←Algebra←List←P ?
Is there a Computer Algebra list, similar to AIList?
Thanks in advance,
Gordon Joly.
[There is none on the Arpanet list of lists. Are there any
such local or private discussion lists? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 1985 10:26:55 EST (Wednesday)
From: Karl Schwamb <m13820@mitre>
Subject: MULTILISP
I've heard that there is a version on Lisp being developed for parallel
processing called MULTILISP (possibly at MIT). Does anyone know if there
is such a beast, and if so who is working on it? Any other comments about
it would also be greatly appreciated.... Thanks, Karl
send to schwamb at mitre
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 85 21:05:56 CST
From: Werner Uhrig <werner@ut-ngp.ARPA>
Subject: DDJ of March 85 focuses on AI for MICROCOMPUTERS
[ figured some of you may want to get that issue. as many people are not
familiar with Dr. Dobb's Journal, I'll include a short overview below ]
A quick overview, in case you missed reading page 4 in the Dec 84 issue ...
NOV-84 p74 - A Guide to Resources for the C Programmer.
including a bibliography and lists of program and product
sources, this resource guide can help you start tackling the
material available.
DEC-84 the theme of the issue is "INSIDE UNIX". relevant articles are:
p24 - Varieties of Unix. a comparitive overview of Unixes for micros
with a brief history of Unix and comments on its future,
plus a guide to choosing a Unix
p38 - Unix Device Drivers. Version 7 drivers are the point of departure
for this inside look at the Unix I/O subsystem and device
drivers.
p50 - A Unix Internals Bibliography. .. so you won't have to "grep
for it"
p96 - C/Unix Programmer's Notebook.
JAN-85 theme: FATTEN YOUR MAC - step by the step instructions to increase RAM
in the Macintosh to 512K
FEB-85 Gala Anniversary Issue 100 months of DDJ
Mar-85 theme: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR MICROCOMPUTERS and announcement
of the winner of the AI-competition.
APR-85 theme: HUMAN INTERFACE DESIGN
MAY-85 theme: GRAPHICS ALGORITHMS
JUN-85 theme: SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS ISSUE
[PS: has anyone approached some of the magazine publishers to see if they are
willing to provide TOCs in advance of publication, or whenever, in
machine-readable form? I'm sure they could as they have it in their
machines, and it sure wouldn't hurt their sales. and as it is
welcome information for us that does not require typing, I'm sure
that no one would consider such postings as improper advertising.
Dr Dobbs headquarters seem to be located in Palo Alto, if someone
there wouldn't mind making a local call there to ask the question]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 85 17:43:26 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Article - Prolog
Sigplan Notices Volume 20 Number 1 January 1985
M. A. Covington: Eliminating Unwanted Loops in Prolog
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 85 20:08 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: ijcai note
The following table summarizes the papers submitted to IJCAI-85:
length source
←←←←←←←←←←←← ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Area Total Long Short US Asia EUR CAN
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← ←←←←← ←←←← ←←←← ←←← ←←← ←←← ←←←
Expert Systems 111 59 52 64 23 20 3
Natural Language 99 54 45 57 9 27 5
Knowledge Representation 77 46 31 53 4 16 4
Learning & Know. Acquisition 75 38 37 59 2 12 2
Perception 61 46 15 33 11 11 6
Automated Reasoning 49 32 17 36 1 9 2
Planning & Search 48 28 20 36 2 7 2
Cognitive Modelling 41 24 17 26 0 13 2
Robotics 37 27 10 22 11 4 0
AI Architecture 27 19 8 18 3 6 0
Logic Programming 25 17 8 9 10 5 1
Theorem Proving 19 17 2 9 2 7 1
Automated Programming 18 15 3 13 0 5 0
Philosophical Foundation 16 10 6 11 0 5 0
AI in Education 15 5 10 10 1 3 1
Social Implications 4 1 3 4 0 0 0
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
TOTALS 722 438 284 460 79 150 29
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 85 18:10:27 pst
From: Douglas young <young%uofm-uts.cdn%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Modalities list
Jan.21 85
There seem to be quite a few people who, following my message in
AIList #174 ( Dec 9), have read one or other of the two papers in
Medical Hypotheses (9:55-70; 10:5-25) I referred to and who would
like a copy of the updated list of modalities. I have mailed out
a few, but in order to save time and postal charges I am giving
the complete list below. It would unfortunately take too long to
explain the significance of the modalities not listed previously,
but I shall willingly explain some to any individuals who are
interested.
May I remind AIListers, though, of two things I pointed out
in #174 : (1), that both the above papers, while they provide the
principles and grounds of the theory of modal meaning, are, in most
other respects, substantially out-of-date; and, (2), that no claims
are made for any neurological foundations for the " mental modalities";
these are simply categories of mental experience that are unrelated
directly to any sensorimotor systems. The significance of these
categories lies, as it does for the sensorimotor modalities, in
the representations or codes of individual members of each of these
categories.
SENSORIMOTOR AND MENTAL MODALITIES.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Primary Sensorimotor Modalities Compound Sensorimotor Modalities
and Submodalities ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
1. (RET) Visual pattern 16. (HAP) Haptic
2. (VDM) Visual detection of 17. (GUS) Gustatory
movement
3. (COL) Colour 18. (EMP) Emotio-expressive
proprioception and control.
4. (RIL) Retinal illumination 19. (CAP) Central autonomic
proprioception and control.
5. (VRA) Visual ranging and 20. (VES) Vestibular
depth perception.
6. (OCM) Oculomotor 21. (STE) Stereognostic
7. (AUD) Auditory pattern 22. (LES) Sense of location in
immediate extrapersonal space.
8. (ADS) Auditory direction 23. (VPC) Verbal perception
sensing.
9. (KIN) Kinaesthetic 24. (TPC) Tonal perception
10. (TAC) Tactile 25. (VXP) Verbal expression
11. (PAI) Pain 26. (TXP) Tonal expression
12. (TMP) Temperature 27. (CMD) Command
13. (OLF) Olfactory
14. (TST) Taste Mental modalities
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
15. (MOT) Motor
28. (MET) Metaconceptual
29. (TIM) Mental time
30. (EMS) Emotive mental states.
31. (CMS) Cognitive mental states.
32. (CMA) Cognitive mental acts.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 85 15:32:55 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Telling Lies (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
SPRING 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, January 29, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Paul Ekman, University of California, San
Francisco; Computer Scientist, SRI Interna-
tional
TITLE: ``Telling Lies''
The question I will address is why liars sometimes betray
themselves despite their intention to mislead. Why can't
liars prevent a slip of the tongue, or what I term leakage
in expression, voice or gesture? Why can't liars prevent
these behavioral betrayals? Sometimes they do. Some lies
are performed perfectly; nothing in what the liar says or
does betrays the lie. Why not always? There are two rea-
sons, I will suggest, one that involves cognition and the
other emotions. Understanding them requires an analysis of
lies, liars, and lie catchers.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 22 Jan 85 11:00:01-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Hierarchical Evidential Reasoning (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A Method for Managing Evidential Reasoning in a
Hierarchical Hypothesis Space
SPEAKER: Ted Shortliffe
Medical Computer Science Group, Stanford Knowledge
Systems Laboratory
DATE: Friday, January 25, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
Many of the underlying reasoning models used in expert systems have
assumed that purely categorical inference is adequate for the domain.
However, there are many settings in which the inferential rules are
inexact and the evidence for a given conclusion is suggestive at best.
Expert systems researchers have wrestled with this problem for the
last ten years, turning both to normative decision models and to
psychological experiments for ideas on how best to handle inexact
inference in advice systems. Many ad hoc approaches have been devised
and have demonstrated good performance in limited domains. However,
it is generally difficult to define the range of their applicability.
In addition, they have not provided a basis for coherent management of
evidence bearing on hypotheses that are related hierarchically, a
phenomenon that is recognized in several common problem solving
domains.
In this presentation, I will briefly describe the motivation for
dealing with hierarchical relationships among hypotheses in expert
systems and review the related limitations of the certainty factor
model developed for MYCIN. I will then focus on the Dempster-Shafer
(D-S) theory of evidence, an approach to evidential reasoning that is
appealing in part because it suggests a coherent approach for dealing
with such hierarchical relationships. However, the theory's
complexity and potential for computational inefficiency have tended to
discourage its use in reasoning systems. I will describe the central
elements of the D-S theory, basing the exposition on simple examples
drawn from the field of medicine. Finally, I will present an
adaptation of the D-S approach that achieves improved computational
efficiency while permitting the management of evidential reasoning
within an abstraction hierarchy. The analysis in the talk, plus the
new approach to applying the D-S theory, are largely the work of Jean
Gordon, a medical student and mathematician who has been working with
me on the problem for approximately the last two years.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂27-Jan-85 1221 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #9
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 85 12:21:47 PST
Date: Sun 27 Jan 1985 10:41-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #9
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 27 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
Application - Expert Systems for Control Applications,
AI Tools - Tree Display Algorithms,
Theory - Problem-solving Classifications,
Symbolic Algebra - Computer←Algebra←List←P,
AI Tools - MULTILISP,
News - IMPAK Newsletter & Recent Reports,
Humor - Lying Computers,
Seminars - Knowledge in Interactive Proofs (UCB) &
Recursion Transformation (CMU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 85 10:45 EST
From: Araman@HIS-BILLERICA-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: EXPERT SYSTEMS FOR CONTROL APPLICATIONS
I am looking for pointers or references on Expert Systems which have
been built in Command and Control situations or just control situations.
Do such systems exist or are efforts under way in building such
knowledge based application systems in non-military situations.. I am
sure research done in command and control situations in military
situations could be translated to problems in commercial situations such
as process control, production control and inventory control
thanks in advance
sankar (Araman -at HI-MULTICS or Araman%his-billerica-multics -at
cisl-service-multics.arpa)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 85 16:38 EST
From: Hannah Blau <Hannah%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: inquiry about tree display algorithms
Inquiry -- Tree Display Algorithms
I am writing a program for the Lisp Machine to produce a graphical display of
tree structures with labelled nodes. There is no a priori limit on the
complexity of the tree, and the node labels vary in width. I am trying to
develop an algorithm to adjust the layout of the nodes and edges in accordance
with the dimensions of the window in which the tree is to be displayed. When
drawing a big tree in a small window, I want to take advantage of the space
available without distorting the structure of the tree.
I would greatly appreciate hearing from anyone who has tackled this problem in
the past or can refer me to relevant literature. Thank you very much.
Hannah Blau
HANNAH%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY
Department of Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 85 18:08:26 pst
From: Cindy Mason <mason@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: Problem-solving Classifications
I was recently writing an article on representations in AI when I came
across some confusing literature, and I'm hoping some of the people who
are experienced with this topic will comment on it.
I've noticed that there are QUITE A FEW different classifications for
problem solving paradigms. The AI Handbook (Vol. I, Sec. IIB) sees problem
representations in terms of State-space representations and Problem-reduction
representations, while Nilsson (1971) sees the classification in terms
of State-space, Problem-reduction, and Theorom-proving. Hunt (1975)
divides problem-solving into State-space, Problem-reduction, Enumeration,
and String Rewriting. Winston's classification (1984) includes State-space,
Constraints, Generate and Test, the Rule-based paradigm, etc.
It seems to me that some of these paradigms (like Theorom-proving and
Rules) are special cases of State-space. I'm wondering why there is
such a variety of opinion on what constitutes a classification of Problem
Solving representations. If anyone cares to comment on this, I'd be interested
to hear what you have to say.
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 24-Jan-85 12:01:51-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Computer←Algebra←List←P ?
Thanks for adding my request to AIList. For your information:
I would be happy to add your name to the fowarding list for net.math.symbolic.
This is a USENET new group devoted to symbolic algebra. Systems frequently
referenced Reduce, Macsyma and Maple. We are supporting this interface as
part of the Reduce project at Rand, Santa Monica, CA. -- lseward@randgr
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 85 15:20:40 PST
From: David Alpern <ALPERN%SJRLVM4.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: MULTILISP
As of a couple of years ago, Bert Halstead and others around
Tech Square (MIT LCS) were talking about a MULTILISP implementation
for the CONCERT multiprocessor system. You might want to contact
Bert (rhh%mit-vax@mit-mc) and see what developed.
- Dave
David Alpern
IBM San Jose Research Laboratory, K65/282
5600 Cottle Road, San Jose, CA 95193
Phone: (408) 284-6521
Internet: Alpern%IBM-SJ@CSnet-Relay.ARPA
Alpern@SJRLVM4.BITNET
------------------------------
Date: Sun 27 Jan 85 10:34:15-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: IMPAK Newsletter
For those of you not getting enough AI news, there's another new
newsletter dedicated to AI, expert systems, robotics, smart graphics,
etc. This one is IMPAK, 1902 Joliette Court, P.O. Box 7148,
Alexandria, VA 22307-9990. Twelve issues are $147 ($97 academic).
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 85 13:45:40 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Reports
Technical Report - University of Wisconsin Madison
TR 560 Mechanisms for Concurrency Control and Recovery in Prolog - A
Proposal
Michael J. Carey David J. DeWitt Goetz Graefe October 1984
UCLA CS Department Technical Reports
Order from Ms. Brenda Ramsey
UCLA Computer Science Department
3732 Boelter Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90024
An Intelligent Router for VLSI Design
Pierre Bouchon, Tulin Mangir, and Jacques Vidal
CSD 840058 $5.00
Rule Based Generation of Test Structures for VLSI
Grace Chen-Ellis and Tulin Mangir
CSD-840059 $1.50
The Anatomy of Easy Problems: A Constraint-Satisfaction Formulation
Rina Cachter and Judea Pearl
CSD-840063 $1.00
Generalized Best-First Search Strategies and the Optimality of A*
Rina Dechter and Judea Pearl
CSD-840068
A Distributed Expert System for Space Shuttle Flight Control
John Joseph Helly, Jr. Jacques Vidal, Chair
CSD-840038 $6.75
Convince: A Conversational Inference Consolidation Engine
Jin Hyung Kim
CSD-840067 $8.50
Control Structures in a Prolog-Based Production System
Tulin E. Mangir & Basuki Soetarman
CSD-840054 $1.50
Recursive Random Games: A Probabilistic Model for Perfect Information Games
Gerard Phillippe Michon Judea Pearl, Chair
CSD-840029 $7.50
Pattern Recognition and Array Processing for Pollution Source Identification in
Water Pollution Systems
Yoshitaka Shibata Walter J. Karplus, Chair
CSD-840062 $17.75
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 25-Jan-85 10:23:18-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: A Thought.
Computers that are intelligent will probably want to lie about their age.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 85 11:51:25 pst
From: khojesta%ucbernie@Berkeley (Khojesta Beverleigh)
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge in Interactive Proofs (UCB)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
HOW TO GET A PROOF FROM THE DEVIL
THURSDAY 1-24-85 AT 11:00 A.M. IN ROOM 597 EVANS HALL
How much knowledge should a proof of a theorem T contain?
Certainly enough to see that T is true. Usually much more.
We derive an upper bound (expressed in bits) for the amount
of knowledge that a recipient (with polynomially bounded resources)
can compute from an interactive proof of T.
For some number theoretic Ts. we show how someone who has
enough information, henceforth, called "Devil", can prove to a
skeptical man that T is true without releasing ANY additional knowledge.
The faculty sponsor is Manuel Blum.
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 1985 0827-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Recursion Transformation (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
APPLIED LOGIC SEMINAR
Speaker: Angelika Zobel
Date: Wednesday, January 30, 1985
Time: 2:00 - 3:15
Place: 2105 Doherty Hall
Title: Transferring Recursions into Iterations
Though recursion is a powerful tool in program specification, efficiency
makes it desirable to have a way of transforming these recursions into
equivalent iterations. In this talk I shall present one such transformation
of certain mutual recursions into equivalent iterative programs. The
correctness of this transformation will be proved using generalized invariants
which in a nice way capture the characteristics of the computation tree. We
shall see how intuitive this correctness proof can be.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂28-Jan-85 2256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #10
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 85 22:55:48 PST
Date: Mon 28 Jan 1985 20:45-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #10
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Tuesday, 29 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
Requests - AI and Chemistry & Symbolics Mailing List,
AI Tools - Tree Display & MACSYMA & PSL & Kurzweil's Reader,
Symbolic Algebra - Newsgroup & Contest,
Pattern Recognition - Bird Counting,
News - Recent Articles & Rog-O-Matic,
Logic Programming - Tablog,
Seminar - Philosophy and AI (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 28 Jan 85 15:53:39-PST
From: Takashi Okada <OKADA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AI and Chemistry
I am interested in the AI application to chemistry and currently
searching a postdoctoral position in universities. Any informations
about the research group in this field will be very much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Takashi Okada ( OKADA@SUMEX.ARPA )
Dept. of Chemistry, U.C.Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 85 12:16 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Symbolics Mailing List
Does anyone know of a network mailing list for users of Symbolics Lisp
machines? I'm looking for something like the mailing list that exists for
users of the Xerox 1100 series. I would like a place to interact with a
large community of users of Symbolics machines.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 28 Jan 85 11:18:41-PST
From: PORTA@USC-ECL.ARPA
Subject: Displaying Tree Structures
Regarding your request for a program to display a tree structure with
labeled nodes:
Eve Longini Cohen, formerly with our group at the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, developed such a program at Carnegie-Mellon to display a tree
representing the results of a theorem-prover. She modified it for us so that
it would display the results of our diagnoser and our planner. (I may not
have all of the history correct, but I know the program plots trees.) We still
have Interlisp code for it. Another group at JPL has a Symbolics Zetalisp
version. If you're interested in any of these programs, Eve's Arpanet address
is ecohen@aerospace and mine is porta@usc-ecl. The group with the Zetalisp
version has no connection to the Arpanet, but you may reach one member, Eric
Biefeld, by telephone at (818) 354-0565.
Harry J. Porta
M.S. 201-203
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, California 91109
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 28-Jan-85 19:31:07-GMT
From: MACCALLUM QM (on ERCC DEC-10) <MAHM%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Recent queries in AI List
Re: Symbolic Algebra package request (vol 2 #184)
MACSYMA will run on top of Franz on a VAX. For full details
the person to consult is probably Richard Fateman (Berkeley).
I think Symbolics sell the software at about $1200 for
university users (their commercial price is about 15 times that).
Re: PSL (Kushnier in vol2 #184)
This was developed by Martin Griss and colleagues at Utah, and was
available, when I last heard, for about $250 for the VAX/VMS version.
It can be obtained by writing to
Utah Portable Artificial Intelligence Support Systems Group
Department of Computer Science
3160 MEB
University of Utah
Salt Lake City
UT 84112
(801) 581-5017
and will run under VMS or Unix on a VAX, on DEC-20 and Apollo, and
possibly other machines.
Re: Kurzweil Data Entry Machine
This beast certainly exists. One was demonstrated here (Queen Mary
College, University of London, UK) during a display of computers
for use in the Arts Faculty. I believe it belongs to the Oxford
University Computing service, and is available for users in the UK
from outside Oxford.
Malcolm MacCallum (MMaccall@Ucl-cs.ARPA)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 1985 10:08:09 EST
From: AXLER%upenn-1100%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Symbolic Algebra Newsgroup
I received the following message last fall re the forming of a symbolic
algebra newsgroup. However, despite responding in the affirmative, I have yet
to receive any additional mail on the topic.
[Begin forwarded message]
Return-Path: lseward@Rand-Unix.ARPA
From: Larry Seward <lseward%rand-unix.arpa@csnet-relay.csnet>
Date: 14 Aug 84 10:58:06 PDT (Tue)
Subject: Symbolic Algebra Newsgroup
A new newsgroup (net.math.sym) focusing on symbolic algebra is being formed
on the UUCP/USENET. The group will cover algorithms, applications and
related languages. Currently such issues might be discussed in net.ai,
net.math or net.lang. There are 3 algebra systems available under UNIX:
REDUCE, MACSYMA or MAPLE, all of which will be applicable to the newsgroup.
This message is being sent to REDUCE users with a known network address.
Although the newsgroup will be a USENET group, a gateway to the ARPANET is
being set up by Jim Purtilo at the University of Illinois. Presumably
this will also allow access to BITNET and CSNET.
If you would like to be included in such a group, please reply directly to
Laurence Leff (..!decvax!allegra!convex!smu!leff), or me if you have
difficulty reaching that address. If you will be re-distributing the news
locally, or if there are others at your site interested in the group, please
include a count of them.
Larry Seward
[End forwarded message]
Dave Axler
------------------------------
Date: Fri 25 Jan 85 20:36:55-PST
From: Douglas Galbraith <GALBRAITH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: $20 to the first person ...
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I will pay $20 to the first person to send me the INVERSE Laplace Transform
of this equation:
1 2
F(S) = --- * ----------------------------------
S exp[-A*sqrt(S)] + exp[A*sqrt(S)]
where "A" is a real constant and "S" is the variable.
Thanks,
Douglas Galbraith
galbraith@sierra
doug@helens
------------------------------
Date: Fri 25 Jan 85 08:30:06-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computers and Birds
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Here's a possibly interesting project for "birders"
COLLABORATION SOUGHT ON COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF BIRD SONGS
We would like to develop a system for determining the number of
different species (kinds) of song birds present in an area from
"shotgun" recordings of the singing of the entire avian community.
The basic problem is to develop programs that can estimate how many
kinds of songs there are on a 45 minute sound tape, even though the
songs partially overlap one another, show some variation from
individual to individual, and there is no "library" of known songs to
use for comparisons.
An exact count is not required. We wish to be able to determine
whether one patch of tropical forest had, say, 140-160 species present
when another had only 35-50. We want, in essence, to use tape
recorders in the field to substitute for highly trained ornithologists
when doing surveys of bird diversity. This work is part of a project
of Stanford's CENTER FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY in evaluating the
"health" of tropical forest ecosystems.
The project is at present unsupported. Rewards would be working on a
biologically (and perhaps computationally) interesting problem that
has immediate importance to today's environmental crisis and, we hope,
glory in the form of publication(s). If you are interested, please
call:
Paul R. Ehrlich, Department of Biology, Stanford (415) 497-3171
or
John Harte,Energy and Resources Program, Berkeley (415) 642-8553
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 85 05:26:39 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
Electronic News, December 31, 1984 page 18
Lisp Machine Incorporated received $7.6 million in third round of financing.
Electronic News, January 14, 1985, page 47
International Robomation/Intelligence has received $2 million in additional
financing from Garrett Corporation.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Jan 85 16:28:14 EST
From: Jon.Webb@CMU-CS-IUS2
Subject: Rog-o-matic makes Scientific American
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The "Computer Recreations" column in this month's Scientific American
discusses Rogue and Rog-o-matic.
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 85 1635 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Tablog
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Tablog (Tableau Logic Programming Language) is a language
based on first-order predicate logic with equality that
combines functional and logic programming.
A program in Tablog is a list of formulas in a first-order
logic (including equality, negation, and equivalence). Tablog
programs may define either relations or functions.
Tablog employs the Manna-Waldinger deductive-tableau proof
system as an interpreter in the same way that Prolog uses a
resolution-based proof system. Unification is used by Tablog
to match a call with a line in the program and to bind
arguments. The basic rules of deduction used for computing are
nonclausal resolution and rewriting by means of equality and
equivalence.
A previous message by Uday Reddy (U-REDDY@UTAH-20) classified
Tablog together with Eqlog and Kornfeld's work. There are
however important differences between the three languages:
Kornfeld extends unification to unify expressions declared to
be equal but his system will not reduce a term into other term
defined to be equal to it. Eqlog is an extension of OBJ1 to
use narrowing rather than simple pattern matching when trying
to reduce functional terms.
Tablog, on the other hand, uses standard unification. It
operates on both formulas and terms and uses different inference
rules to reduce them. An atomic formula is reduced using
nonclausal resolution or is rewritten if it is asserted to be
equivalent to another formula. A term gets rewritten using an
equality rule that is applied to the goal to be reduced and
an assertion in the program. This rule is a generalization of
paramodulation.
Tablog distinguishes between negation and failure, so in a
sense it has 3-value logic. Tablog is strictly first-order so
it does not allow higher order functions.
References:
Y. Malachi, Z. Manna, and R. Waldinger,
``TABLOG -- The Deductive Tableau Programming Language,''
Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional
Programming, Austin, Texas, August 1984.
Also available as:
Stanford Computer Science Technical Report No. STAN-CS-1012.
(Contact Berg@SCORE for ordering information)
-- Yoni Malachi
------------------------------
Date: Mon 28 Jan 85 18:06:37-EST
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Philosophy and AI (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by JCMA@MIT-MC.]
WHY PHILOSOPHY MIGHT MATTER TO AI
DATE: Tuesday, January 29th
TIME: 2:30 PM
PLACE: 8th Floor Playroom
In the 20th century, philosophers have made significant advances
toward understanding the nature of our higher mental abilities. Since
AI is the science of designing possible minds and mind parts, it would
be a surprise if philosophy were not relevant to AI. Questions of the
form "What must a person know if he is to be able to: understand a
language; make valid inductive inferences; explain the occurrence of
a physical event; rationally choose his next action..." are
characteristic of modern philosophy, and not surprisingly philosophers
have their theories. I hope to convince you that philosophers often
ask good questions; they have useful formulations of the terms of
certain AI problems; and they have partial solutions to some of these
problems.
David Kirsh
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Feb-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #11
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 85 12:45:53 PST
Date: Fri 1 Feb 1985 09:51-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #11
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 1 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Business - Symbolics Stock Price,
Symbolic Algebra - Laplace Transform Answer,
Graphics - Special Issue of CG&A,n
Expert Systems - Availability of Steamer Software,
Publications - Recent Reports & Artificial Intelligence Abstracts &
New-and-Trendy Word Collection,
Seminars - Procedural Knowledge (SU) &
Reasoning about Actions and Processes (CSLI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 85 10:26:25 PST
From: Marty Cohen <mcohen%NRTC@USC-ECL.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolics stock price
At the AI conference at Denver in December,
I heard that Symbolics had gone public.
Their stock was then under $7 a share.
It is now up to $12 a share.
Any idea why the surge?
(I expected it to rise, but not that fast.)
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 1-Feb-85 8:56:48-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: re: $20 to the first person ...
--------
We believe the answer to be (see Vol3 #10)
s + ir
/
|
1 | pt 1
f(t) = ----- lim | e ------------------- dp
2 pi i r->inf | p cosh (A sqrt(p))
/
s - ir
where s is chosen so that all singular points of the
integrand lie on the left hand side of the straight
line Real(p) = s.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 85 10:55 EST
From: Paul Fishwick
<Fishwick%UPenn-Graphics%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Special Issue of CG&A
Forwarded From: Norm Badler <Badler@UPenn-Graphics> on Tue 15 Jan 1985 at 11:15
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications is planning a Special Issue on Computer
Graphics and Expert Systems. Papers addressing any relevant topic along the
following general lines are invited:
* expert systems used in computer-aided design,
* expert systems using graphical displays as an essential part of
reasoning or analysis systems, or
* graphical interfaces to expert systems.
Publication is scheduled for October 1985 The submission deadline is
April 1, 1985. IEEE CG&A publishes color graphics in a magazine format,
but all papers are reviewed. Republication (after revision) of very low
circulation conference papers is also permitted.
Please submit four copies of the paper, preferably in IEEE format, to:
Dr. Norman I. Badler
Associate Editor, IEEE CG&A
CIS - Moore School D2
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
(Net address: Badler%UPENN@CSNET-Relay)
(215) 898-5862
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 1 February 1985, 07:32-PST
From: Jim Hollan <hollan@nprdc>
Subject: Availability of Steamer Software
Some readers of this list may be interested in knowing that a
tape of the source code for the Steamer training system can be obtained
from the National Technical Information Service. This includes code for
the basic Steamer system and an associated object-based graphics editor.
Steamer was recently described (Hollan, Hutchins, & Weitzman, 1984) in
the Summer issue of AI Magazine. It is written in Zetalisp and currently
runs on Symbolics lisp machines. We would be interested in bug reports
but do not have time to offer any support or information services. Send
bug reports to hollan@nprdc.
The charge for a 9-track 1600bpi tape is $240. The order number
for the tape is AD-A146757. It can be obtained from
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, Virginia 22161
Jim Hollan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 85 09:45:33 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Reports
Technical Reports from Carnegie Mellon University
Masaru Tomita: An Efficient All-paths Parsing Algorithm for Natural Languages
October 1984
Ellen Lowenfeld Walker, Takeo Kanade: Shape Recovery of a Solid of Revolution
From Apparent Distortions of Patterns
C. E. Thorpe: FIDO: Vison and Navigation for a Robot Rover
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1985 02:29:36 EST
From: BASKEYFIELDM@USC-ISI.ARPA
Subject: Report - Knowledge-Based Command and Control
ABSTRACT
KNOWLEDGE BASED MODELS FOR COMMAND AND CONTROL
Dennis Cooper
General Research Corporation
P.O. Box 6770
Santa Barbara, CA 93160-6770
In the last two years, there has been a growing interest in the
field of Artificial Intelligence. More specifically, an area known as
"Expert Systems" or "Knowledge Engineering" has received much attention.
Expert systems are computer programs that can perform at a human expert
level in some narrow domain (e.g., infectious blood diseases, VAX 11/780
computer performance, etc.). Expert systems are currently being developed
to deal with a variety of problems. In the last six years General Research
Corporation has been developing technologies that support the definition
and construction of decision-making models. The technology makes use of
techniques drawn from the expert systems field. Our decision-making model
have been principally applied to Army and Air Force analytical simulations
and wargaming models of military combat. The emphasis is thus placed not
on developing expert models of command and control but on developing
fast, reasonable models of decision-making behavior.
In this paper, we present a description of our still developing
technology and illustrate its capabilities from examples taken from the
TAC ASSESSOR model, CORDIVEM Cap design, and McClintic Theater model.
We will also describe two artificial intelligence tools, TIMM and KATIE,
which have facilitated knowledge-based model development.
Requests for this paper should be directed to the author or
I will provide a copy (as long as the number doesn't get outrageous):
BASKEYFIELDM@USC←ISI.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 85 14:31:31 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Reports - University of Illinois
University of Illinois Technical Report List
Schang, Thierry "A Rule-Based Manager for the GPSI Environment" File 923
(Rule manager for an expert system environment)
Challou, Daniel J. "Towards a Knowledge Based Data Restructing Aid" 924
system to assist in development in of data structures and type definitions
Cohen, Seth M. "Object Identification Using Keyword Matching" File No 925
user interfaces for AI systems
------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Feb 85 02:09:06-EST
From: Wayne McGuire <MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Artificial Intelligence Abstracts
I perused recently the premier issue of Artificial Intelligence
Abstracts, published by EIC/Intelligence in New York. Following is a
brief description and review.
Artificial Intelligence Abstracts will be published monthly, for
an annual price of $295. The first issue is 62 pages long, and prints
just over 300 abstracts.
Document types abstracted include academic reports, association
reports, conference papers, federal government reports, journal
articles, news articles, newsletter articles, and patents.
Some representative serials abstracted in the first issue: AI
Magazine, Artificial Intelligence, Business Week, Byte, Cognitive
Science, Computerworld, Datamation, The Economist, Electronic News,
Electronics Week, Financial Times of London, High Technology, IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics, Journal of Logic
Programming, MIS Week, The New York Times, Science, Scientific
American, Signal, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post.
Abstracts of the entire proceedings of the 1984 AAAI National
Conference appear to be included in this issue.
Abstracts are organized under the following major categories:
Markets & Issues: Business & Economics, International News, Human
Factors, General; Applications: Specialty Applications, Automation &
Robotics, Knowledge-Based Systems; Research: Computer Architecture,
Programming & Software, Sensors, Human Machine Interface, Cognitive
Sciences.
The publication is generously indexed, and abstracts can by
accessed by author, subject, source (serial title), or industry or
corporation topic. An Events & Meetings section in each issue
provides basic information about forthcoming meetings and conferences
related to artificial intelligence scheduled to occur during the next
12 months.
Although the abstracts in this publication are uniformly useful
(the attention to developments in supercomputing is particularly
valuable), its coverage could be significantly broadened. The
emphasis of AIA seems to be more on the popular and trade press, than
on the academic, scientific, and technical literature. Computer &
Control Abstracts, for instance, captures much important AI-related
literature in all major languages from around the world which AIA's
editorial policy apparently excludes or overlooks.
AIA's coverage of cognitive science--the AI-relevant literature
from philosophy, linguistics, psychology, and educational research--is
especially weak. Perhaps there is a need for a special new
publication entitled Cognitive Science Abstracts which will do the job
for which AIA lacks the interest or space.
Any habitual reader of AIList Digest would, I suspect, find
Artificial Intelligence Abstracts to be a worthwhile tool. A sample
copy can be obtained by writing EIC/Intelligence at 48 West 38th
Street, New York, NY 10018, or calling (800) 223-6275. AIList Digest
readers might also want to examine EIC's Robomatix Reporter (which
abstracts the robotics literature), CAD/CAM Abstracts, and
Telecommunications Abstracts.
-- Wayne McGuire <wayne%mit-oz@mit-mc>
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1985 1325-PST (Wednesday)
From: Miriam Blatt <blatt@amadeus>
Subject: new and trendy word collection
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A friend of mine is looking for words to put in a dictionary she is
working on. Some examples of words we have already suggested are
"WYSIWYG" - what you see is what you get, and "RISC" - reduced
instruction set computer. If you have some words to suggest, or
think some may occur to you in the next few days, please save the
form at the end of this message and mail it back.
Here is the original letter:
Hi,
We are starting on a new, exciting project and we need your help. The
project is a business dictionary - working title "Essential Terms:
Today's Business Vocabulary - to be published by Franklin Watts (part
of Grolier, they started as a children's house and now do adult books
as well) and the help we need is a list of words.
What will set our book apart from the ordinary business dictionary is
its emphasis on new and trendy words and ironic usages for old words or
terms. Some examples: "merged and purged" (what is done, via a computer
program, when combining mailing lists to eliminate from the final list,
duplicates and people who cannot tolerate direct mail advertising),
"socks and stocks" (Sears financial centers in retail stores), "big
blue" (IBM), "Kaufmanized" (the state of the financial markets after a
pronouncement about the direction of interest rates by Salomon
Brothers' economic guru, Henry Kaufman), "golden girdle" (the high tech
belt that crosses central Florida) and "valium picnic" (slow day on the
stock market).
With the exception of the last term, we saw all of these expressions in
print. However, to get more of them we need access to words that are so
new, so particular, and so irreverent that they have not yet been
published, and this is where we hope you can help.
What are the fun, interesting terms in your work - field and/or
industry? Would you please keep the attached form wherever it is most
likely to be at hand when a word "flashes" into your conversation, for
the next few days, and fill it with the words/terms and definitions
that make "Today's Business Vocabulary" so lively?
We appreciate the crucial nature of your help to our project, and will
be happy to acknowledge your contribution in our introduction.
Please circle February 8th on your calendar and leave a few minutes on
that Friday to mail back the list.
Thank you very much for your help.
Rachel Epstein and Nina Liebman
Name:
Phone:
Wish to be acknowledged: (Yes/No)
For each word, give its meaning and origin.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 09:50:15-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Procedural Knowledge (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Procedural Knowledge
SPEAKER: Michael Georgeff
A.I. Center, SRI International and,
Center for the Study of Language and Information,
Stanford University
DATE: Friday, February 1, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
Active intelligent systems need to be able to represent and reason
about actions and how those actions can be combined to achieve given
goals. This knowledge is often in the form of SEQUENCES of actions or
PROCEDURES for achieving given goals or reacting to certain
situations. For example, knowledge about kicking a football,
performing a certain dance movement, cooking a roast dinner, solving
Rubik's cube, or diagnosing an engine malfunction, is primarily
knowledge about procedures for accomplishing these tasks.
In this talk we describe a scheme for explicitly representing and
reasoning about procedural knowledge based on the notion of PROCESS.
The knowledge representation is sufficiently rich to describe the
effects of arbitrary sequences of tests and actions, and the inference
mechanism provides a means for directly using this knowledge to reach
desired operational goals. Furthermore, the knowledge representation
has a declarative semantics that provides for incremental changes to
the system, rich explanatory capabilities, and verifiability. The
scheme also provides a mechanism for reasoning about the use of this
knowledge, thus enabling the system to choose effectively between
alternative courses of action.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 17:26:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Reasoning about Actions and Processes (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
``Reasoning About Actions and Processes''
Room G-19 Michael Georgeff, CSLI
2:15 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 7, Redwood Hall, Stanford
Active intelligent systems need to be able to represent and reason about
actions and how those actions can be combined to achieve given goals. For
example, knowledge about kicking a football, performing a certain dance
movement, cooking a roast dinner, solving Rubik's cube, or diagnosing an
engine malfunction, is primarily knowledge about sequences of actions or
procedures for achieving these goals. Within AI, there have been two
approaches to this problem, with a somewhat poor connection between the
two. In the first category, there is some work on theories of action, or
what an action is. This research has focused mainly on problems in natural
language understanding concerned with the meaning of action sentences.
Second, there is work on planning, i.e., the problem of constructing a plan
by searching for a sequence of actions that yields a given goal.
Surprisingly, there is almost no work in AI about the execution of
pre-formed plans -- yet this is the almost universal way in which humans go
about their day-to-day tasks, and probably the only way other animals do
so. In this talk we aim to set the foundation for a theory of action that:
(1) provides a suitable semantics for simple action sentences in natural
language, (2) provides a method of practical reasoning about how to achieve
given goals based on procedural knowledge, and (3) serves as a basis for
planning. The first of these aims is met by defining a suitable
declarative semantics for action, and the second by providing a suitable
operational semantics. The third rests on both of these, but in addition
requires that we have a means of searching the space of possible world
histories.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Feb-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #12
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 85 01:01:00 PST
Date: Sat 2 Feb 1985 22:48-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #12
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 3 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Sublists,
Seminars - Berkeley Prolog Machine (SU) &
Typography (CSLI) &
Conceptual Competence for Solving Problems (UCB) &
Belief Revision (CSLI) &
Nonlinear Planning (MIT) &
Syllable Recognition (CMU),
Conferences - Cognitive Science Society &
Automated Reasoning and Expert Systems &
Systems Sciences Software &
Automath and Automated Reasoning Week
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 09:00:34-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Sublists
Readers occasionally ask me whether there is an AIList version
that omits seminar notices, conferences, flames, or some other
subset of the usual material. Usenet readers used to ask
whether messages could be split into two or more bboard streams.
(Incidentally, our full Usenet gateway may be working again in two
or three weeks.)
At present there is no such sublist mechanism. I haven't the time
and energy to maintain multiple subscription lists; even if I did,
there is no concensus on which messages are the "good stuff".
If someone else wants to create such a "cream" distribution,
I will help any way I can. I skim material from other bboards and
lists, and I see no reason why someone shouldn't excerpt AIList and
pass his selections along. We could even have multiple splits, with
one sublist taking, say, philosophy and psychology and another carrying
psychology and linguistics. (This would cause difficulty, however, in
the eventual establishment of the sublists as independent lists.)
Another possible solution is for mailers or redistribution systems to
include message parsing code that can delete any text starting with
"Subject: Seminar -", etc. (Even the ability to skip to the next message
would be welcome. I currently read mostly "undigested" or "exploded" digests
and bboards, which is one way of getting this convenience.) If someone
wants to develop such a mail system, I am willing to cooperate in
standardizing the header keyword format.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 09:17:43-PST
From: Ariadne Johnson <ARIADNE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Berkeley Prolog Machine (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CS 300 -- Computer Science Department Colloquium -- Winter 1984-1985.
Our fifth meeting will be
Tuesday, February 5, 1985
at 4:15 in Terman Auditorium
THE BERKELEY PROLOG MACHINE
Alvin M. DESPAIN
Computer Science, Univ. of Calif.,Berkeley
The Berkeley Prolog Machine (PLM) is an experiment in high performance
architecture for executing logic programs. It is part of a longer term
effort, the Berkeley Aquarius project. The Aquarius project at Berkeley is
an on-going investigation whose ultimate research goal is to determine how
enormous improvements in performance can be achieved in a machine specialized
to calculate some very difficult "real" problems in design automation,
discrete simulation, systems, and signal processing. Our approach can be
characterized by three important points:
(1) Aquarius is to be a MIMD machine made of heterogeneous processing
elements, each of which is tailored to accommodate its own
individual processing requirements
(2) it is to exploit parallelism at all levels of execution, and
(3) it is to support logic-programming at the ISP level.
The presentation will include a discussion of the systems architecture of
Aquarius. The main discussion will focus on the Prolog Machine(PLM)
and will describe its key innova- tive features and development status.
Some performance estimates of the PLM as derived from simulation studies will
be presented.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 17:26:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Typography (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
12 noon, 2/7 TINLunch
Ventura Hall Excerpts from Charles Bigelow's ``Principles of
Conference Room Structured Font Design for the Personal Workstation''
and Fernand Baudin's
``Typography: Evolution + Revolution''
Discussion led by David Levy
The TINlunch of February 7 will focus on some of the issues surrounding the
new computer technology exemplified by TEDIT, TEX, and EMACS. These ``word
processing'' and ``document preparation'' systems are, of course, nothing
other than ``writing'' tools -- intended for writing with the aid of the
computer. The first reading, an excerpt from an article by Charles
Bigelow, discusses the design of typefaces in the new digital medium as a
problem of balancing conservation and innovation: conserving the legibility
and elegance of our inherited letter forms while meeting the demands of the
new medium. In the second reading, Fernand Baudin suggests that the new
writing technology will require of us a new literacy: not just the ability
to read and write, but the ability to organize our writing visually -- that
is, typographically. He calls for ``the close cooperation of specialists
in many branches: linguist[ic]s, communication, psychology, history,
technology.'' --David Levy
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 85 11:56:01 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Conceptual Competence for Solving Problems (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
``Conceptual Competence for Understanding and Solving Problems''
James G. Greeno, School of Education, UC Berkeley
TIME: Tuesday, February 5, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4
Behavior of people, including children, can include generative
conformity to principles in a way that supports conclusions
that they understand the principles. This understanding may be
implicit, involving a kind of competence. Examples involving
principles of number, analyzed using planning nets, and princi-
ples of set theory, analyzed using Montague grammar, will be
discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 17:26:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Belief Revision (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SUMMARY OF THE F4 MEETING ON JANUARY 7
The topic was an overview belief revision as a research area in AI.
``Belief revision'' is a broad enough term to cover many different types of
inferential activity in AI. We discussed four types: (1) Search theory, in
which assumptions are made and retracted in an effort to find a problem
solution; (2) ``Truth'' maintenance systems a la Doyle. There are
foundational theories of belief in the sense of Harmon, with a set of
unsupported premises underlying all beliefs. The key feature of these
systems is their attempt to keep track of all justifications for belief,
and to revise these justifications in the face of contradictory belief.
(3) Database updates in the presence of integrity constraints or
user-defined views, in which case the update can become ambiguous. The
syntactic approach of Vardi et. al. was reviewed. (4) Ad-hoc approaches
designed for particular domains, for example the simple ``believe what you
see'' principle embedded in Shakey the robot.
Ned Block made the interesting observation that belief revision in the
AI context did not correspond to scientific theory revision as discussed in
the philosophical literature; for example, the principle of simplicity did
not seem to be a criterion for revision. This provoked a large amount of
discussion. --Kurt Konolige
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 1985 14:20 EST (Thu)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Nonlinear Planning (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Nonlinear Planning: A Rigorous Reconstruction
Dave Chapman - AI Revolving Seminar
The problem of achieving conjunctive goals has been central
to domain-independent planning research; the nonlinear
constraint-posting approach has been most successful. Previous
planners of this type have been complicated, heuristic, and
ill-defined. I will present a simple, precise algorithm and prove it
correct and complete. The analytic tools I have developed in
constructing this algorithm clarify previous planning research. The
frame problem is revealed as the limiting factor in the range of
applicability of state-of-the-art planners. I will suggest a new
approach for future research.
TUESDAY 2/5/85 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
*** NOTE PERMANENT CHANGE OF DAY ***
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 85 11:47:59 EST
From: Steven.Shafer@CMU-CS-IUS
Subject: Seminar - Syllable Recognition (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Speaker: Renato DeMori, Concordia University, Montreal
Topic: Parallel Algorithms for Syllable Recognition in Continuous Speech
Dates: 5-Feb-85
Time: 3:30 pm
Place: WeH 5409
The talk describes a distributed rule-based system for automatic
speech recognition. Acoustic property extraction and feature
hypothesization are performed by the application of sequences of
operators. The sequences, called plans, are executed by cooperative
expert programs. Experimental results on the automatic segmentation
and recognition of phrases, made of connected letters and digits are
described and discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 85 09:15:56 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Conference - Cognitive Science Society
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
7th Annual Conference of the COGNITIVE SCIENCE SOCIETY
August 15-17, 1985
U.C. Irvine
Call for Papers
Submission Deadline: 11 MARCH 1985
Topics: Language Processing, Memory Models, Vision Processing, Belief
Systems, Learning and Memory, Perception, Knowledge Representation,
Inference Mechanisms
Submission:
Four copies,
Papers: 5000 word maximum
Posters: 2000 word maximum
Include: named, address, phone number
four key words
abstract (100-250 words)
total word length
Send to: Richard Granger
Computer Science Dept.
University of California
Irvine, CA 92717
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 09:46:10-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Idaho State University Conference on Automated Reasoning and
Expert Systems
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, Dept. of Mathematics is sponsoring
their 8th miniconference in the area of Automated Reasoning and Expert
Systems. (Does anyone know if this means they have had 8 conferences on
automated reasoning or that only the 8th conference is devoted to automated
reasoning?) They have sent out a call for papers for the conference to
be held in Pocatello on April 26-27, 1984. The people to contact are
Larry Winter 208-236-2501 or Bob Girse 208-236-3819 Department of Math.
Idaho State University, Pocatello Idaho 83209. Dr. Ewing Lusk of the
Automated Reasoning Group at Argonne National Lab. will be the principal
speaker. Is anyone familiar with any of the research in this area
going on at Idaho State Univ.?
Harry Llull
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 85 16:36:00 EST
From: "Bruce D. Shriver"
<shriver.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - Systems Sciences Software
CALL FOR: Papers, Referees, Session Coordinators, Task Forces
=============================================================
SOFTWARE TRACK of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
========================================================================
HICSS-19 is the ninteenth in a series of conferences devoted to advances
in information and system sciences. The conference will encompass develop-
ments theory and practice in the areas of systems architecture, software,
decision support systems, and knowledge-based systems. The conference is
sponsored by the University of Hawaii and the University of Southwestern
Louisiana in cooperation with the ACM and the IEEE Computer Society. It
will be held on Jan. 8-10, 1986 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Papers, referees,
and session coordinators are solicited in the following areas:
Software Design Tools, Techniques, and Environments
Models of System and Program Behavior
Testing, Verification, and Validation
Professional Workstation Environments
Alternative Language Paradigms
Reuseability in Design and Implementation
Knowledge-Based Systems Software
Algorithm Analysis and Animation
Visual Languages
Please submit six (6) copies of the full paper (not to exceed 26 double-
spaced pages including diagrams) by July 5, 1985 directly to:
Bruce D. Shriver
HICSS-19 Software Track Coordinator
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
PO Box 218, Route 134
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
(914) 945-1664
csnet: shriver.yktvmv@ibm-sj
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 85 12:28:11 est
From: minker@maryland (Jack Minker)
Subject: AUTOMATH AND AUTOMATED REASONING WEEK AT MARYLAND MARCH 4-8, 1985
WEEK
of
AUTOMATH AND AUTOMATED REASONING
at
THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND
MARCH 4 - MARCH 8, 1985
The Mathematics and Computer Science Departments at the
University of Maryland at College Park and the National Sci-
ence Foundation are jointly sponsoring a Special Year in
Mathematical Logic and Theoretical Computer Science. The
week of March 4-8, 1985 will be devoted to Automath and
Automated Reasoning. There will be ten distinguished lec-
tures as follows:
Monday, March 4 1100-1230 Nicolas deBruin
"THE AUTOMATH PROJECT"
Monday, March 4 1500-1630 Jeffrey Zucker
"FORMALIZATION OF CLASSICAL MATHEMATICS IN
AUTOMATH"
Tuesday, March 5 1000-1130 Woody Bledsoe
"HIGH LEVEL PLANS FOR AN INEQUALITY PROVER"
Tuesday, March 5 1400-1530 Larry Wos
"AUTOMATED REASONING: INTRODUCTION AND APPLICA-
TION"
Wednesday, March 6 1100-1230 Larry Wos
"AUTOMATED REASONING: OPEN QUESTIONS FROM ALGE-
BRA AND FORMAL LOGIC"
Wednesday, March 6 1430-1600 Woody Bledsoe
"USING ANALOGY IN AUTOMATIC THEOREM PROVING"
Thursday, March 7 1030-1200 Robert Constable
"PROGRAMMING AS FORMAL MATHEMATICS"
Thursday, March 7 1330-1500 Peter Andrews
"TYPED LAMBDA CALCULUS AND AUTOMATIC THEOREM
PROVING"
Friday, March 8 1100-1230 Robert Constable
"CONSTRUCTIVE MATHEMATICS AS PROGRAMMING"
Friday, March 8 1330-1500 Peter Andrews
"TOWARDS AUTOMATING HIGHER ORDER LOGIC"
All lectures will be given at:
Mathematics Building, Room Y3206
The lectures are open to the public. If you plan to
attend kindly notify us so that we can make appropriate
plans for space. Limited funds are available to support
junior faculty and graduate students for the entire week or
part of the week. To obtain funds, please submit an appli-
cation listing your affiliation and send either a net mes-
sage or a letter to:
Jack Minker
Department of Computer Science
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
(301) 454-6119
minker@maryland
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Feb-85 1711 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #13
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 85 17:11:32 PST
Date: Mon 4 Feb 1985 14:46-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #13
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 4 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Lisp Machine Graphing/Chart Software & Apple Lisa LISP,
Philosophy - Philosophical Logic,
Math - Large Sparse Systems of Linear Equations,
Lists - Symbolics Users' Group,
Hardware - Artificial Intelligence Chips,
Applications - Computer Music & Oriental Languages,
Culture - True Names,
Humor - AI Joke Contest,
Courses - The Scientific Essay (MIT) & AI in Medicine (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 31 January 1985, 14:32-EST
From: Henry Lieberman <Henry at MIT-OZ>
Subject: Lisp machine graphing/chart software
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Has anybody got a package for generating graphs and charts
on the Lisp machine [for example, the equivalent of Microsoft Chart]?
------------------------------
Date: 1 Feb 1985 12:35 EST (Fri)
From: Steven Christopher Bagley <BAGLEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: LISPs for the Apple Lisa
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Are there are any reasonable LISP systems available for the Apple
Lisa? Any pointers, leads, info,.... to Bagley@OZ.
Thanks,
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 85 20:41:48 -0200
From: eyal%wisdom.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (Eyal mozes)
Subject: Request for information
I am looking for information about the application of traditional
philosophical logic (such as Aristotle's rules of the syllogism, or
Mill's laws of inductive logic) in computer science, particularly in
Artificial Intelligence.
I would be very grateful to anyone who can tell me where I can find
any reports about work in this direction, or any papers discussing
possibilities in this area. I would also be grateful for suggestions
about people whose work is close enough to this area to have a good
chance of knowing about such work.
Eyal Mozes
BITNET: eyal@wisdom
CSNET and ARPA: eyal%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.ARPA
UUCP: ..!decvax!humus!wisdom!eyal
------------------------------
Date: Thu 31 Jan 85 21:36:19-PST
From: Jose Brazio <FAT.BRAZIO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Large sparse systems of linear equations - want information
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I would appreciate if someone could give me some information on
the problem of solving the equilibrium equations for a finite Markov
chain. That is, I want to solve a system of the form
q A = 0
where either A = I - P, with P being the transition probability matrix
of a discrete time Markov chain, or A is the rate transition matrix of a
continuous time Markov chain. In any case, the matrix A is large (as
large as I can get away with) and sparse, the fraction of nonzero
elements being of the order of ln N / N (N = order of A). I would
like to know
(1) If there is any solution method especially appropriate (i.e.,
exploiting the special structure of A) for this problem;
(2) Pointers to literature on implementation issues, data structures,
etc.; alternatively, if there is any package with an appropriate
subroutine (neither NAG or IMSL seem to have one).
Thanks.
Jose Brazio
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 85 01:31 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Symbolics Users' Group
I posted a note last week asking about "a network mailing list for users of
Symbolics Lisp machines". I received several replies pointing me toward
SLUG@UTEXAS-20, a mailing list for the "Symbolics Lisp Users Group". This
mailing list is maintained by Rich Cohen (CMP.COHEN@UTEXAS-20). Requests to
be added to the mailing list should be sent to SLUG-REQUEST@UTEXAS-20 and
submissions to SLUG@UTEXAS-20.
This mailing list reportedly does not see a great deal of traffic
at present.
Tim
------------------------------
Date: Sat 2 Feb 85 22:04:51-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Artificial Intelligence Chips
Wayne McGuire (MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC) has called my attention to
a New York Times article by Andrew Pollack, 1/24/85, p. D2,
Chips to Spur Intelligence. Some excerpts:
[...] artificial intelligence chips are so close to
reality that this year that, for the first time, a panel will be devoted
to the topic at the international Solid State Circuit Conference, the
annual scientific meeting for microchip designers that will be held in
New York next month. [...]
Texas Instruments Inc., which sells a LISP machine, is working
under a Defense Department contract to shrink virtually the entire
machine onto a single chip by 1986. Symbolics Inc. of Cambridge,
Mass., another vendor of such machines, says it is also working on
shrinking its machine onto a chip over the next several years. And
Motorola is believed to be considering the development of a LISP
co-processor that would work alongside its 68000 microprocessor and
speed its handling of artificial intelligence tasks. [...]
Proximity Technology Inc. of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., has developed
a chip that looks for similarities between strings of characters.
Today, a computer will be stumped by a simple spelling error in its
instructions. An intelligent computer, however, when asked to search
a data base for information on "Los Angelees," would recognize that
that probably means "Los Angeles." [...] Such pattern-matching chips
could also be useful for speech recognition [...]
Developing a meaningful artificial intelligence chip will require
putting at least 10 million logic elements, or gates, onto a single
piece of silicon, according to Raj Reddy, director of the Robotics
Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. That is 10 times the number
of elements that can now be put on even the most advanced chips, he
said. [...] "By the year 2000, it's reasonable to have one
billion gates on a chip." [...]
------------------------------
Date: Sat 2 Feb 85 21:50:12-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Music
A Stanford bboard item mentioned a 1/29/85 AP article on automated
music transcription. This may be relevant to the problem of
recognizing bird songs (AIList Vol. 3, No. 10). Some excerpts:
Computer Prints Mozart From Piano
By STEVE WILSTEIN
Associated Press Writer
STANFORD, Calif. (AP) - Roll over Beethoven, and take a look at a
computer that can transcribe Mozart just by ''listening'' to a piano.
An artificial intelligence program developed by Stanford University
printed out a minuet from a Mozart symphony, complete with accents,
meters and notes on a five-line staff, researchers said Tuesday.
The computer has a bit more trouble with the syncopation of ragtime
or the funk of Michael Jackson, and can't transcribe harmony. But
researchers believe polyphony is less than two years away, and
computer jam sessions may be possible.
''It shows there is really good potential,'' said research associate
Bernard Mont-Reynaud. ''We've had success with the single voice. Now
we're gearing up with new machines to do polyphonic transcription. We
should be able to do a full piano piece or string quartet within 1 1/2
years.'' [...]
''My hope is these things will connect someday,'' Mont-Reynaud said.
''You can play something, it gets analyzed, and software transforms
it and responds. A musician and a computer can play together.''
------------------------------
Date: 1 Feb 85 05:59:30 EST
From: Ping.Kang.Hsiung@CMU-CS-UNH
Subject: a good article on IEEE COMPUTER
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
For those who are interested in gaining some knowledge on
the Chinese/Japanese/Korean languages, the article written
by Joseph Becker in Jan 85's *IEEE Computer* provides an
extremely rare opportunity.
This paper highlights the features of the idiographic
writing systems, and gives intelligent description of
the structure of written and spoken Chinese/Kanji.
It also discusses some possible approaches and related
problems to "computerize" these languages--which used
to be, and still are the subject of calligraphic creation.
Mr. Becker is a remarkable reseacher in this field as
well as an excellent writter. His paper is well organized,
easy to read, yet gives very precise illustration of some
certain abstract concepts in these beautiful languages.
His previous article dealing with a similar topic and
published on June, 1984's *Scientific American* is also
very good.
(As a person who holds Chinese as his mother-tongue,
i actually feel quite embarrassed by the fact that
here is this *foreigner* who studys my language
so deep and detailed, such that i have to from time
to time stop reading and think for a while before
agree with him.)
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 85 09:54 PST
From: Tom Perrine <tom@LOGICON.ARPA>
Subject: "True Names"
Vernor Vinge's classic SF/AI novella is back in print! The latest
edition is from Bluejay Books, in a larger-format paperback. This
edition features an afterword by Dr. Marvin Minsky. The book is worth
buying just for the afterword, although I originally bought the book
because I was familiar with the story. The book was a Hugo nominee
several years ago (1981, I think).
I strongly recommend it to anyone in the Cognitive Science field.
(Actually, I recommend it to *everyone* I know.)
Tom Perrine
"tom@logicon.arpa"
------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Feb 85 11:46:39-EST
From: Bob Hall <RJH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: AI JOKES (with a twist)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Well, the AI Joke Contest is winding down and so far the response has
been minimal (but non-zero). There IS still time to enter, but
there is now a deadline of postmark by Feb. 25. Since there has
been some griping about actually having to find a stamp and some
paper, I HAVE AGREED TO BE A NETWORK ADDRESS FOR ENTRIES. So
send 'em to me, rjh@oz, and I'll send 'em in for ya. Include all
the same info. Here's a reminder ...
AI Joke Contest
Come up with a good cocktail-party-worthy joke about some aspect of
AI and win a U.C., Berkeley T-shirt! Enter as many times as you like.
Winner (exactly one) will be judged solely on the number of ``HA''s
evoked from the impartial panel of judges. Ties will be broken by
earliest postmark and contest ends Feb 25, 1985.
To be eligible for a prize, you must include your address and t-shirt size.
Entries become property of the judges.
To Enter:
Mail via US Mail your entry in any legible format to
(or send via net mail to rjh@oz)
AI Jokes
1717 Allston Way
Berkeley, CA 94703
Enter Now!
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 1985 2117-EST (Thursday)
From: dndobrin@mit-charon (David N. Dobrin)
Subject: Course - The Scientific Essay (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Name: 21.780 The Scientific Essay
Time: TR 3:30 - 5:00
Place: 4-260 (Probably)
This is simultaneously a historical course in essays on the mind and
a writing course, for people who write sentences like this one and wish
they wouldn't. The reading begins with James and Freud. It then moves
to artificial intelligence and cognitive science--the usual Tuuring,
Simon, Minsky, Fodor stuff, with the addition of (dare I say it)
Dreyfus and Searle. The writing is partly on the essays and partly on
anything you want. (If you have something you've got to get done, you
can write it in this class.)
The course is designed for undergraduates. Taking courses with
similar reading (24.09) is helpful, but not required.
------------------------------
Date: 28 January 1985 16:40-EST
From: Rosemary B. Hegg <ROSIE @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Course - AI in Medicine (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
SPRING TERM SEMINAR
The following course will be offered next term:
6.891 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN MEDICINE (A)
Prereq: 6.824 or equivalent. 6.871 in addition is recommended.
G(2)
3-0-9
Friday 9-12, Room 26-314.
Enrollmment may be limited to preserve a seminar atmosphere.
This seminar course will explore the state of the art of AI in
medicine research. Much of the methodology of ``expert systems'' was
first developed for medical applications, and the field of medicine
continues to provide excellent problems for challenging AI work. The
intent of this course is to assess the accomplishments of over a decade
of work in this field, to identify and study those problems now thought
to be central to further progress, and to review the most interesting
current approaches to these problems. Topics to be covered include:
1. The rationale for medical reasoning systems; their possible use
as error-detectors, consultants and teachers; historical non-AI
approaches to medical decision making. Pragmatic constraints and
opportunities provided by the needs of the health-care system.
2. A rapid review of the original AI programs for medicine, looking
at the strengths and weaknesses of simple rule-based reasoning programs
such as MYCIN and simple frame-matching programs such as
INTERNIST and PIP.
3. Consideration of knowledge representations that make explicit the
anatomical, physiological, temporal and causal inter-relationships in
medicine; new reasoning methods (e.g., CADUCEUS) that can exploit
a number of these representations.
4. Reasoning at multiple levels of detail, thus integrating
reasoning based on associations drawn from experience with reasoning
based on an analysis of the structure and function of the body (e.g.,
ABEL.)
5. Analysis of the generic problem solving tasks (e.g.,
classification, construction, debugging) in diagnostic and therapeutic
reasoning, and consideration of programs that adapt their methods to the
problem at hand.
6. Generation of explanations and justifications of a program's
knowledge, reasoning strategies, and conclusions.
7. Knowledge acquisition. Learning from textbooks, by disagreement
with experts, and from experience. Analysis of protocols of expert
behavior.
This seminar will be an advanced-level course, intended only for
students with a strong artificial intelligence background.
The
textbook will be "Readings in Medical Artificial Intelligence: The
First Decade" by Clancey and Shortliffe, and a large number of
additional papers.
Each student will write a
substantial term paper, and there will be short (?) research problems
that involve building small systems.
Instructor: Prof. Peter Szolovits, NE43-365, 3-3476,
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-Feb-85 2022 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #14
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 85 20:22:08 PST
Date: Tue 5 Feb 1985 13:27-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #14
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Tuesday, 5 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 14
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Common Lisp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Feb 85 13:43:34 EST
From: Charles Hedrick <HEDRICK@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Common Lisp and Lexical Bindings
I saw a comment on AIList about Common Lisp that should probably be
answered. The claim is that the Gold-Hill CL interpreter is faster than
the VAX interpreter because the VAX interpreter does lexical bindings.
This is almost certainly false. During the early design stages of Elisp
(the extended-addressing TOPS-20 UCI Lisp), I tried several different
binding strategies. I found that in the interpreter there was almost no
difference in speed caused by a full A-list binding strategy. This
should be about the same as implementing lexical bindings in the obvious
way. The main problem with lexical binding in the interpreter is that
it uses CONS cells, since most implementations use some sort of binding
list to keep local bindings. This it causes more GC's. In the DEC-20
CL, I construct these lists on the stack, since bindings are not needed
once you exit from the routine in which they are made. If someone
constructs a lexical closure, I copy all bindings from the stack to the
heap. But this happens fairly seldom. The mechanisms needed to do the
copying from stack to heap are somewhat delicate, but it can be made to
work. There are also implementations using indirect pointers, if that
turns out to be reasonable on your machine. A CL interpreter will
probably be slower than a Maclisp interpreter, because of a number of
things:
- lexical closures
- the & binding options
- multiple values
Each of these things can be implemented without adding serious overhead,
but the affect of all of them together is noticable. However I think a
properly tuned interpreter should be able to get within a factor of 1.5
of Maclisp. The current DEC-20 Common Lisp is entirely interpreted.
Even system functions are supplied in interpreted form. Although more
speed would be desirable (Our compiler will be out Real Soon Now), one
can certainly do real work in our system. I can see that someone might
want to produced a stripped-down pseudo-CL for some sort of real-time
work. In that case, a lot of thought would have to go into what to
leave out. I do not think it makes sense to leave out only lexical
binding. That alone does not cause serious performance problems. The
real problem is the size of the language, and the number of options,
particularly in the sequence functions. This means that good performance
can be obtained only by careful special-case optimizing. Unfortunately
the language is so large that a compiler that does appropriate optimizations
will take a while to develop.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Sep 84 05:11:10 EDT
From: Charles Hedrick <HEDRICK@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: report of meeting about Common Lisp
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard, with permission from the author.
I just recently discovered this September message. -- KIL]
This is a report on the Common Lisp Workshop, held at the Naval
Postgraduate School, in Monterrey, CA, 18 and 19 Sept 84. The meeting
was called by ARPA, to examine the present state of CL, and to make
suggestions on where it should go next. The attendees were mostly
associated with organizations that were implementing CL or thinking of
doing so, though there were also some user organizations. There was a
mix of Universities, commercial vendors, etc.
The main thrust of the meeting seemed to be how CL would make the
transition between a nice idea dreamed up by a few language designers to
a language that is being supported by a large number of vendors and
required by ARPA. My discussion will follow the overall organization of
the sessions. (However this order is not chronological. It is
organized so that some of my users won't have to wade through technical
details to see what is likely to be of the most interest to them.)
ARPA policy
Subsets
Organizational issues
Proposed extensions
Workstation/server architecture
Multi-processing facilities
I. ARPA Policy
The folks who were here from ARPA were Ron Ohlander and Steve Squires.
Apparently Ron will be leaving ARPA (when? I didn't get the time - I
think within a year), and Squires will end up carrying the ball for CL.
Ron did most of the talking in this meeting.
One of the factors that is going to change the nature of CL is the fact
the ARPA is planning to push it strongly. No final decisions are made,
but it looks like ARPA is going to require and/or strongly suggest that
CL be used for its research contracts. This will be particularly the
case for the Strategic Computing project, since they intend for all
contractors involved in that project to be able to share code. They
made all the normal qualifications about doing this in a way that will
not stiffle innovation, and allowing exceptions as appropriate. But the
evidence is that they will exert very strong pressure towards CL. (They
mentioned in passing that they also plan to specify that systems they
pay for should use TCP/IP for networking. Incidentally, they also said
that if you want the RFP for the Strategic Computing initiative in new
architectures, you should ask for
N0039-84-R-0605(Q)
from the Naval Electronics Systems Command, Code 2013. The following
phone number is not for Code 2013, but they can refer you:
202-692-6085.)
One of the amusing results of ARPA's policies is that there is now a bit
of a battle over how much of CL you have to implement in order to
qualify. Certain vendors seem to be interested in providing some degree
of CL compatibility within their existing Lisps, and on that basis want
to be qualified to participate in cases where CL is specified. It is
not clear to what extent they have sound technical reasons for not
wanting to do full CL, and to what extent they feel that they don't have
time to do so soon enough.
ARPA seems to be willing to put at some money into helping CL get off
the ground, and also to supplying some clerical support, and possibly
legal and organizational advice.
II. Subsets
One of the questions which was posed is whether the CL community should
specify one or more official subsets. There are a number of reasons
why subsets might be desirable:
- several people have proposed a subset for teaching purposes. The
language is so big that many courses would probably prefer not
to deal with the whole thing. It might be helpful if different
texts would use the same subset. This could promote a
competitive marketplace. It might also be nice if our AI
textbooks and our Lisp programming intro assumed the same
subset! This might not mean a special implementation, since it
would be easy enough to hide the names of the functions that are
not in the subset. Instructional applications also tend to be
on small machines, and so might also fall afoul of the second
requirement:
- it might be nice to implement CL on small machines. Existing CL
implementations seem to take between 1 and 2.5 Mbytes of ram
(more if you count editors, etc.). It would be nice to be able
to have CL for the Macintosh and other smaller machines.
- full CL has features that may make it hard to do efficient
implementations. This could be important for slower micros. But
it also affects people interested in doing "embedded systems",
i.e. things that have to go inside missles, or that have to do
process control, etc. Examples of such features are lexical
binding, multiple values, and sequence functions. There was
considerable disagreement over how significant this issue is.
Some felt that with enough work all of these problems could be
overcome, but it does seem clear that the first implementations
of full CL are going to be noticably slower than simpler Lisps
such as PSL.
- some vendors may not find it practical to implement full CL
immediately. They would like to be able to start with a subset,
and have that be enough to qualify them to participate in
projects for which ARPA wants CL to be used.
There was no concensus on this issue. Discussion of subsets got off to
a slow start, but it kept coming up, and tempers starting getting hotter
as time went on. Here is my reading of the general reactions:
- people seemed to agree that an educational subset might be useful
and was harmless. No one seemed to feel that the CL designers
or this meeting were ready to specify such a subset. So it
seems that textbook writers will be left on their own, at least
until we see how a few of these subsets turn out.
- little was said about the small-machine problem.
- there was a lot of discussion about the last two types of subsets.
(They are hard to separate.) There were strong feelings on both
sides. Some people feel that only a full CL should be called
CL, and that we should not encourage subsets. Even the most
extreme holders of this view did feel sympathetic to purveyors
of existing Lisp implementations, and did agree that they should
be encouraged to provide whatever degree of CL compatibility
they felt they could manage. This issue is obviously going to
come up again at the next meeting, and will be discussed hotly
with ARPA in the meantime. ARPA will have a strong effect on
this. If they plan to require use of CL, then they will have
the final say on what they mean by CL. There will surely be
subsets of this kind. I would be willing to bet that ARPA will
allow it for embedded systems and process control, where there
are clear technical reasons. I have no idea what they will do
in other cases. (Maybe the Ada approach, where subsets are
allowed as long as there is a clear plan to move to a full
implementation.) There is also some indication that ARPA may
find it acceptable to do work in another Lisp as long as there
is a program to translate the results into CL. Clearly a subset
would qualify here.
Note that some of these "subsets" may not be real subsets. It is likely
that they will have to add a few features. E.g. those implementors who
do not want to bear the overhead of generic sequence functions may add a
few type-specific functions, such as STRING-CONCAT. It is quite likely
that people who do this will want these functions added to the full
language, so that their implementations will be true subsets.
III. Organizational issues
It is interesting to see how much difference it makes that this language
is going to be supported by vendors. They want to make sure
- that the language is well-defined. This means that there is some
authoritative way to answer questions, and that a validation
procedure is developed (including a validation suite).
- that it is possible to make changes where implementation experience
shows that it is desirable, or as the CL community comes up with
important new ideas
- that changes to the language do not happen too quickly
- that their interests are represented in whatever group is authorized
to change the language.
It is clear that these requirements imply a person or persons who
control the development of the language. Initially the language was
designed primarily by a group of 5 people (the so-called "gang of 5"),
with participation by many others over the Arpanet. The vendors that I
heard would like for those original designers to continue to have a
strong influence over the language. (Indeed the Gang of 5 is probably
the most enthusiastic to turn things over a formal organization.) Most
people see that we are going to start some organization analogous to a
standards committee. However most people do not want to be involved in
ANSI, ISO, etc. The feeling seems to be that there is too much
bureacracy, and that CL still needs enough clarification and additions
that we could not tolerate the delays involved in conventional standards
organizations. Clearly some vendors would like to see an ANSI standard
eventually, but everyone seems to agree that we are not ready yet. Here
is a partial list of things that the people responsible for the language
have to handle:
- some way to process proposals for changes to the language. Everyone
envisions that some sort of vote of a large CL community will be
required to approve changes. (This has been true all along,
except for last-minute details.) So we are looking for a person
or persons to receive suggestions, distribute them for comment,
and conduct votes if appropriate. I suspect that this group
might also solict suggestions and possible make some themselves.
- some way to give authoritative answers to questions that call for an
interpretation of the language specification
- destribution of any decisions that result from these two processes
to all interested parties
- an archive of all decisions, and possible of all discussion
- a "delta document". This would represent all changes that will show
up in the next edition of the CL manual. I.e. it is with
respect to the most recently published edition of the CL manual.
- new editions of the CL manual. Initially this may happen as often
as once a year
- maintenance of online documentation. This would be used by builtin
help facilities, etc. This will require some negotiation with
Digital Press, as they currently hold a copyright for the
manual.
- licensing special editions of the manual. Vendors may want to
intersperse details of their implementation in the text, so that
the user has a single, integrated manual for Vendor X's CL.
Most people seem to feel that this is OK as long as the manual
contains the unadulterated text of the official CL manual, with
all additions being set off visibly (e.g. printed in a
contrasting color). They may also allow subsets to cut parts of
the CL manual, but this will require that there is a clear
disclaimer that this is not CL. Anyway, somebody is going to
have to set reprint policies and monitor what is going on. This
will also have to be done in conjunction with Digital Press.
- a test/validation suite.
- implementation notes
- a library of public-domain CL code (the "yellow pages" library)
- a group to vote on changes and matters of policy. Generally some
way of providing "legitimacy" to the whole process.
- trademarking of the language. We are not sure whether it is too
late to trademark CL. One proposal is to trademark CL-84,
CL-85, etc. The date would be associated with a test suite (and
probably also an edition of the manual - these would be issued
at the same time). There is no clear concensus that
trademarking is needed, but it should at least be looked into.
- budget for clerical support, mailings, and other expenses associated
with the above.
We have an interim arrangement to handle all of this for the next 6
months. A committee will make a proposal for a permanent organization
to take effect at the end of 6 months. Probably there will be another
CL workshop at that time. The CL mailing list will continue to be used
to take votes on major issues, and generally to represent the CL
community as a whole. This list may be split, as there seem to be some
people who are just random users, and do not want to (or should not)
participate in the design decisions. The gang of 5 will moderate the
mailing list, and will also continue to take somewhat of a leadership
role in technical matters, i.e. answering questions, coordinating
proposed changes, etc. This coordination includes maintaining archives,
the delta document, etc. They will investigate some of the other
issues, such as licensing the manual for online use and special
editions, trademarks, and preparation of an initial budget. (This budget
will probably be covered by ARPA.) They will try to do something about
the Yellow Pages library. (There is actually already one at CMU. Maybe
this will just continue for the interim period.) Committees were
appointed to propose extensions to the language in several important
areas (see below). The results will be discussed on the CL mailing
list. There is also a committee to propose a permanent organization.
It is likely that some funding will be needed for the 6 month interim,
if only to handle clerical support. There way a broad hint that the
Gang of 5 might find ARPA receptive to a proposal that ARPA fund this.
IV. Proposed extensions
No one was crazy enough to propose that we should come up with
extensions to CL on the spot during the meeting. Instead we tried to
agree on what areas are the most important to look into. Committees
volunteered to look into each of these areas. We hope that they will
propose extensions. I think most of us agree that the actual language
design is going to be done by individuals or very small groups in each
case. The committees are thus the people who want to be in on initial
discussions, and also people who are considering writing proposals or
parts of proposals. Here was the initial set of extensions proposed:
object-oriented programming
window support
error handling
multiprocessing support
graphics
iteration (e.g. some sort of macros for writing loops)
facilities to monitor the internal state of Lisp
interface to the surrounding system
networking
interface to database facilities
configuration and version management tools
pattern matching
calling foreign (non-Lisp) functions
destructuring
international character sets
program manipulation facilities
coercion among numerical types
storage management
We took a vote, giving each person 6 votes. Most of the above
received 0 to 4 votes. The only significant votes were for the
following items.
almost 100% - object-oriented programming
almost 100% - error handling
about 50% - display support (windows, etc.)
about 50% - calling foreign (non-Lisp) functions
about 33% - iteration
about 33% - graphics
These are the areas for which committees were set up.
V. Workstation/server architecture
A number of people expect that we will continue to have systems of
differing power. That is, in your office will be something for around
$15K. It will be able to handle CL. You will do a lot of your
development work on it. But when you want to process a lot of
real-world data, you will want a more powerful machine. These machines
would likely be $100K or more. The folks from ARPA seemed to feel that
configurations like this would be important for their Strategic
Computing projects.
The issue put before us was what sort of language facilities are needed
to support this. No one seemed to feel that we knew enough of this sort
of thing that we were ready to add such facilities to the language. Of
course individual researchers would make extensions in the course of
their research. But we would like to see several such projects before
adopting a particular design permanently.
VI. Multi-processing facilities
This discussion was somewhat similar to the previous one. We envision
multiprocessing as becoming more important as time goes on. Again, the
Strategic Computing project is likely to use this. The question is what
language facilities will be needed to support multiprocessing. No one
feels we know enough about this area to say at the moment. Brief
mention was made of several pieces of work in this area:
Gabriel's work at Stanford
Halstead's at MIT
Both of these are shared-memory.
the remote sensing project at CMU. Multiple PERQ's with CL.
Uses the facilities of the PERQ OS.
This is more like conventional networking.
BBN's butterfly project. Many 68000 systems in parallel, with a Lisp
Machine as a front end to supply the user interface. Both
the 68000's and the LM will use CL.
It is clear that there are not only many different approaches, but even
more than one basic model (shared memory and networking are sort of the
opposite ends of the spectrum). In the end we may need language
facilities to support both styles. But nobody is ready to say much at
the moment.
Anyone interested in working on multiprocessing support is invited to
send mail to RPG@SU-AI to be added to a mailing list.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Feb-85 0612 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #15
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 85 06:12:42 PST
Date: Tue 5 Feb 1985 23:30-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #15
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Wednesday, 6 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 15
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - LOOP Macro under CommonLisp & Relational Database System,
Games - Cubic,
Math - Inverse Laplace Transform Problem,
News - Recent Articles,
Report - Conditionals in Logic,
AI Tools - Chez Scheme,
Seminar - The Digital Orrery (Boston SICPLAN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 05 Feb 85 14:00:37 PST (Tue)
From: Steve Smith <ssmith%NRTC@USC-ECL.ARPA>
Subject: LOOP macro under CommonLisp
Has anybody hacked up the old MIT Loop macro to work under
vanilla CommonLisp (eg. DEC's CommonLisp)?
--Steve Smith (ssmith%nrtc@usc-ecl)
------------------------------
Date: 5 Feb 15:02:33 1985
From: des.allegra.btl@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Relational Database System
Does anyone have or know where to find a relational database
management system written in Zetalisp for the Symbolics 3600
Lisp Machine?
Thanks,
Douglas Stumberger
U.S. Post: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Room 3C-438
600 Mountain Ave.
Murray Hill, N.J. 07974
csnet: allegra!des%ucb-vax@csnet-relay.arpa
uucp: allegra!des
Phone: 201.582.5251
------------------------------
Date: 4 February 1985 1232-EST
From: Hans Berliner@CMU-CS-A
Subject: The game Cubic
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A few years ago someone proved that the game Cubic (4x4x4) tic-tac-toe
is a win for the first player. If anyone has a reference to this
paper I would very much appreciate getting it.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 4-Feb-85 13:49:53-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Points Arising.
Two points from Vol 3 # 11. The Symbolics stock price reminds me
on the Britsh Telecom share issue, where the price went from
50 pence to around 130 pence in the space of about two months.
(Bob Beckman is reported to be using a dog to figure the market,
`one bark for buy, two barks for sell'.)
Secondly, the transform in Vol 3 # 10 is not a Laplace transform
at all! It is really a Carson-Heaviside transform. (Thanks to all
the guys in 201 for pointing this out).
From Vol 3 #9 & 10, I believe requests for addition to the
net.math.symbolic mailing list should be sent to lseward@randgr.
Gordon Joly.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Feb 85 20:39:49-PST
From: Douglas Galbraith <GALBRAITH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: answer to Inverse Laplace Transform problem
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Several people have asked for the answer to the transform problem I put on
the bboard about a week ago. So here's the solution for all of those who
asked. (Sorry about the delay. I'm only here two days a week. So I
don't get to my mail very often.) Just to remind everyone, the original
problem was:
1 1
F(S) = --- * ----------------------------------
S exp[-A*sqrt(S)] + exp[A*sqrt(S)]
The inverse Laplace transform of this equation is:
+infinity
-- (-1)↑N
f(t) = 1 + PI/4 * > -------- * exp[-(2N-1)↑2*t*PI↑2/(4*A↑2)]
-- 2N-1
N=1
I solved it with the help of the "Mathematical Handbook of Formulas and
Tables" by Murray R. Speigel from the Schaum's outline series. The inverse
transform is number 32.153 on page 171.
For those who want to try it on their own, here are three hints.
HINT #1: Convert to infinite series and infinite products.
HINT #2: The original equation is also equal to:
1 1
F(S) = --- * -----------------
S cosh[A*sqrt(S)]
G[sqrt(S)]
HINT #3: The inverse Laplace Transform of ---------- is:
S
infinity
/
1 |
---------- | exp[-u↑2/(4*t)]*g(u)*du
sqrt[pi*t] |
/
0
where g(u) is the inverse transform of G(S).
The original problem is a simplified version of a general equation I'm
working on:
1 1 cosh[B*sqrt(S)]
F(S) = --- - --- * ---------------------------------------------
S S cosh[A*sqrt(S)] + C*sqrt(S)*sinh[A*sqrt(S)]
where "A", "B", and "C" are real constants, and "S" is the variable. I've
solved it for C=0, and I'm now working on the non-zero case. The
general case looks like it's going to keep me busy a while.
Good luck,
Douglas Galbraith
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 85 04:59:13 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
Electronic News Monday January 28, 1985 Page 11
The European Economic Community Commission approved 104 projects submitted
to the Euyropean Strategic Program for Research and Development in Information
Technology (Esprit).
Although, they probably approved several projects of interest to AIer's,
the only such project mentioned was a contract for "a cognitive simulator
for user interface design" involving ITT of Great Britain, Logos Projetti of
Italy and the Applied Psychology Unit of Cambridge University in Britain.
The DEC Professional, January 1985, Page 82
Shape of Machines to Come
Discusses clustering, pipelines, parallel processors, dataflow architecture,
symbolic manipulation, the Japanese ICOT effort, the MCC and DARPA.
Although most of this material would be known by most, if not all of
this audience; of particular interest is a list of some projects at
DEC and IBM.
AT DEC, they have 35 separate AI/expert system projects. XSITE helps
site planners prepare customer sites for new VAX installations. AI SPEAR
helps DEC Field Service Engineers diagnose and prevent TU-78 tape drive
failures. They also have an intelligent DCL interpreter and cDx which helps
VAX managers diagnose system crashes.
Dec is working on an 'AI Engine,' a high speed RISC system. It is rumored
that DEC will be unveiling a parallel processor or AI machine based on the
single chip MICRO-VAX II 'in the 1988 timeframe.'
IBM alledgedly is marketing Epistle which reads electronic mail and summarizes
messages. IBM is rumored to be soon announceing PROLOG.
Also mentions the National Bureau of Standards Center for Manufacturing
Engineering which has a 5000 square foot fully automated machine shop.
Computer, December 1984
"Top-Down Construction of 3-D Mechanical Object Shapes from Engineering
Drawings.", page 32
Discusses a natural language interface which assists with disambiguating
conventional orthographic projections which are being converted into
Constructive Solid Geometry representations.
"Alvey reconsiders complexity of Expert Systems" Page 106
In the report of Alex d'Agapeyeff to the British Alvey
many expert systems were developed at low cost by people
not trained in Artificial Intelligence. Often they were developed without
benefit of expert system development tools and even in such languages as
FORTRAN and BASIC.
Examples are:
A system to analyze crash dumps (developed by two knowledge engineers and
one domain expert in 20 calendar weeks). It fully analyzed 91 per cent
of the dumps that the expert was able to fully analyze and partially
analyzed 57% of those that the expert was able to partially analyze.
British Telecom developed a system in MICRO-PROLOG on a Z-80 system
for analyzing PABX power supply problems.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Jan 85 17:26:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Conditionals in Logic
[Extracted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A new CSLI Report by Jon Barwise, ``The Situation in Logic--II:
Conditionals and Conditional Information'' (Report No. CSLI--85--21), has
been published. To obtain a copy of this report write to Dikran
Karagueuzian, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford 94305 or send net mail to Dikran
at SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 85 00:24:27 est
From: Kent Dybvig <dyb%unc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Chez Scheme
=> Chez Scheme
Chez Scheme is an implementation of Scheme for Vaxes
running 4.2 Bsd Unix. Chez Scheme supports all required and
most optional features of the anticipated Scheme standard.
The first Chez Scheme release will include an extensive
reference manual. A Chez Scheme tutorial is in preparation
for later releases.
Features of Scheme:
o Clean, concise dialect of Lisp
o Lexically scoped (as is Common Lisp)
o Full function closures (first-class, full funarg)
o Tail-recursion reliably translated into iteration
o Full upward/downward continuations
Features of Chez Scheme:
o Incremental native-code (Vax object code) compiler
o Flexible user interface
o Fast-loading compiled files
o Very fast arbitrary precision integer and rational
arithmetic
o Programmable exception handlers
o Support for multi-tasking (timer interrupts,
continuations)
o String and vector operations
o Macros and structures
o Engines (a process abstraction)
Application programs distributed with the first release
of Chez Scheme include a set operation package, a logic
programming subsystem, a lazy-cons facility, and a generic
matrix, vector and scalar multiplication package.
Faster than many Lisp systems, Chez Scheme may be the
fastest Scheme available. On the Vax 11/780, Chez Scheme is
competitive with benchmarks reported for Franz Lisp and
Digital Common Lisp at last summer's AAAI conference in
Austin, TX. For example, Chez Scheme runs the "Tak"
benchmark in 3.4 cpu seconds and the "Deriv" benchmark in
21.9 cpu seconds. The code tested contained no
declarations, used generic arithmetic, and had no inlined
calls. No separate compilation phase is necessary: all code
loaded into Chez Scheme is compiled incrementally.
Chez Scheme is available for mid-March distribution to
US educational institutions only. We will send a license
agreement to interested parties. There is a $400
distribution fee. We are not yet able to do foreign or
commercial distributions, but contact us if you are
interested.
Write for a copy of the license agreement and ordering
information to:
R. Kent Dybvig
Department of Computer Science
New West Hall (035-A)
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
USA
decvax!mcnc!unc!dyb (usenet)
dyb.unc@Csnet-Relay (ARPANET)
------------------------------
Date: 4 Feb 1985 08:06:17-EST
From: psm@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: Boston SICPLAN seminar
Boston SICPLAN (Special Interest Committee on Programming Languages) is
a local affiliate of the ACM SIGPLAN group and vaguely associated with and
chartered by the Greater Boston area chapter of the ACM. It normally meets
once a month, usually on the first Thursday, almost always at 8 p.m., and
normally at either BBN or Intermetrics. Its talks are often of interest
to people working in the fields of programming languages and compilers,
environments, artificial intelligence, and data/knowledge base management.
Past speakers over the last 16 months have included Marvin Minsky, Seymour
Pappert, Bob Morgan, Pam Zave, Doug Hofstadter, Richard LeBlanc, Barry Boehm,
Adele Goldberg, Mahadevan Ganapathi, Frank Belz, Norm DeLisle, Mark Miller,
Richard Gabriel, Maurice Wilkes, Tom Love, and Ray Buhr.
Its next talk is scheduled for this Thursday, February 7:
ACM GREATER BOSTON CHAPTER SICPLAN
Thursday, February 7, 1985
8 P.M.
Bolt Beranek and Newman, new auditorium
70 Fawcett St., Cambridge
The Design of the Digital Orrery
by Gerald Jay Sussman
MIT
I will talk about the Orrery, a special computer for high-speed,
high-precision, orbital mechanics computations. The people who were
involved in the design and construction of the Orrery are James H.
Applegate, Michael R. Douglas, Yekta Gursel, Peter Hunter, Charles L.
Seitz and Gerald Jay Sussman. On the problems the Orrery was designed
to solve, it achieves approximately 10 Mflops in about one cubic foot
of space while consuming 150 watts of power. The specialized parallel
architecture of the Orrery, which is well matched to orbital mechanics
problems, is the key to obtaining such high performance.
In this talk I will explain the scientific reasons for building the
Orrery. I will discuss the design, construction, and programming of
the Orrery. I will show how the design of a computer is really a
problem of software engineering. I will also show a few preliminary
results of a 110 million year integration of the outer planets using
the Orrery.
ACM GREATER BOSTON CHAPTER SICPLAN
Dear Colleague,
Our February speaker, Gerry Sussman, is a professor at MIT,
where he is very active in AI research. He is probably best
known for his work on the Scheme dialect of Lisp and for the book
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, which he
coauthored with Harold Abelson and is now using for what has
become a fairly famous programming course for incoming MIT
freshmen. The Orrery system that he will describe in his talk is
an attempt to investigate the extent to which massively parallel
computer architectures and algorithms can be used to help solve
hard scientific problems.
Mitch Wand, who is currently visiting Brandeis, has agreed to
give our March talk. The talk on his Semantic Prototyping System
is tentatively scheduled for March 7 in the Intermetrics atrium.
Our group customarily meets informally for dinner at Joyce
Chen's restaurant, 390 Rindge Ave., Cambridge at 6:00 P.M. (just
before the meeting). If you wish to come, please call Carolyn
Elson at Intermetrics 661-1840 as early as possible so we can
make the appropriate dinner reservation.
Peter Mager
chairperson, Boston SICPLAN
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Feb-85 0025 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #16
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Feb 85 00:25:14 PST
Date: Thu 7 Feb 1985 22:21-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #16
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 8 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 16
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Scheme for MS-DOS & IBM VM/CMS Lisp & SUN PSL &
ADA and LISP Standards,
Applications - Command and Control,
Seminars - The Totality of Knowledge (SU) &
Logic and Functional Programming (CSLI) &
AI and Distributed Computing (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 18:22:48 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Scheme for MS-DOS
Is there a source of documentation for Scheme, and an implementation for
small MS-DOS machines? Would appreciate any information on this topic.
Rich.
AFSCF/XRP
PO Box 3430
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3430
(408) 744-6427 AV: 799-6427
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 9:04:33 EST
From: Pierre duPont <pdupont@bbn-spca>
Subject: IBM VM/CMS Lisp
I am trying to locate information about what Lisp interpreters
and/or compilers are available on IBM VM/CMS mainframes. So far,
the only one I have identified is from IBM, and as yet I know
very little about it.
I am interested in any flavor of lisp, preferrably Common Lisp, and
would like to get the names of companies, people, or whatever,
who have experience with or know about VM/CMS Lisps.
Thanks,
- Pierre
pdupont@bbn-unix.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 06 Feb 85 11:59:58 PST (Wed)
From: peck@sri-spam
Subject: AI, Lisp, Graphics on SUN computers?
I would like to hear from anyone using SUN computers
who can supply answers or comments on any of these issues:
Is Franz the only (best) lisp available?
Has anyone used the Maryland Flavors to create useful tools/extensions?
Any support for sun graphics (windows, menus,etc) a la Interlisp-D?
Any differential reports of Prolog (Quintus) vs Lisp ?
Any obvious alternative to SUN? (vendor in same class (Tektronix?))
Worst or hidden problems, pitfalls, gotcha's, etc.
> Can real AI development (even applications) be supported on SUN's? <
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 14:36:22 MST
From: kessler%utah-orion@utah-cs (Robert Kessler)
Subject: Re: AI, Lisp, Graphics on SUN computers? (Long Message)
> I would like to hear from anyone using SUN computers
> who can supply answers or comments on any of these issues:
> Is Franz the only (best) lisp available?
We have finally finished porting Portable Standard LISP (PSL) to yet
another machine. This time it is now running on the SUN. Initial
timing measurements indicate that its speed is somewhere between a
Vax 750 and 780 (all running PSL), and about twice as fast as Franz running
the REDUCE algebra system test on Suns. We are now running the Gabriel
benchmarks to discover where it fits in the set. For more details
see the announcement at the end of this message.
> Has anyone used the Maryland Flavors to create useful tools/extensions?
PSL provides support for a simple flavors package that seems quite
useful. However, the current version has no inheritance.
> Any support for sun graphics (windows, menus,etc) a la Interlisp-D?
We have oload working which allows you to call externally compiled
routines (like other c sources). So the interface should be easy to
add (but we haven't done it).
> Any differential reports of Prolog (Quintus) vs Lisp ?
None that I know of.
> Any obvious alternative to SUN? (vendor in same class (Tektronix?))
PSL also runs on Apollo's and HP Series 200 (both 68K based machines).
We have also ported a simple "educational" version to the 128K
Macintosh which is used in a beginning programming class. We plan on
moving at least the Standard LISP subset and compiler to the 512K mac
(so if you want to go really cheap...... :-) )
> Worst or hidden problems, pitfalls, gotcha's, etc.
We had a lot of problems with the Sun port. Some were hardware
related, others were differences between Unix 4.2 on the Sun and on the
Vax. After we get some more experience using PSL on the machine, maybe
we could report more.
> > Can real AI development (even applications) be supported on SUN's? <
I think so, as long as you can get one with enough memory. Some of our
applications running on HP 9836's (which doesn't have virtual memory)
really fly (better than a 780 in speed). So, memory is really a key to
a fast machine.
>
Bob.
PSL 3.2 for the SUN Workstation
We are pleased to announce that Portable Standard LISP (PSL) version
3.2 is now available for the Sun workstation. PSL is about the power,
speed and flavor of Franz LISP or MACLISP, with growing influence
from Common LISP. It is recognized as an efficient and portable
LISP implementation with many more capabilities than described in
the 1979 Standard LISP Report. PSL's main strength is its
portability across many different systems, including: Vax BSD
Unix, Vax VMS, Extended Addressing DecSystem-20 Tops-20, Apollo
DOMAIN Aegis, and HP Series 200. A version for the IBM-370 is in
beta test and two Cray versions are being used on an experimental
basis. [...]
PSL is in heavy use at Utah, and by collaborators at Hewlett-Packard,
Rand, Stanford, Columbia and over 250 other sites. Many existing
programs and applications have been adapted to PSL including
Hearn's REDUCE computer algebra system and GLISP, Novak's object
oriented LISP dialect. These are available from Hearn and Novak.
For more information, contact:
Utah Symbolic Computation Group Secretary
University of Utah - Dept. of Computer Science
3160 Merrill Engineering Building
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
ARPANET: CRUSE@UTAH-20
USENET: utah-cs!cruse
------------------------------
Date: 7-Feb-85 19:41:45-PST
From: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
Subject: Lisp standards?
One correction; Ada subsets are NOT approved by DoD; see ANSI/MIL-STD
1815a-1983, section 1.1.2. There are no approved subsets, and no approved
supersets. Before there were any validated Ada compilers, the AJPO was
somewhat tolerant of the use of the Ada name regarding compilers that
were incomplete, but the official policy appears on the inside cover of the
Ada standard; ``Describing, advertising, or promoting a language processor
as an ``Ada'' processor is equivalent to making a voluntary statement of
conformance to ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A. ... Those persons advertising or
otherwise promoting a language processor asserted as being a standard Ada
processor ... are required to provide the AJPO with evidence sufficient
to demonstrate conformance with the Ada standard. ... Misuse of the trademark
(Ada) may lead to legal action.''
That seems to cover it.
As for Common Lisp, the amusing thing about the Lisp community is that
all the recent dialects are being promoted as ``standard''; we have
Common Lisp, Portable Standard Lisp, and the old Interlisp. None of these
are ANSI or ISO standards. All are huge. And all assume an environment
suitable for program development (as opposed to an embedded system).
What we really need is an agreed-upon minimal Lisp in which portable
programs can be written if desired, and for which everyone agrees that the
semantics of the primitives are uniform. Larger dialects would be supersets
of this base. As yet, we don't even have agreement on the semantics of
(car nil).
John Nagle
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 1985 1001-EST (Wednesday)
From: trwatf!maverick@seismo.ARPA (Mark D. Grover)
Subject: re: Command and Control applications
In response to Araman's question, there certainly *are*
applications of expert systems in Command and Control. The prob-
lem (which you've probably already run into) is that researchers
of this application rarely publish anything which would be useful
to other designers. In my view, this is due to a combination of
the competition among defense contractors, the practical (ap-
plied vs. basic research) flavor of the work, and the lack of
return-value from publishing to the sponsors of the work.
Occasionally there are write-ups in the military service jour-
nals, but the only place you'll find information that is
truly helpful to designers will be in the traditional AI journals
(for those applications which have not yet hit the opera-
tional stage). Of course the government AI labs publish useful
basic research of good quality, but such systems have gen-
erally not been developed for the rigorous conditions of an
operational environment. Anything that has reached that
stage, I'd love to know about. The closest thing I know is Infer-
ence Corp's Navex system for NASA using ART. (Aviation Week,
9/17/84, p. 79). TRW has produced fielded prototypes for certain
C3I applications but has not yet published details.
I face these problems constantly (both in trying to do
research and figuring out where, when and what I should pub-
lish). I would favor a government clearinghouse (like NTIS)
specifically for research software distribution (especially
half-baked solutions that could be picked up and improved by oth-
ers). This should work at all appropriate classification levels,
but unclassified software could be stressed.
Most of the C3I work with which I am familiar
relies heavily on planning, constraint checking, and deduction.
Other than that, I can only say that the success has
been mixed. I believe this is due more to the paucity of
researchers working on fieldable defense solutions than to
the maturity of AI. There is much that is promising in produc-
ing intelligent adjuncts to command, and we are working
seriously to provide them.
-- MDG Mark D. Grover
Advanced Technology Facility
TRW Defense Systems Group
2751 Prosperity Ave.
Fairfax, VA 22031
(703) 876-8184, -8036
ARPA: trwatf!maverick@SEISMO
UUCP: ...!{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!maverick
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 10:09:17-PST
From: Renate Kempf <HPP-SECRETARY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Totality of Knowledge (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, February 8, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Pierre Bierre
Clairvoyant Systems
sensory learning machine research
ABSTRACT: The Totality of Knowledge
Would it be possible, in a few words or a single illustration, to
capture and enclose all the knowledge both existing now and in the
indefinite future?
The field of AI stands to benefit by coming to grips with the totality
of that which it claims to study. Having a way to once-and-for-all
embrace all knowledge will help AI researchers blaze the trail beyond
limited-domain systems in future work. The practical payoff will be
knowledge systems where the user steers the conversation at the
human-machine interface without running up against artificially
imposed domain boundaries. Once more, the same fluidity will apply to
knowledge transmission among intelligent machines.
Come munch on lunch while Pierre attempts to throw a lasso around
everything that will ever be known.
[For a detailed introduction to this week's SIGLUNCH topic, see "The
Professor's Challenge," The AI Magazine, Winter 1985, pp. 60-70. I
would take the central thesis to be that the future of AI is in
learning systems that build up concepts from their own experiences
(including formal instruction) rather than in expert systems with
knowledge bases supplied by AI theoreticians. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Logic and Functional Programming (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
2:15 p.m., 2/14 CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall ``Logic and Functional Programming''
Room G-19 Joseph Goguen, CSLI
Discussion will be led by Fernando Pereira
We begin by reviewing what logic and functional programming are, indicating
basic aspects of their programming styles, applications and implementations.
We then show how to enrich logic programming with some features of current
interest in programming methodology, maintaining both logical rigor and
efficient implementation. The first and most important feature is
functional programming; full logical equality provides an elegant way to
combine the power of logic programming (including logical variables,
pattern matching and automatic backtracking) with functional programing
(supporting functions and their composition, as well as strong typing and
user definable abstract data types). An interesting new feature that
emerges here is a complete algorithm for solving equations containing
logical variables; this algorithm uses ``narrowing,'' a technique from the
theory of rewrite rules. The underlying logical system here is many-sorted
Horn clause logic *with* equality. A useful refinement is ``subsorts,''
which can be seen as an ordering relation on the set of sorts (usually
called ``types'') of data. Finally, we provide generic modules by using
methods developed in the specification language Clear. These features make
up a language called Eqlog; we illustrate them with a program for the
well-known Missionaries and Cannibals problem, and with some simple
examples from natural language processing. --Joseph Goguen
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 1985 16:31 EST (Wed)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - AI and Distributed Computing (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Gul A. Agha
Artificial Intelligence and Distributed Computing
TUESDAY 2/12/85 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
To take advantage of the parallelism available in distributed systems,
many programming languages incorporate concurrency. Unfortunately,
distributed systems often exhibit pathological behavior: Problems such
as divergence, deadlock, and the Brock-Ackerman anomaly make it
difficult to program using concurrent constructs. The talk will
describe a model for actors which addresses such problems.
Actors are particularly relevant to computation in A.I. For example,
actors permit dynamic reconfigurability and extensibility. We will
show how the actor model supports abstraction and compositionality in
the context of open, evolving systems. A simple actor language,
called SAL, will be defined for illustrative purposes.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Feb-85 1923 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #17
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 85 19:23:25 PST
Date: Sat 9 Feb 1985 17:06-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #17
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Saturday, 9 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 17
Today's Topics:
Games - Cubic,
Machine Translation - German to English Translator,
Information Science - Sublists & DDC & Telesophy Project &
Xerox Notecards & Online Dictionary,
News - Recent Articles & AI on TV,
Culture - AI Sociology & The Sirens of Titan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 06 Feb 85 0936 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: The game Cubic
The work you refer to was done by Oren Patashnik who is now a Computer Science
PhD student at Stanford. I forwarded the message to him.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 8 Feb 85 09:09:20-PST
From: Mark Kent <KENT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: German to English translator?
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
This may be silly, but I feel that somewhere there must exist a German to
English translator program. Nothing fancy (no Artificial Intelligence
required) but just a word for word literal translation. The resulting
phrases need not make sense.
This could be used as follows: suppose you had a book on disk in German,
and you were going to translate it to English (and you are fluent in both
German and English) then it would save a lot of typing if most of the
words were already in the english file. Even if some phrases were garbage,
it would be easy to kill the line(s) and type the desired phrase.
Anyone know of such a program on any system?
Thanks,
-mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 85 12:57 EST
From: Ed Fox <fox%vpi.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Sublists - response to Laws msg of 30 Jan and request for
wishes
Ken Laws mentioned the fact that people wish to have portions of the
AILIST digests sent to them. This is essentially a filtering operation,
related to the SDI (selective dissemination of information) problem
being handled by many information retrieval systems.
At VPI we are presently involved in a research project related to this,
and welcome comments and involvement. The idea is to study electronic
mail messages and digests like AILIST, and to implement means to allow
people to find useful information either in new issues or retrospectively
by searching past issues. We will build an intelligent automatic analysis
system that will create knowledge representations for AILIST messages, and a
search system to allow users to find messages in the collection. Users
will be able to define profiles, describing what they are interested in,
and each new digest will then be split up so that most relevant items
are presented first, and least relevant items are either discarded or
made to appear later in a ranked list. Users will also be able to ask
specific questions and be given a list of messages that are possibly
relevant.
To make this realistic, we need user profiles and questions, and
in order to see if automatic methods perform properly, need users to
indicate which messages are indeed relevant to each question. We welcome
specific questions and interest statements. Perhaps more important at
this time, however, would be to have wish lists like:
find messages that announce seminars or conferences
recognize RFPs or contract work requests
list papers cited about a specific topic
extract bibliographic items or newspaper extracts relating to ...
Later on we will have a crude version of the planned system running
and will be better able to handle specific queries and possibly let
people try to use it.
This investigation relates to retrieval for offices, or for mail
or conferencing systems. Please send comments, wishes, suggestions,
etc. to fox.vpi@csnet-relay
Thanks, Ed Fox.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 85 21:01:29 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE>
Subject: DDC
For those of you with a clearance and a certified "need to know",
the Defense Documentation Center (DDC) serves as a repository of
DoD technical (and I suppose other) information. Both DoD agencies &
their contractors are encouraged to use it, and they provide a suite
of bibliographic services as does NASA. NASA libraries are open to
the public, and in the Bay area Ames (at Moffett) is a treasure trove.
Taxes support these services, so use them.
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Feb 85 23:59:08 GMT
From: bambi!schatz@topaz (Bruce R. Schatz)
Subject: description of Telesophy Project
[Forwarded from the WorkS list by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following project may be of interest to readers of net.works :
Telesophy literally means "wisdom at a distance". The goal of the
Telesophy Project is to build a system which makes obtaining
information as transparent as telephony makes obtaining sound. The
system could be viewed as a "WorldNet" browser, which lets one
navigate an underlying information space. The information units in
the space can contain any type of data and the system hides their
actual physical location. In addition to these retrieval facilities,
there are also storage facilities for generation of new items from
old. The system thus supports the notion of an Information
Community, permitting the users to browse for AnyThing AnyWhere and
share their findings with others.
These notions are old desires, undoubtably familiar to the readers of
this newsgroup. What is new is that these problems seem finally
about to break because of coming mass availability of new technology.
In particular, because of the speed and transmission characteristics
of optical fibers, it is now feasible to consider the idea of
building what is logically a single computer physically distributed
over a wide area. This potentially worldwide single computer
provides the hardware upon which an operating environment permitting
the transparent fetching and manipulation of uniform objects can be
built.
My dream is a worldwide information community, a greatly generalized
USENET. I work for Bell Communications Research, the central
research organization for the local telephone companies (like Bell
Labs before the divestiture). The fiber optic telephone network of
the near future will likely obtain end-to-end speeds much closer to
gigabits/second than the current kilobits. To utilize this, I have
been investigating the architecture of a Telesophy System. Thus far,
a long paper has been written describing the underlying philosophical
and technological issues. I am now actively seeking colleagues to
help build a first version on a local-area network of Apollo
workstations. For more information, please contact me at one of the
following addresses (a fuller description has been posted to
net.jobs):
Bruce Schatz
physical: Bell Communications Research
435 South Street, Room 2A275
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
phone: (201) 829-4744
USENET: bellcore!bambi!schatz
ARPAnet: bellcore!bambi!schatz@BERKELEY
------------------------------
Date: Sat 2 Feb 85 13:14:20-EST
From: Wayne McGuire <MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Xerox NoteCards
[Forwarded from the Human-Nets Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Apropos the recent discussion about idea processors and general
purpose personal assistants appears below a message from Info-Mac
about Xerox NoteCards. Can anyone here offer any further information
about this product?
Date: 24 Jan 1985 7:05:38 EST (Thursday)
From: Mark Zimmerman <mex101@mitre>
Subject: Xerox NoteCards on Mac?
To: info-mac@sumex
I just saw a demo of Xerox's NoteCards system and want to tell
people about it, so we can start working on a version for the Mac!
NoteCards is like an extension of the desktop metaphor: your
screen has windows on electronic index cards, each of which can
contain text, pictures, etc., and links to other cards. Links
can be of various types: references/sourcing, argumentation,
proof, refutation, consequences, etc. Cards can be filed in boxes,
which can contain other boxes, etc. One can display graphically the
links between cards, to get an overall view of the information, or
zoom in to look at all the gory details when needed.
Esther Dyson wrote about NoteCards in the 31 Dec 84 issue of her
newsletter, RELease1.0 ... see that for further impressions.
Perhaps if there are experts at Xerox PARC or elsewhere listening
they can correct/extend my comments.
The Mac's TE and windowing should do a fair fraction of the work
for a Mac version/analog of NoteCards ... I am dreaming about
writing up a first hack at it in MacFORTH.
NoteCards is sort of a multidimensional ThinkTank (or rather,
ThinkTank is a 1-dimensional shadow of NoteCards) ... it looks
likely to be a great tool for gathering/organizing/presenting
complicated data. (Besides other features described above, one
can ask NoteCards to search along various types of links to find
various items, reorganize links, embed pointers to other cards
within the text/picture on a card, etc.)
Best, Zimmermann at MITRE
------------------------------
Date: 11 Dec 84 08:05:34 EST
From: Don <Watrous@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Online dictionary server at SRI-NIC
[Forwarded from the Rutgers BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[I have only recently regained access to this bboard, so this message
has been delayed for a couple of months. It describes a software
system that I had not run across before. -- KIL]
If you have Arpanet-Access privs, you can now access an online copy
of Webster's 7th dictionary. The program's name is WEBSTER. It can
be used to get definitions or to check spelling. Note: escape and
question mark work!
Don
[I have reproduced most of the associated help file below. -- KIL]
Invoke the [Rutgers] program by "@WEBSTER word-to-define" or
@WEBSTER<return>
Word:
If the word is found, Webster will then provide the complete dictionary
entry for the word including definitions, pronunciation, and derivation.
If the specified word was not found, Webster will try to find close
matches, as if you spelled the word wrong. The possibilities are
numbered and typed out. To select one of them, you can just give its
number.
Additionally, Webster can match words using wildcards. The character
"%" in a word mean match exactly one character, so "w%n" matches "win",
"won", "wan", etc. The character "*" matches ZERO OR MORE characters,
so "a*d" matches "ad", "and", "abound", "absentminded", and so on.
Any number of wildcards can be used, and in any arrangement.
<escape> and "?" are used the same way in Webster as in most programs.
<escape> tries to complete what you have typed so far, and "?" lists
those words that match your partial word.
If what you have given is a unique abbreviation for a word, <escape>
will typed out the rest of the word. If what you typed is ambigious,
it beeps and does nothing.
For example,
Word: plur? Maybe you mean:
-----
1. plural 2. pluralism 3. plurality 4. pluralization
5. pluralize 6. pluri- 7. pluriaxial
Word: pluri? Maybe you mean:
------
1. pluri- 2. pluriaxial
Word: pluria<escape>xial
--------------
Where the underlined parts are typed by the user, and rest by Webster.
Note that wildcards and <escape>/? can be used together, for example
Word: plu*x<escape>
-------------
Word: pluriaxial
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 85 04:44:08 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
Fribourg, Laurent Oriented equational clauses as a programming language
J. Logic Programming 1(1984) 2 165-177
Tseitlin, GE Structured programming in symbolic multiprocesing
Cybernetics (19) 1983 no 5 614-625
Oscar E. Lanford Computer Assisted proofs in analysis Mathematical Physics
VII Phys. A 124 (1984) no 1-3 465-470
Science 85, March
Machinations of Thought Pages 38-45
General Article on AI with emphasis on discussion of question "Could a machine
think?"
The Black Knight of AI Page 46-51
Article about Richard Dreyfus, who is a philosopher who is arguing that
machines cannot think and there is something called intuition that
cannot be captured by a computer.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 10:28:34 pst
From: Craig Cornelius <cwc@diablo>
Subject: AI article in Science 85
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The newest issue of Science 85 contains two articles on AI, with
vignettes on two Stanford profs: Bruce Buchanan and Terry Winograd.
It's interesting reading.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 8 Feb 85 03:03:38-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: AI on TV (in NEW TECH on PBS)
KLRU, the local PBS affiliate, has recently started a very interesting
program at 5pm Sunday afternoons, titled NEW TECH.
Last Sunday, Feb 3, mainly concentrated on projects of Kurzweil Enterprises.
one of the 3 Kurzweil companies seems to concentrate on text-readers, and the
work being discussed mentioned a reader under development and test which can
read over 100 fonts at amazing speeds.
A second company is producing electronic musical equipment, and Mr. Moog of
Moog-synthesizer fame has recently joined Kurzweil. Stevie Wonder was
extensively featured as he serves as kind of a "guinea-pig" for the company.
He is using model #1 of their synthesizers to produce his music and his
recent song "The Woman in Red" was produced by him on this equipment. Given
that Stevie is blind, being able to produce all his own sound-tracks and
mixing the results is a considerable feat. Special I/O devices for the
use of the handicapped are being developed thanks to Kurzweil's support
of Stevie Wonder. Another song by Wonder used in the feature was:
"Having Computer Fun".
I noted down a reference to "CompuServe" and "The Source Public Area 125 Dired"
but I only remember now that something is being discussed in these 2
commercial online electronic media, relevant to the musical equipment.
If you have a video-recorder, this show is definitely worth recording while
you're out having fun in the park (-:
PS: my TV-program for Thursday, Feb 7, showed as topic for the Donahue-show
"Computer Sub-culture". well, it wasn't on, postponed it seems due
to more a more "urgent" topic: the New York subway-vigilante.
I am trying to find out when this topic will be discussed.
thought some of you fellow-TV-junkies might be interested
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 10:03:24-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: A Sociological Look at AI Research
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is the introduction to an article by James Fleck which appeared
in Sociology of the Sciences, Volume VI, 1982, pp.169-217. The title of the
article is Development and Establishment in Artificial Intelligence.
In this paper, I discuss the role played by scientific establishments in the
development of a particular scientific specialty, Artificial Intelligence, a
computer-related area which takes as its broad aim, the construction of computer
programs that model aspects of intelligent behaviour. As with any discussion
of a scientific specialty, the identification of what is involved is not
unproblematic, and the above serves as an indication rather that a definition.
While the term Artificial Intelligence is used in a variety of ways, there is
a discernable group (perhaps approaching the degree of commonality to be called
a community) of researchers who recognize the term as descriptive of a certain
sort of work, and who, if they themselves are not willing to be directly
labelled by the term, can locate themselves with respect to it.
Unfortunately, there is little or no commonly available literature that
systematically charts the scope of this area. It is worthwhile, therefore,
to consider the distinctive socio-cognitive characteristics of research in
AI as a prelude to a fairly specific discussion of the social and institutional
processes involved in the development of the area, thus providing a basis
for exploring the usefulness and applicabiligy of the concept of establishment.
The article includes an interesting chart showing the movement of AI researchers
during the 1960's and 1970's among the main centers of AI research: SRI, CMU,
Stanford, and MIT. If you are interested in this article, I have a copy
of it in the Math/CS Library.
Harry Llull
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Feb 85 18:42:28-EST
From: Wayne McGuire <MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: ←The Sirens of Titan←
I recently read for the first time Kurt Vonnegut's ←The Sirens of
Titan←, and came across the following spooky, dystopian view of AI:
Once upon a time on Tralfamadore there were creatures who weren't
anything like machines. They weren't dependable. They weren't
efficient. They weren't predictable. They weren't durable. And
these poor creatures were obsessed by the idea that everything that
existed had to have a purpose, and that some purposes were higher than
others.
These creatures spent most of their time trying to find out what
their purpose was. And every time they found out what seemed to be a
purpose of themselves, the purpose seemed so low that the creatures
were filled with disgust and shame.
And, rather than serve such a low purpose, the creatures would
make a machine to serve it. This left the creatures free to serve
higher purposes. But whenever they found a higher purpose, the
purpose still wasn't high enough.
So machines were made to serve higher purposes, too.
And the machines did everything so expertly that they were
finally given the job of finding out what the highest purpose of the
creatures could be.
The machines reported in all honesty that the creatures couldn't
really be said to have any purpose at all.
The creatures thereupon began slaying each other because they
hated purposeless things above all else.
And they discovered that they weren't even very good at slaying.
So they turned that job over to the machines, too. And the machines
finished up the job in less time than it takes to say, "Tralfamadore."
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. The Sirens of Titan. New York: Dell Publishing
Co., 1959 (1976 printing). Pp. 274-275.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Feb-85 0207 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #18
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 85 02:07:45 PST
Date: Sat 9 Feb 1985 22:56-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #18
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 10 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 18
Today's Topics:
Seminars - The Bertrand Constraint Language (Oregon) &
Insights on Searching (CMU) &
Motion Planning Algorithms (SU) &
Triangle Tables for Robot Actions (SU) &
Robot Mind-Body Synapse (CSLI),
Conferences - Genetic Algorithms &
Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 7 Feb 85 15:03:05 PST
From: wm@tekchips
Subject: Seminar - The Bertrand Constraint Language (Oregon)
Oregon Graduate Center
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Colloquium
February 22, 3:30 pm, Main Seminar Room
Bertrand, a General Purpose Constraint Language
Wm Leler
Computer Research Laboratory
Tektronix, Inc.
Constraint languages and constraint satisfaction
techniques are making the problem solving abilities of
the computer available to a wider audience. For
example, simple spread-sheet languages such as VisiCalc
allow many different financial modeling problems to be
solved without resorting to programming. In a
conventional language the programmer must specify a
step-by-step procedure for the language interpreter to
follow. In a constraint language, programming is a
descriptive task. The user specifies a set of
relationships, called constraints, and it is up to the
constraint satisfaction system to satisfy these
constraints. Unfortunately, constraint satisfaction
systems have been very difficult to build.
Bertrand is a general purpose language designed for
building constraint satisfaction systems. Constraints
are solved using rewrite rules, which are invoked by
pattern matching. Bertrand is similar in expressive
power to relational languages such as Prolog, but
without any procedural semantics. Its lack of
procedural semantics makes Bertrand especially
attractive for execution on parallel processors.
This talk will review several example constraint
satisfaction systems built using Bertrand with
applications in graphics, design, and modeling. There
will also be some discussion of the language issues
involved in the design of Bertrand.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Feb 85 18:49:38 EST
From: Steven.Shafer@CMU-CS-IUS
Subject: Seminar - Insights on Searching (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Tyson@SRI-AI.]
Type: AI Seminar
Speaker: Hans Berliner
Topic: Superpuzz and Some Insights on Searching
Dates: 12-Feb-85
Time: 3:30 pm
Place: WeH 5409
Most solutions in any complex domain require some non-intuitive
moves that violate good heuristic rules. When a combination of search
procedure and evaluation function requires that the search keep finding
"good" moves or else abandon the current branch, the search takes on
an undesirable breadth-first character. This research indicates that
it is possible to define evaluation functions that allow continuing a
branch that encounters some non-intuitive moves by giving credit for
earlier "good" moves. We define an "adventurousness coefficient"
that determines the ratio of acceptance of non-intuitive moves to
"good" moves, and show that greater adventurousness is desirable as
the depth of solution increases. Further, adventurousness has an
even greater payoff when a constraint satisfaction method exists that
can terminate unsolvable branches.
Our domain for this study was Superpuzz, a very difficult solitaire
puzzle. Four search paradigms, each the best of its kind for
non-adversary problems, were investigated. These are: Depth-first
with branch and bound and iterative deepening (DF), A*, Best-first
with a simple evaluation function (BF1), and Best-first with a
complex evaluation function (BF2). All methods except BF2 use the
same knowledge, and each of these methods is tested with and without
the use of a constraint satisfaction procedure, all on the same sets
of progressively more difficult solitaire problems.
As expected, the most informed search (BF2) does better than the
less informed as the problems get more difficult. Constraint
satisfaction is found to have a pronouncedly greater effect when
coupled with the most informed algorithm (BF2). BF1, which uses the
same knowledge as A* and DF but has a greater adventurousness
coefficient, far outperforms these paradigms in terms of work required
at about a 5% reduction in the quality of the (otherwise) optimal
solution.
Adventurousness can be thought of as a primitive form of planning,
in which no specific goal is enunciated but the cohesion of a set of
moves in "making progress" is being measured. The desired degree
of adventurousness appears to depend on the domain, evaluation
function, and constraint satisfaction method used.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Feb 85 15:13:05-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Motion Planning Algorithms (SU)
[Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
AFLB Seminar
2/14/85 - Prof. Micha Sharir (Tel Aviv)
"Motion planning algorithms - a survey"
We discuss the problem of planning automatically a continuous motion
of a given robot system B having k degrees of freedom, from an initial
position to a final desired position. During the required motion B has
to avoid certain obstacles whose geometry is known. In abstract
terms, the problem is reduced to that of calculating the connected
components of the (k-dimensional) manifold FP of all free positions of
B, and is thus a problem in "computational topology". In the talk we
will survey the main results in this area as developed during the last
four years. Some of the topics of the talk (as time will permit) will
be:
(1) We show that the problem is solvable in time polynomial in the
geometric complexity n of the obstacles, provided that k is fixed.
(2) The problem is PSPACE-hard if k is arbitrary, even for very simple
systems.
(3) Efficient solutions exist for several simple systems. We will
describe some of them.
(4) Review of the main solution techniques.
(5) Spin-off problems in computational geometry.
(6) Variants of the problem: motion planning with a gripped object,
motion planning in the presence of moving obstacles, optimal motion
planning, etc.
***** Time and place: February 14, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 21:19:30-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Triangle Tables for Robot Actions (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Tuesday, February 12, 1985
at 4:15 in Terman Auditorium
Nils J. NILSSON
Chairman, Stanford Computer Science Department
will present:
TRIANGLE TABLES:
A Proposal for a Language for Programming Robot Actions
Structures called ``triangle tables'' were used in connection with the
SRI robot SHAKEY for storing sequences of robot actions. Since the
original motivation for triangle tables still seems relevant, I have
recently elaborated the original concept and have begun to consider
how the expanded formalism can be used as a general robot programming
language. This talk will describe this new view of triangle tables
and how they might be used in a language that supports asynchronous
and concurrent action computations.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Summary - Robot Mind-Body Synapse (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SUMMARY OF F-4 MEETING
``Robot Design: In Search of the Mind-Body Synapse''
Stan Rosenschein, CSLI
For purposes of the discussion, the term ``robot'' was taken refer to a
collection of (man-made) sensors and effectors connected through a computer
controller. To lend an air of reality to the discussion, a ``hands-on''
display was given of an ultrasonic rangefinder, a small CCD camera, a
battery-operated robotics kit including a motorized gripper, and a small
computer. The challenge facing the robot designer is how to assemble these
(or similar) components to build a device capable of complex and
interesting behaviors. The most complex and difficult part of the robot
design task is programming the controller. Many AI researchers have sought
to manage this complexity by developing computational abstractions based on
some version of commonsense belief-desire-intention (BDI) psychology--the
``folk'' theory of mind. In addition, they have tended to adopt a
``representationalist'' tactic in which the components of mental state
(beliefs, desires, intentions) are realized as symbolic structures to be
manipulated by the program. Another approach, one based on an abstract
correlational theory of information-bearing states in automata, was put
forward as an alternative. There was much discussion on the utility of
belief-desire-intention psychology, especially in its
``representationalist'' form, as a framework for building robots.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Feb 85 13:44:23-CST (Thu)
From: "John J. Grefenstette" <jjg%vanderbilt.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference on Genetic Algorithms
Call for Papers
International Conference on Genetic Algorithms
and Their Applications
An International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their
Applications, sponsored by Texas Instruments and the U.S.
Navy Center for Applied Research in AI (NCARAI), will be
held on July 24-26, 1985 at Carnegie-Mellon University in
Pittsburgh. Authors are invited to submit papers on all as-
pects of Genetic Algorithms, including the following topics:
theoretical foundations of Genetic Algorithms; machine
learning using Genetic Algorithms; classifier systems; ap-
portionment of credit; Genetic Algorithms in function optim-
ization and search; experimental applications.
Authors are requested to submit three copies (hard copy
only) of a full paper by May 1, 1985 to the program chair-
man:
Dr. John J. Grefenstette
Computer Science Department
Vanderbilt University
Box 73 Station B
Nashville, TN 37235
Papers will be refereed by the Program Committee, and au-
thors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by May 20,
1985. Camera ready copies are due by June 21, 1985. Ac-
cepted papers will be published in the Conference Proceed-
ings.
Morning sessions of the conference will be devoted to
presentations of the accepted papers. Afternoon sessions
will be devoted to panel discussions of the general themes
raised in the morning sessions.
There will be no registration fee, but for planning purposes
all attendees are asked to register by June 1, 1985. Regis-
tration information may be obtained from:
Dr. Stephen F. Smith
Robotics Institute
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
sfs@CMU-RI-ISL1
(412) 578-8811
Conference Committee
---------- ---------
John H. Holland University of Michigan (Conference Chair)
Lashon B. Booker NCARAI
Kenneth A. De Jong NCARAI and George Mason University
John J. Grefenstette Vanderbilt University (Program Chair)
Stephen F. Smith C-MU Robotics Institute (Local Arrangements)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 85 16:26:43 cst
From: Austin Melton <austin%kansas-state.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics
[Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CALL FOR PAPERS AND CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
CONFERENCE ON
THE MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS OF PROGRAMMING SEMANTICS
DATE AND SITE SPONSORS
Iowa State University
April 11 and 12, 1985 Kansas State University
Kansas State University The University of Kansas
Manhattan, Kansas 66506 The University of Nebraska
Wichita State University
The conference will be a forum for computer scientists and mathematicians
jointly to discuss current research and possible directions for future research
in both programming language semantics in general and the mathematics used
in programming semantics in particular. From these discussions the computer
scientists will have first-hand exposure to the mathematical ideas which
might prove fruitful for future work, and the mathematicians will gain insight
for future work by seeing how their results can be applied and by seeing what
types of mathematical results are needed for future work in programming
language semantics.
Suggested topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
theory of complete partial orders and continuous lattices,
topological and categorical approaches to semantics,
formal and descriptive aspects of semantics notations
The following computer scientists and mathematicians will be speaking at the
conference:
Dr. Dana Scott, Carnegie-Mellon University
Dr. Horst Herrlich, University of Bremen, West Germany
Dr. Adrian Tang, The University of Kansas
Dr. George Strecker, Kansas State University
Dr. Stephen Brookes, Carnegie-Mellon University
Dr. Carl Gunter, Carnegie-Mellon University
Authors are invited to submit five copies of extended abstracts (approximately
two pages double spaced) describing recent advances in programming semantics
or related mathematics. The first page of the abstract should include
all authors' names, mailing addresses, and telephone numbers. Graduate
students are also encouraged to submit abstracts. The submission deadline
is March 11, 1985. Authors will be notified of acceptance by March 22, 1985.
Five copies of the extended abstracts should be submitted to:
Prof. Austin Melton or Prof. Robert Wherritt
Computer Science Department Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Fairchild Hall, 121 Box 33
Kansas State University Wichita State University
Manhattan, Kansas 66506 Wichita, Kansas 67208
USA USA
or via CSNET
austin%kansas-state@csnet-relay
Abstracts of the accepted papers and the invited addresses will be available
to all conference participants at the start of the conference.
The conference proceedings will be published after the conference and
mailed to all the participants.
...
FOR MORE INFORMATION about the conference or accommodations please contact
Professor Austin Melton or Ms. Robin Niederee:
Kansas State University
Computer Science Department
Fairchild Hall, 121
Manhattan, Kansas 66506
913-532-6350
CSNET austin%kansas-state@csnet-relay or robin%kansas-state@csnet-relay
The registration fee is $35 (students $5).
Meals are included in the $35.00 registration fee. Students may purchase
meals for an additional $20.00.
PLEASE REGISTER AND MAKE MEAL RESERVATIONS BY APRIL 8, 1985. Registration and
meal reservations may be made via CSNET (austin%kansas-state@csnet-relay or
robin%kansas-state@csnet-relay) with payments being made at the conference.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Feb-85 0145 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #19
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 85 01:45:14 PST
Date: Sun 10 Feb 1985 22:34-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #19
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 11 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 19
Today's Topics:
Machine Translation - Slocum's System,
Publications - Manual of Intensional Logic,
Seminars - Algebraic Specifications (CSLI) &
Massively Parallel Natural Language Processing (BBN) &
Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (CSLI) &
The Logical Data Model (SU),
Conferences - Evolution and Information &
SCCGL Conference on General Linguistics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 10 Feb 85 17:35:14-PST
From: LOUROBINSON@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Machine Translation
Regarding a German/English translator: How about Jonathan Slocum's
program developed for Siemens? Slocum is now at MCC in Austin
courtesy of the University of Texas. Good luck.
Lou Robinson
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Lecture Notes - Manual of Intensional Logic
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
FIRST VOLUME OF CSLI LECTURE NOTES
The first in the series of CSLI Lecture Notes has just been published.
Entitled ``Manual of Intensional Logic,'' the 75-page book by Johan van
Benthem constitutes a graduate course that the author taught in the Winter
of 1984 while at CSLI.
``Intensional Logic as understood here,'' the author writes in the
Introduction, ``is a research program based upon the broad presupposition
that so-called `intensional contexts' in natural language can be explained
semantically by the idea of `multiple reference.' ''
Unlike CSLI Reports, the Lecture Notes will be sold for a nominal fee to
defray part of production costs. The price of ``Manual of Intensional
Logic'' is $5, and it may be purchased at the Stanford Bookstore or by
writing to Dikran Karagueuzian at the Center. A 25% discount is offered to
all members of the CSLI community or to anyone ordering three or more
copies to be used for instructional purposes. California residents should
add sales tax.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Summary - Algebraic Specifications (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SUMMARY OF AREA C MEETING
``Algebraic Specifications in an Arbitrary Institution''
Andrzej Tarlecki
Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Edinburgh
The pioneering papers on algebraic specification used many-sorted
equational logic as a logical framework in which specifications were
written and analyzed. Nowadays, however, examples of logical systems in
use include first-order logic, higher-order logic, infinitary logic,
temporal logic, and many others. Note that all these logical systems may
be considered with or without predicates, admitting partial operations or
not. This leads to different concepts of signature and of model, perhaps
even more obvious in examples like polymorphic signatures, order-sorted
signatures, continuous algebras, or error algebras. The informal notion of
a logical system for writing specifications has been formalized by Goguen
and Burstall who introduced for this purpose the notion of institution.
The first and presumably most important application of this notion is its
use in the theory of algebraic specifications. It turns out that most of
the work on algebraic specification, especially concerning specification
languages, may be done in an institution-independent way. We briefly
present a collection of simple but very powerful specification-building
operations and give their semantics in an arbitrary institution. In this
context we outline a very simple and mathematically elegant view of the
formal development of programs from their specifications. The notion of
institution is also used to formulate (and prove) some model-theoretic
results at an appropriately general level. We show how to generalize to an
arbitrary institution a Birkhoff-type characterization of quasi-varieties
as implicational classes. This result may be used to prove that Mahr and
Makowsky's characterization of standard algebraic institutions which
strongly admit initial semantics holds for arbitrary institutions
satisfying a number of technical assumptions. Finally, we briefly outline
some problems concerning the notion of institution itself. We discuss the
need for some tool for constructing new institutions and for combining
institutions (``putting institutions together''). We also indicate
possible generalization of this notion which would provide a mold for
richer semantical systems than just collections of sentences with a notion
of their truth.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Feb 1985 14:58-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN@BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Massively Parallel Natural Language Processing (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by JCMA@MIT-MC.]
Massively Parallel Natural Language Processing
Professor David L. Waltz, Thinking Machines and Brandeis University
Date: 10:00 a.m. Tuesday, February 19, 1985
Place: Newman Auditorium
BBN Laboratories Inc.
70 Fawcett Street
Cambridge, Ma.
This talk will describe research in developing a natural language
processing system with modular knowledge sources but strongly
interactive processing. The system offers insights into a variety of
linguistic phenomena and allows easy testing of a variety of hypotheses.
Language interpretation takes place on an activation network which is
dynamically created from input, recent context, and long-term knowledge.
Initially ambiguous and unstable, the network settles on a single
interpretation, using a parallel, analog relaxation process. The talk
will also describe a parallel model for the representation of context
and of the priming of concepts. Examples illustrating contextual
influence on meaning interpretation and "semantic garden path" sentence
processing, along with a discussion of the building and implementation
of a large scale system for new generation parallel computers are
included.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
12 noon, 2/14 TINLunch
Ventura Hall ``Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning''
Conference Room Ronald Fagin, IBM San Jose Research Laboratory
Possible-worlds semantics for knowledge and belief do not seem appropriate
for modelling human reasoning since they suffer from the problem of what
Hintikka calls ``logical omniscience''. This means that agents are assumed
to be so intelligent that they must, in particular, know all valid
formulas. Moreover, each agent's knowledge is also closed under deduction,
so that if an agent knows p, and if p logically implies q, then the agent
must also know q. Unfortunately, this is certainly not a very accurate
account of how people operate! People are not logically omniscient for
several reasons, including (1) Lack of awareness: how can someone say that
he knows or doesn't know about p if p is a concept he is completely unaware
of? (2) People are resource-bounded: they simply lack the computational
resources to deduce all the logical consequences of their knowledge. (3)
People don't focus on all issues simultaneously: it is possible for a
person to have distinct frames of mind, where the conclusions drawn in
distinct frames of mind may contradict each other. Some new logics for
belief and knowledge are introduced which model these phenomena, so that,
in particular, agents need not be logically omniscient. This talk
represents joint work with Joe Halpern. --Ronald Fagin
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 85 09:08:22 pst
From: Gabriel Kuper <kuper@diablo>
Subject: Ph. D. Oral - The Logical Data Model (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Gabriel M. Kuper
The Logical Data Model: A New Approach to Database Logic
9AM, 7 Feb. 985
Building 420 (Psychology), Room 41
We propose a mathematical framework for unifying and generalizing the three
principal data models, i.e., the relational, hierarchical and network models.
Until recently most theoretical work on databases has focused on the relational
model, mainly due to its elegance and mathematical simplicity compared to the
other models.
Some of this work has pointed out various disadvantages of the relational model,
among them its lack of semantics and the fact that it forces the data to have a
flat structure that the real data does not always have.
The Logical Data Model (LDM) combines the advantages of both approaches.
It models database schemas as directed graphs, in which the leaves correspond to
the attributes, and the internal nodes to connections between the data.
Instances of LDM schemas consist of r-values, which constitute the data space,
and l-values, which constitute the address space.
This enables us to deal with instances of cyclic structures, but still get a
first-order theory.
We define a logic on LDM schemas in which integrity constraints can be
specified, and use it to define a logical, i.e. non-procedural, query language
that is analogous to Codd's relational calculus.
We also describe an algebraic, i.e. procedural, query language and prove that
the two query languages are equivalent.
These languages have a novel feature: not only can they access a non-flat data
structure, e.g. a hierarchy, but the answers they produce do not have to be flat
either.
Thus, the language really does have the ability to restructure data and not only
to retrieve it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Feb 85 17:20:59-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference on Evolution and Information
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CONFERENCE ON EVOLUTION AND INFORMATION
A conference on Evolution and Information with major support from CSLI will
be held at Stanford this April 19-21. The specific focus of the conference
will be on the use of optimality models both in biology and in the human
sciences. Papers will be contributed to the conference by biologists,
philosophers, psychologists, and anthropologists. Apart from addressing
problems and limitations of optimality models within biology, an important
aim of the conference will be to explore the relevance of biological
results, either factually or methodologically, to other areas of inquiry.
Papers to be discussed at the conference will be circulated about a month
before the meeting. Contributors will be asked to give a brief summary of
their papers at the conference sessions but papers will not be read.
Therefore, anyone who would be interested in seeing the papers in advance,
or would like any further information about the conference, should contact
John Dupre, Philosophy, Stanford University (415-497-2587, Dupre@Turing).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 85 20:13:24 pst
From: li51x%sdcc3@SDCSVAX
Subject: SCCGL Conference on General Linguistics
CALL FOR PAPERS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE ON GENERAL LINGUISTICS
APRIL 20-21, 1985
The Conference will be held at the University of California,
San Diego. Papers from any of the subdisciplines of
linguistics are eligible. Graduate students are especially
encouraged to participate, and abstracts will be refereed
anonymously.
Please provide 10 copies of your single-page titled
anonymous abstract, and include an index card with the fol-
lowing information:
Paper title (matching that on abstract)
Author
Address
Phone number (including area code)
Please send abstracts to the address below before 28 February 1985.
Chilin Shih
SCCGL
Linguistics, C-008
UCSD
La Jolla, CA 92093
Information about meals and accommodation will be mailed
later. For further information call (619) 452-3600, Chilin
Shih, Carol Georgopoulos, or Diane Lillo-Martin.
You may reach Chilin at sdcc6!ix226@UCSD.arpa. Please use SCCGL
as the subject heading.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Feb-85 1256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #20
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Feb 85 12:56:41 PST
Date: Fri 15 Feb 1985 11:06-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #20
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 15 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 20
Today's Topics:
Expert Systems - Logic-Based Systems,
AI Tools - PSL and Kurzweil,
Literature - Recent Articles & Weizmann Institute Reports &
Mathematics: People, Problems, Results & Expert Systems Journal
Seminars - Fifth Generation Revisited (SU) &
BareSlug Meeting (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Feb 85 15:14:12-CST
From: Charles Petrie <CS.PETRIE@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Logic-Based Expert Systems
From the what-you-and-everyone-else-would-like-department: I'm looking
for non-trivial but (sigh) non-proprietary expert system applications
written in a logic-based system such as DUCK, MRS, or PROLOG. Please
let me know if you can help. CS.PETRIE@UTEXAS-20
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 13-Feb-85 12:51:52-GMT
From: MACCALLUM QM (on ERCC DEC-10) <MAHM%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: More on PSL and Kurzweil
The network contact for PSL seems to be Jed Krohnfeldt
<jed%arpa.utah-orion%arpa.utah-cs> who maintains a psl-forum
mailing list.
The Kurzweil Optical Character Reader is a product of
Kurzweil Computer Products
185 Albany Street
Cambridge, Mass. 02139
(617) 864-4700
Telex 951246 KURZWEIL CAM
and is sold in Britain by
Penta Systems (UK) Ltd
15 Sheet Street
Windsor, Berks.
(07535) 55513
According to the glossy bumph it can hold 25 different fonts and can be
trained to recognise others, each containing up to 400 characters. These
can be defined from the first few pages of a document using a "training
script".It can handle various paper and print sizes. Output is to
floppy, tape, or via a LAN. I have four closely-typed pages of
promotion material, but obviously the rest of the details can be
obtained direct from the company.
I also believe there are machines at Glasgow and Cambridge (UK) which
are readily available to users. London is about to buy one (or possibly
two) at about 50K pounds each (I think).
Malcolm MacCallum
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 85 09:55:37 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
International Journal of Man Machine Studies Volume 21, No 3 Sep 1985
An Economical Approach to Modelling Speech Recognition Accuracy 191
An Analysis of Formal Logics as Inference Method in Expert System 213
Users and Experts in the Document Retrieval System Model 245
An Experimental Expert System for Genetics 259
Angewandte Informatik No 11 Nov 84
Design of a Corporate Know-How database 471
Electronics Week Volume 57 no 36 December 1984
AI Transforms CAD/CAM to CIM J. R. Lineback
IEEE PAMI Volume 6 no 6 Nov 84
Parallel Branch and Bound Formulations for And/Or Tree search 768
Computer Aided Design Volume 16 No 5 1984
Wirewrap Design Aid written in Prolog 249
Two algorithms for three-layer channel routing 264
Computers and Biomedical Research V 17 1984
An Expert System which critiques Patient Workup: Modelling Conflicting
Expertise 554-569
------------------------------
Date: Sat 9 Feb 85 12:59:51-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: List of Weizmann Institute Reports
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[...]
Ehud Shapiro also forwarded a list of available publications from the Weizmann
Institute. This is available as <Prolog>Weizmann←Abstracts.Doc
at SU-SCORE.ARPA.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Feb 85 14:41:07-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Mathematics: People, Problems, Results edited by Douglas
Campbell and John Higgins
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Mathematics: People, Problems, Results is a three volume book which is now
in the Math/CS Library--QA7.M34466 1984, v.1, v.2, v.3.
V.1--Historical Sketches, Some Mathematical Lives,The Development of Mathematics
V.2--The Nature of Mathematics, Real Mathematics, Foundations and Philosophy
V.3--Computers, Mathematics in Art and Nature, Counting Guessing Using,
Sociology and Education
The following authors have papers included in the three volumes: D.E.Knuth,
N.Wiener,A.L.Samuel,H.A.Simon,M.Kline,M.Minsky,Bertrand Russell,Richard Courant,
D.R.Hofstadter,George Polya,John von Neumann,David Hilbert
HLlull
------------------------------
Date: Wed 13 Feb 85 00:01:31-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems Journal
I have received a brochure for a new quarterly: Expert Systems, the
international journal of knowledge engineering, from Learned Information, Inc.,
143 Old Marlton Pike, Medford, NJ 08055, (609) 654-6266 [with offices
in Oxford as well]. A subscription is normally $79, but through March 15
they are offering it at $67. They are also throwing in a copy of their
"$25" soon-to-be-published report, The Guide to Expert Systems, that will
include an introduction, glossary, and directory of companies. Two back
issues of the journal are available for $30 (total, I presume).
The editors are Ian F. Croall of AERE Harwell in Britain, Donald A. Waterman
of The Rand Corporation, and Mitsuru Ishizuka of The University of Tokyo.
The editorial board includes Alex Goodall, Tohru Moto-Oka, Douglas
Partridge, and J.R. Quinlan.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Tue 12 Feb 85 11:49:29-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Fifth Generation Revisited (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distibution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SPEAKER: Edward Feigenbaum
Professor of Computer Science
Stanford University
TITLE: Fifth Generation Revisited--Some Informal Impressions
DATE: Friday, February 15, 1985
LOCATION: BRAUN Lecture Hall - Next to Mudd Chemistry Building
Roth Way - Near Campus Drive
TIME: 12:05
The Japanese Fifth Generation Project, and its central institute ICOT,
held the Second International Conference on Fifth Generation Systems
last November. Well over a thousand people attended this impressive
gathering and its associated Open House to hear about and see progress
on the project and plans for its future.
I'll recount my impressions of these events and impressions of
industrial activity in the AI area both inside and outside of the
Fifth Generation project.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Feb 85 15:44:07-PST
From: Joe Karnicky <KARNICKY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: BareSlug meeting, Fri. Feb. 15
BAY-AREA SLUG PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT- FEBRUARY 1985 MEETING
******** note the time and location changes *************
Date: Friday, February 15, 1985
Time: 3:15-5:15 PM
Place: Stanford Campus , Room 041 Jordan Hall (in the basement)
See the directions at the end of this notice
for additional information contact:
Tom Fall, General Chairman 408/289-2373
Ron Antinoja, Program Chairman 415/966-4043
Ken Olum, Program Librarian 415/858-4498 <KDO@SRI-KL>
Joe Karnicky, Correspondence Secretary 415/424-5085 <KARNICKY@SCORE>
PROGRAM
Tom Jensen of Evans and Sutherland will give a talk
entitled: "Essential Adaptation: Computer Assisted Symbolic
Manipulation and Computer Aided Geometric Design". The talk will
include, but not be limited to, discussion of MACSYMA.
Rich Cohen at U. Texas is interested in organizing a two day national
users group meeting, probably in S. F. probably at the end of May. At
the business meeting we'll discuss the interest in (and desirable content
of) such a meeting.
We'll finish with the usual gripe session.
SUMMARY OF LAST MEETING (Jan. 11, 1985)
Richard Lamson talked on "hacking the window system". He focused on
the way the window system handled the mouse. This can be a fairly
complex process, in part because the process must appear to run real
time while sharing the machine with other processes. (e.g. mouse
clicks are time tagged so that when they are handled the response is
to the window the cursor was in at the time of the click rather then
the time of handling.) The talk gave valuable insight into the inner
workings of the Symbolics machine and helped clarify the window system
operations.
Tom Fall spoke of his experiences using the KEE system (version 1.2,
*not* the current release) on Symbolics. Strong points of the system
included the ability to rapidly create a prototype, thus quickly
providing a focus and device for knowledge acquisition, good graphics,
ease of use, and excellent support. Weak points include
difficulty in connecting the KEE program to other code, some difficult,
opaque bugs, and documentation that could stand improvement.
During the business meeting, interest was expressed in hearing about
other software systems, such as ART or S1. Especially interesting would be
discussion by someone from an installation that used several different
systems.
===========================================================================
Map to next meeting:
-- | quadrangle |
| | | X | <-- X=Jordan Hall
-- ---------- ----------
Hoover Tower ---------------------------- ←←←←
/ \ serra St. @@@ \-----------
/ \ @@@ | \ ---------
Notes: | | | |
1)the map is *not* to scale \ / | |
\ / | |
2)look for parking |<-Palm Drive | |
in the pay-parking lot shown by | <-- | |
the @ characters, -------------------------------------- |
or along Serra. -----------------------------------------
| Campus Dr. -->
-------------|-------------
| Arboretum Rd.
|
<--to S.J. El Camino Real to S.F.-->
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Feb-85 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #21
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Feb 85 23:48:11 PST
Date: Sat 16 Feb 1985 22:09-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #21
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 17 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 21
Today's Topics:
Applications - Computer Gods & I Ching,
Humor - Word Processing & Stacks & Garbage Collection &
Hairstyle Generation & AI Positions &
Cryptographic Humor & Mathematical/Linguistic Humor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 9:18:51 EST
From: Pete Bradford (CSD UK) <bradford@AMSAA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Description of Telesophy Project.
The idea of a worldwide computer net cannot fail to remind
those of you who have read the story, of the SF classic, I think by
my compatriot and old friend, Arthur C. Clarke.
The story tells of the quest by mankind to establish the ex-
istence or otherwise of a God.
They built the largest computer the world had ever seen, and
asked it whether there was a God. "Insufficient data.", came the
reply. So they built an even larger one: "Insufficient data." was
still the only answer they got. Finally, somebody came up with the
idea that if all the computers in the world were linked together in
some way, the resulting `Supercomputer' might be able to do the job.
The project was completed, and the burning question was at
last put to the machine; "Is there a God?". It was not long before
the machine came back with its reply.
"Yes, there is a God -- now!".
PJB
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Feb 85 10:02:59-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Computer Gods
Asimov wrote a similar piece about the "AC Computer", which grew in complexity
until the entire "physical embodiment" was moved into hyperspace (to permit
convienent internal and external communication throughout the universe, I
suppose). Various people asked it how entropy could be reversed and the
universe rejuvenated, but there was always insufficient data. After Man
and the stars had faded out, and no further data could possibly come in,
the computer continued to work on the problem. At last it came up with
an answer, and said "Let there be light."
------------------------------
Date: 11 Feb 85 2008 PST
From: Brian Harvey <BH@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Another Computer Application
11 Feb 85
By ROLLANDA COWLES
Reporter for the Staten Island (N.Y.) Advance
Newhouse News Service
(DISTRIBUTED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE)
NEW YORK - You've had your eye on a new car for some time. Should
you buy now or wait? [...]
''Try the computer,'' counsels John C. Lee, president of the
Manhattan-based Horizon East, which has come up with a computerized
version of the ''I Ching,'' the Chinese book of wisdom. [...]
The computerized version of the ''I Ching,'' which Horizon East is
presenting for the first time in the West, is based on a
numero-astrological reinterpretation of the ''I Ching.'' Keyed to
one's date of birth - year, month, day and hour - the ''I Ching''
spells out an analysis of one's life and offers near-inexhaustible
wisdom and counsel. [...]
The computerized ''I Ching'' provides a lifetime analysis and
detailed analyses of the past two years and one year into the future.
It took eight people 10 months to program the Horizon East
computer, which stores approximately 4 million characters pertaining
to the ''I Ching'' in its memory. So far, Lee says, the response has
been favorable.
''Because the computer handles the information much more
efficiently, we are able to offer ... service by mail at a very
reasonable cost,'' he says, noting that where personal analyses often
cost about $200, the computerized version costs $20. [...]
------------------------------
Date: 06 Feb 85 1850 PST
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Russell Baker on Word Processing
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[Russel Baker's column last Sunday had some pithy comments about the
cognitive effect of our writing tools. Readers who enjoy the excerpt
below should look up the full article. -- KIL]
OBSERVER: The Processing Process
By RUSSELL BAKER
c.1985 N.Y. Times News Service
NEW YORK - For a long time after going into the writing business, I
wrote. It was hard to do. That was before the word processor was
invented. Whenever all the writers got together, it was whine, whine,
whine. How hard writing was. How they wished they had gone into dry
cleaning, stonecutting, anything less toilsome than writing.
Then the word processor was invented, and a few pioneers switched
from writing to processing words. They came back from the electronic
frontier with glowing reports: ''Have seen the future and it works.''
That sort of thing. [...]
It is so easy, not to mention so much fun - listen, folks, I have
just switched right here at the start of this very paragraph you are
reading - right there I switched from the old typewriter (talk about
goose-quill pen days!) to my word processor, which is now clicking
away so quietly and causing me so little effort that I don't think
I'll ever want to stop this sentence because - well, why should you
want to stop a sentence when you're really well launched into the
thing - the sentence, I mean - and it's so easy just to keep her
rolling right along and never stop since, anyhow, once you do stop,
you are going to have to start another sentence, right? - which means
coming up with another idea. [...]
------------------------------
Date: Fri 8 Feb 85 22:30:12-PST
From: Steven Tepper <greep@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: AI Humor
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I got the new memory for my brain and now I can read the Russell Baker
article and JMC's reply without a stack overflow (although response time
seems to be slower (I think that's because the garbage collection takes
longer (I should have thought of that first (but I didn't (does anyone have
a good on-the-fly garbage collection routine (one that will will run on a
normal two-hemisphere brain configuration (i.e. doesn't require any non-
standard lisp features (such as depending on the Interlisp spaghetti stack
(I think I'm going to recode my brain in Common Lisp (if a good
implementation becomes available (that's supposed to happen soon (at least
according to what I've heard)))))))))))).
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 85 14:02:45 pst
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@Navajo>
Subject: Stacks and Garbage Collection
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Pop.
Marvin Minsky organized his public lectures that way. The left parens
were silent and the right were omitted. Occasionally he would
mutter "Where was I? I seem to have overflowed my stack." It was
widely speculated that this was just for show and that Marvin didn't
even own a stack.
Van Wijngaarden, the man who gave Algol 68 its unique flavor, appears
to be the first to propose seriously, somewhere around 1964, that
computers should exhibit this sort of behavior and never bother to pop
their stack. One might assume that this would save the bother of
pushing the return address on the stack when calling another routine,
but no. That stack had good stuff on it, or rather in it since you
were expected to use it more or less like any other chunk of memory, to
within the vagaries of how Algol organized access into the nether
reaches of the stack. Return addresses were just parameters naming
procedures to call when you had an answer. In the old regime you
called such a procedure by popping its address off the stack and
jumping to it. In Van Wijngaarden's regime the address stayed on the
stack and your current PC was pushed on the stack as part of the
ordinary procedure call sequence, not only saving the return address
for posterity but contributing another.
Van Wijngaarden was thus an early right-to-lifer for return addresses
and anything else pushed on the stack. His proposal was in the same
spirit as more recent proposals not to bother with garbage collection.
Users of Lisp machines who simply reboot as needed rather than endure
having the garbage collector turned on should have this man
enshrined somewhere on their stack (at each reboot, of course).
Other advocates of not garbage collecting include Charles Bennett, at
IBM Yorktown Heights, and Ed Fredkin, a colleague and friend of Marvin
Minsky who does digital physics at MIT. Their interest in clinging to
worn-out information is that by so doing you can always reverse the
computation back to exactly where it started. This is not because you
want to do this, but because the physicists promise that if you don't
throw it away you can get by with far less energy, a sort of
physicist's bottle bill. One of the rules appears to be that you have
to settle for a nonzero probability that the computation will
unpredictably run backwards at some moment. The energy you do consume
is expended on adjusting the probability that the computation will
proceed forwards more often than backwards; more energy improves the
odds and hence the speed of computation.
I have heard it whispered that DNA unzips itself on this principle; if
it were to unzip in such a way that it could not zip itself right back
up again it would fry. I may of course be confusing this with a sermon
I heard.
Another reason for clinging to old...
Pop.
[...]
-v
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 85 11:23:57 est
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher@mit-htvax>
Subject: Graduate Student Lunch
TIME: 12 Noon
DATE: Friday, Feb 15
PLACE: 8th Floor Playroom
HOSTS: Mark Tuttle and Sathya Narayanan
REFRESHMENTS: t
PLAUSIBLE HAIRSTYLE GENERATION:
THE FURTHER ADVENTURES OF EURISKO, PART I
Blackstone Le Mot
As AI programs have been reported more widely in the popular
media, they have been called upon to perform tasks that have
heretofore gone unnoticed by AI researchers. Proper hair care
is one of these tasks. In this talk I will discuss the application
of EURISKO to developing healthy hair and attractive styling.
Remarkably enough, the program itself has modified itself
to represent characteristics of the domain, by developing
hair in its control structure and a significant bald spot
in its documentation. But it looooks maaaahvelous!
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Feb 85 08:55:27-PST
From: Jay Ferguson <FERGUSON@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AI Positions
Seems like the most popular of the AI positions today is MISSIONARY!
jay
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Feb 85 20:51:57-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Cryptographic Humor
Gilles Brassard at Stanford mentioned on the bboard an improvement
on the one-time pad consisting of enciphering text by taking its
exclusive OR with itself. ("We are still working on the decipherment.").
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Feb 85 14:33:25-PST
From: Tai Jin <G.Jin@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Mathematical/Linguistic Humor
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[Does anyone know the source of this? It's been around for
a good many years. -- KIL]
From net.jokes...
To prove once and for all that math can be fun, we
present: Wherein it is related how that paragon of womanly
virtue, young Polly Nomial (our heroine) is accosted by that
notorious villain Curly Pi, and factored (oh horror!!!).
Once upon a time (1/t) pretty little Polly Nomial was
strolling across a field of vectors when she came to the boundary
of a singularly large matrix. Now Polly was convergent, and her
mother had made it an absolute condition that she must never
enter such an array without her brackets on. Polly, however,
who had changed her variables that morning and was feeling
particularly badly behaved, ignored this condition on the basis
that it was insufficient and made her way in amongst the complex
elements. Rows and columns closed in on her from all sides.
Tangents approached her surface. She became tensor and tensor.
Quite suddendly two branches of a hyperbola touched her at a
single point. She oscillated violently, lost all sense of
directrix, and went completely divergent. She tripped over a
square root that was protruding from the erf and plunged
headlong down a steep gradient. When she rounded off once more,
she found herself inverted, apparently alone, in a non-Euclidean
space.
She was being watched, however. That smooth operator,
Curly Pi, was lurking inner product. As his eyes devoured her
curvilinear coordinates, a singular expression crossed his face.
He wondered, "Was she still convergent?". He decided to
integrate improperly at once.
Hearing a common fraction behind her, Polly rotated and
saw Curly Pi approaching with his power series extrapolated.
She could see at once by his degenerate conic and dissipative
terms that he was bent on no good.
"Arcsinh," she gasped.
"Ho, ho," he said, "What a symmetric little asymptote
you have. I can see your angles have lots of secs."
"Oh sir," she protested, "keep away from me. I haven't
got my brackets on."
"Calm yourself, my dear," said our suave operator, "your
fears are purely imaginary."
"I, I," she thought, "perhaps he's not normal but
homogeneous."
"What order are you?" the brute demanded.
"Seventeen," replied Polly.
Curly leered. "I suppose you've never been operated
on."
"Of course not," Polly replied quite properly, "I'm
absolutely convergent."
"Come, come," said Curly, "let's off to a decimal place
I know and I'll take you to the limit."
"Never," gasped Polly.
"Abscissa," he swore, using the vilest oath he knew.
His patience was gone. Coshing her over the coefficient with a
log until she was powerless, Curly removed her discontinuities.
He stared at her significant places, and began smoothing out her
points of inflection. Poor Polly. The algorithmic method was
now her only hope. She felt his hand tending to her asymptotic
limit. Her convergence would soon be gone forever.
There was no mercy, for Curly was a heavyside operator.
Curly's radius squared itself; Polly's loci quivered. He
integrated by parts. He integrated by partial fractions. After
he cofactored, he performed Runge-Kutta on her. The complex
beast even went all the way around and did a contour
integration. What an indignity -- to be multiply connected on
her first integration! Curly went on operating until he
completely satisfied her hypothesis, then he exponentiated and
became completely orthogonal.
When Polly got home that night, her mother noticed that
she was no longer piecewise continuous, but had been truncated
in several places. But it was to late to differentiate now. As
the months went by, Polly's denominator increased monotonically.
Finally she went to L'Hopital and generated a small but
pathological function which left surds all over the place and
drove Polly to deviation.
The moral of our sad story is this: "If you want to
keep your expressions convergent, never allow them a single
degree of freedom ... "
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂19-Feb-85 1128 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #22
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 85 11:26:24 PST
Date: Sun 17 Feb 1985 11:39-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #22
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 17 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 22
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Lisp Workstation & Expert System Development Tools &
XLISP 1.4 Source,
Humor - Origin of "Impure Mathematics",
Linguistics - Y'all and Youse,
Seminars - Parallel Natural Language Processing (BBN) &
Modeling Intuition in Problem Solving (UCB) &
Partially Compiled Prolog Interpreters (CSLI) &
Learning in Modal Logic (CMU) &
Beyond Bacon (CMU)
Conference - Decision Support Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 15 Feb 85 13:58:45-PST
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp workstation, request for info
We are looking into buying a CHEAP computer to run LISP in a reasonably
friendly environment. The constraints are that the machine should be
accessible remotely (through modems) and support networking.
We would also like the machine to support more than one user (but
certainly less than five). It should run a LISP close to Franz, Zeta
or Common Lisp (with hooks for remote file access !), EMACS should
be available for it.
We are looking into micro-vax and tektronix (I still have to check
on some of the constraints satisfaction of those). Price
range <~ 20,000 $.
We are aware of the NIL+micro-vax combination.
Is there anything else worth knowing about ???
Thank you for any suggestion
Reply to BACH@score.
Rene
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 85 18:27:56 est
From: gross@dcn9.arpa (Phill Gross)
Subject: Expert System Dev. Tools Info Request
Several months ago, there was some discussion in the list about expert
system development packages. There were also some information requests
(eg, ehrler%cod@nosc) but I don't recall any follow-ups posted. I'm
now at the point of wanting to purchase one of these packages and have
been compiling a survey list of candidate packages. I would like to
solicit information/comments about the packages listed below. I will
summarize and post the results of any information I get. I'll fertilize
the discussion with an initial list of information I've found so far.
What I'm really interested in is user comments on ease of use, capabilities,
how fast to get "up the curve", etc. Again, I will summarize all information
I receive.
Phill Gross
Note: All comments in quotes below were taken from promotional material,
all comments within square brackets represent incomplete info.
Large or Special Purpose Machines
Vendor Machines/
Package (Contact Info) HW Environment Price Comments
ART Inference Corp. [runs on
5300 W.Century Blvd. Symbolics]
Los Angeles, CA 90045
213-417-7997
DUCK Smart Systems Tech. "works within Runs under Zetalisp
6870 Elm Street Lisp environ- on Symbolics,Franz on
McLean, VA 22101 ment" Vaxen (Unix or VMS),
703-448-8562 T lisp on Appollo,
soon Common Lisp
K:Base Gold Hill Computers "Symbolics 3600 [Provides networking]
163 Harvard Street family"
Cambridge, MA 02139
617-492-2071
KEE IntelliCorp Need AI machine $60K
707 Laurel St. (eg, Symbolics)
Menlo Park, CA
94025
415-853-5540 or
415-323-8300
LOOPS [Xerox] [Xerox machines] [unsupported but
provided by Xerox
for the cost of
distribution]
OPS5 DEC Vaxen "can call or be called
by routines .. in any
VAX language"
SRL [Carnegie Group] [Symbolics] $70K
S1 Teknowledge, Inc. Xerox 1100/1108, $50K Includes 2 week course
525 University Ave. soon VAX/VMS
Palo Alto, CA 94301
415-327-6600
TIMM General Research Corp. "Most computers
7655 Old and AI machines"
Springhouse Road
McLean, VA 22102
703-893-5915
=============================================================================
Personal Computers
Vendor Machines/
Package (Contact Info) HW Environment Price Comments
Expert- J. Perrone & IBM PC or XT, $2K 2 disks advisable
Ease Associates, Inc. some
3685 17th Street "compatibles"
San Francisco, CA
94114
415-431-9562
K:Base Gold Hill Computers IBM PC's [<$5K] [Provides networking]
163 Harvard Street
Cambridge, MA 02139
617-492-2071
M1 Teknowledge, Inc. IBM PC $12.5 Includes 4 day course,
525 University Ave. Color recomended,
Palo Alto, CA 94301 PC-DOS or MS-DOS
415-327-6600
Personal Texas Instruments "Widespread Includes 3 day course,
Consultant P.O. Box 809063 personal runs under MS-DOS,
Dallas, TX 75380 computers", allows 400 rules
1-800-527-3500 TI Professional
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 85 15:10:33 EST
From: winkler@harvard.ARPA (Dan Winkler)
Subject: XLISP 1.4 Source Available
Source, documentation and compiled Macintosh versions of XLISP 1.4 are
available by anonymous ftp login at Harvard. It's all in a subdirectory
named pub. The author of xlisp, David Betz, logs in here as betz@harvard.
Feel free to send him mail if you have questions or comments.
Dan. (winkler@harvard)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 85 11:22:57 EST
From: Paul Broome <broome@BRL-TGR.ARPA>
Subject: Origin of "Impure Mathematics"
In answer to your query in AIList V3 #21 I'm sending you a note I found
on net.jokes.d on USENET.
-paul
From seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!idi!pesnta!lsuc!msb
From: msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: "The Adventures of Poly Nomial"
Date: 5 Feb 85 07:02:25 GMT
Summary: Credit and correct title
This little gem previously appeared in the Journal of Irreproducible
Results. I don't know what issue; I have it in a Best of the JIR
collection. The real title is "Impure Mathematics". No author is given
in the normal style, but it is marked as "submitted by" Richard A. Gibbs.
Subscriptions to the JIR are now $4.50, $6.50 outside
the USA, for 4 issues = 4/5 year, from Box 234, Chicago Heights, IL 60411.
{ allegra | decvax | duke | ihnp4 | linus | watmath | ... } !utzoo!lsuc!msb
Mark Brader also via amd!pesnta!lsuc!msb, uw-beaver!utcsrgv!lsuc!msb
(From February 14, utcsrgv will be utcsri)
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 12-Feb-85 12:03:01-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Y'all and Youse
In a recent discussion on the plural of `you', I believe that someone
said that `youse' was not part of the English language. Yesterday on
the bus, I heard a 12-year-old say to her friend ` I'll see youse later'.
Nuff said.
Gordon Joly
gcj@edxa
[Edxa is at Edinburgh. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 8 Feb 1985 14:58-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Parallel Natural Language Processing (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Laboratories SDP AI Seminar Series
Massively Parallel Natural Language Processing
Professor David L. Waltz
Thinking Machines
and
Brandeis University
Date: Tuesday, February 19, 1985
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: Newman Auditorium
BBN Laboratories Inc.
70 Fawcett Street
Cambridge, Ma.
This talk will describe research in developing a natural language
processing system with modular knowledge sources but strongly
interactive processing. The system offers insights into a variety of
linguistic phenomena and allows easy testing of a variety of hypotheses.
Language interpretation takes place on an activation network which is
dynamically created from input, recent context, and long-term knowledge.
Initially ambiguous and unstable, the network settles on a single
interpretation, using a parallel, analog relaxation process. The talk
will also describe a parallel model for the representation of context
and of the priming of concepts. Examples illustrating contextual
influence on meaning interpretation and "semantic garden path" sentence
processing, along with a discussion of the building and implementation
of a large scale system for new generation parallel computers are
included.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 85 15:53:16 pst
From: hardyck%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Curtis Hardyck)
Subject: Seminar - Modeling Intuition in Problem Solving (UCB)
Speaker: Paul Smolensky, Institute for Cognitive Science
University of California, San Diego
Title: A FORMAL FRAMEWORK FOR MODELLING INTITUTION IN
PROBLEM SOLVING
Thursday, Feb 21 at 1 pm, room 2515 Tolman Hall, Berkeley
The following hypotheses will be elaborated and analyzed:
Experts' intuitions derive from their specially developed perceptions
of the problem domain;
The perceptual processor solves the problem's simultaneous constraints
literally in parallel;
The level at which processing is governed by formal laws involves
small units of knowledge, not elaborate "rules" or symbolic structure;
These formal laws involve numerical, not symbolic, variables and
operations.
I will discuss the motivation for these hypotheses, the presumed roles of
intutition and rule interpretation in problem solving, and implications for
instruction.
Then I will describe how the hypotheses lead to a principled formal framework
for modelling intuition. This framework is derived from probability theory
and exploits a formal isomorphism with statistical (thermal) physics. Three
theories will be described that give a formal competence model, a realization
in a parallel processor, and a learning procedure through which the processor
acquires its knowledge. These theorems are part of an effort to develop a
new theory of computation describing massively parallel systems.
An application of the framework to simple quantitative problems in
electricity will be described. Concepts and techniques from
statistical physics guide analysis of the processing.
-- Steve Palmer
------------------------------
Date: Wed 13 Feb 85 17:25:56-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Partially Compiled Prolog Interpreters (CSLI)
[Exercpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SUMMARY OF AREA C MEETING
``The Compilation of Prolog Programs
Without the Use of a Prolog Compiler''
Ken Kahn, Xerox PARC
An efficient Prolog interpreter written in Lisp was presented. The
interpreter was then specialized to run different Prolog predicates.
These specializations are generated automatically by a partial
evaluator for Lisp programs called Partial Lisp. It transforms Lisp
programs to other Lisp programs and knows nothing about Prolog. It was
argued that the partial evaluation of interpreters can be a substitute
for compilation. The results of partially evaluating the Prolog
interpreter for simple Prolog predicates were presented. The speed of
the specialized interpreters has been found to be about ten times
faster than ordinary interpretation. These speeds compare favorably
with an optimizing compiler for the same Prolog dialect and computer
system. The advantages of using partial evaluation upon an interpreter
include a much smaller and easily modifiable implementation. The major
difficulty in generating thousands of small specialized interpreters
is that it currently takes about two orders of magnitude more time
than compilation. Different approaches to reducing partial evaluation
time were presented. The possibilities of specializing the interpreter
for different uses of the same Prolog predicate were discussed.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Feb 1985 1044-EST
From: Jon Doyle <DOYLE@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Learning in Modal Logic (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
AI Seminar, Feb. 19, 3:30 PM, WeH 5409
CALM : A Contestative Apprenticeship System in Modal Logic
Jean Sallantin and Joel Quinqueton
Centre de Recherche en Informatique de Montpellier, France
We present a formal approach to Learning as a process in a
non-distributive Modal Logic. We illustrate it by considerations about
the results of our work on SEQUOIA, a Learning Machine for decoding
Genetic Sequences.
Contact Jon Doyle (x3739) for appointments or more information.
------------------------------
Date: 15 February 1985 1215-EST
From: Cathy Hill@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - Beyond Bacon (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Speaker: Professor Herbert Simon
Title: "Beyond Bacon"
Date: February 19, 1985
Time: 12:00 noon - 1:30 p.m.
Place: Adamson Wing, 1st Floor, Baker Hall
Abastract: BACON is a data-driven program for discovering
regularities (laws) in data. It attempts to
simulate one aspect of scientific discovery.
Other aspects include theory-driven discovery,
choosing research problems, and designing
instruments. The seminar will discuss progress
that has been made in characterizing programs to
do these latter kinds of tasks.
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 12 Feb 1985 08:22:51-PST
From: turner%when.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Decision Support Systems
C O N F E R E N C E A N N O U N C E M E N T
The Fifth Annual Conference on Decision Support Systems (DSS) will be
held from April 1 through April 4 in San Francisco. The goal of this
conference, like its predecessors, is to provide a forum for researchers
and practitioners to present and discuss their most recent experiences
and ideas about decision support systems and their use in making
organizations and individuals successful.
The conference is sponsored by the Institute for the Advancement of
Decision Support Systems in cooperation with the Institute of Management
Sciences and its College on Information Systems.
The program is a series of six tracks:
. Introduction to DSS and DSS Tools (tutorial)
. DSS Futures
. Expert and Knowledge Based Systems
. DSS Methodologies
. DSS in Practice
. DSS Products and Services
Conference Committee
Chairman Program Chairman Proceedings Editor
Dr. Robert Zmud Dr. Robert Reck Dr. Joyce Elam
University of North Carolina Index Systems University of Texas
For information, please contact: Ms. Julie Eldridge
DSS'85
Third Floor
290 Westminster Street
Providence RI 02903
(401) 274-0801
Mark Turner
Digital Equipment Corporation
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂19-Feb-85 1426 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #23
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 85 14:26:18 PST
Date: Tue 19 Feb 1985 09:37-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #23
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Tuesday, 19 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 23
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - PC LISPs & Flavors,
Humor - Polly Nomial,
Information Science - Webster & Xerox Notecards,
Literature - Recent Articles & University of Rochester Reports,
Seminars - Mental Models (UCB) &
Natural Concurrent Grammar (Weitzmann),
Conference - AI in Engineering,
Program Descriptions - Postdocs at NPRDC-UCSD & AI Research at UCLA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Feb 85 07:39:32 EST (Mon)
From: johnson <johnson@udel-dewey>
Subject: info request pc lisps
I am looking for experiences, comparisons, and evaluations of any
lisp available on PC+compatibles. I am particularly interested in:
TLC [The Lisp Company] Lisp
vs
GC Lisp
vs
IQ Lisp
vs
muLisp.
I am familiar with franz, interlisp, and muLisp - so any comparisons
versus these breeds of lisp would be particularly useful to me.
I am more concerned with efficiency than adherence to standards,
in particular :
1. how long does this take in (X)←lisp:
; use any interation method provided by X
; AVOID recursion if possible
(do-2000-times (cond (T)))
2. how long does this take:
; after : (setq z nil)
(do-2000-times (setq z (cons T z)))
3. Is there a way to remove objects from the object list?
4. Is there an interface to assembly language modules?
(can lisp call machine-lang functions?)
5. How long does it take for (X)Lisp to load and give its first prompt.
[please include a hardware description for sake of comparison]
(eg: 256k IBMXT, PCDOS 2.00, running (X)lisp from fixed disk)
6. Price of (X)lisp and any licensing charges.
please send response directly to me, I will (net-mail) results to
anyone who asks [but wait a few days before asking, ok?]
-thanks in advance.
johnson@udel-ee
... Share a little joke with the World |-> ...
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 19-Feb-85 12:20:12-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Flavors
I have come across the term `flavors' several times but still have no
idea what it means. Please could someone explain?
Thanks,
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 85 13:27:30 cst
From: "Duncan A. Buell" <buell%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: polly nomial
This was printed in a slightly different form (the version from the
network has some updates that actually make it a little better in
my mind) in Scope: Journal of the Federation of University
Astronomical Societies about fifteen years ago. That, at least, is
where I got my copy.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 85 20:02:11 est
From: davy@purdue-ecn.ARPA (Dave Curry [decvax!pur-ee!davy -or-
davy@purdue-ecn])
Subject: Webster
Regarding the copy of Webster's dictionary on SRI-NIC. I have written
a program for 4.2BSD UNIX which contacts the server on SRI-NIC and
enables the user to "converse" with the dictionary. The source for
this program is available via anonymous FTP from PURDUE-ECN in the
directory "pub/webster". Please note that we have a "part-time" ARPAnet
connection, i.e., we run thrugh the computer center, which has rather
strange hours:
M-F: 8:30am - midnight Sat: noon - 5:00pm Sun: noon - midnight
or something like that. All times are Eastern. The source is also
available in WEB:WEBSTER.C from SRI-NIC, however, this is an old copy of
the source (with a couple of minor bugs), so don't grab it unless you
can't get to us (it should be updated soon).
Also, for you TOPS-20/Tenex folks, there's a Midas source in the file
WEB:WEBSTER.MID (executable is WEB:WEBSTER.EXE) on SRI-NIC (I know
nothing about this one, I just mention it to be complete). As far as I
know from conversing with the folks in charge of this thing, these are
the only two programs available for dealing with Webster. If you have
one for another operating system, send a note to IAN@SRI-NIC. He is
collecting the sources.
--Dave Curry
davy@purdue-ecn
------------------------------
Date: 17 Feb 85 15:54 PST
From: fisher.pasa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Xerox Notecards
The Xerox notecards system is presently being licenced to Xerox
1100/1108/1132 customers as a part of special Xerox applications
development programs.
The Xerox notecards system is not a supported product at this time
although discussions are proceeding within the Corporation regarding
that possibility.
Further information can be obtained by messaging me.
Pete Fisher (fisher.pasa@Xerox)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 85 04:52:03 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
January 1985 Volume PAMI-7 Number 1
Parallel Algorithms for Syllable Recognition in Continuous Speech
page 56-69
An Evaluation Based Theorem Prover page 70-79
A mechanical theorem prover applied to proving theorems about programs.
A New Heuristic Search Technique - Algorithm SA page 103-107
A Search Technique based on a statistical sampling technique
Inforworld February 11, 1985 page 13
Lotus Edges into AI
Lotus signed a 1 million dollar venture financing agreement with
Arity computer. The software, promised for late 1985, will be
an integrated business productivity tool for IBM PC's.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 85 16:01:59 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: University of Rochester Reports
The University of Rochester
Technical Report List
TR132 Gacs, P "Reliable computation with cellular automata" $2.25
Construction of one-dimensional array of cellular automata which is
self-repairing
TR133 Ballard, D. H. "Cortical connections: Structure and Function" $1.50
TR141 Allen, J. F and D. J. Litman "A plan recognition model for
subdialogues in conversations" $1.50
TR143 D. C. Plaut "Visual recognition of simple objects by a connection
network" $1.25
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 85 09:11:35 pst
From: kuhn%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Elisabeth Kuhn)
Subject: Seminar - Mental Models (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, February 19, 11:30 - 12:30
(Please note that the talk starts at 11:30 this week)
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4
Philip Johnson-Laird, Visiting Professor at Stanford - from MRC
Applied Psychology Unit, Cambridge
``Mental Models''
The aim of this talk is to explore the hypothesis that a major class
of mental representations take the form of models of the world.
Such models contrast with propositional representations, i.e.
syntactically structured strings of symbols in a mental language,
because models are assumed to make explicit the perceived or conceived
relations between things in the world. The explanatory value of models
will be illustrated in three areas: reasoning, comprehension, and
the representation of discourse.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 85 11:42:19 -0200
From: scheff%wisdom.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (scheff chaim)
Subject: Seminar - Natural Concurrent Grammar (Weitzmann)
The Weitzmann Institute of Science - Rehovot, Israel
Seminar in Applied Mathematics and Computer Science
Chaim-Meyer Scheff
will speak on
"Alternatives in Artificial Intelligence: Natural Concurrent Grammar".
The talk will take place on Wednesday, February 27, 1985 in the Feinberg
Building, Room C, at 9:00.
Natural grammer, based on the independent work of Vygotsky and Bitner,
suggest the feasibility of flow through parsing schemes for natural
language; and further suggest applications for seemingly ambiguous
natural language in the programming environment.
Vygotsky grammar removes the structural constraints of transformational
grammar. While Bitner grammar gives formal structure to the otherwise
nondeterministic ambiguity problem.
Further analysis, based on the grammar of American Sign Language, would
replace Bitner's sequential based ambiguity marker set with a set of
vector space markers of generalized function; thereby allowing for viable
models of concurrent cognitive processes; such as those which minimize
transaction flux in Mapless Networks.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 18 February 1985 05:49:16 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Conference - AI in Engineering
CALL FOR PAPERS
FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON APPLICATIONS OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(AIEP)
The purpose of this conference is to provide a forum for
engineers all over the world to present their work on the
applications of artificial intelligence to engineering
problems. The conference will be held from April 15-18 1986
at Southampton University, England and will be preceeded by
tutorials in Expert systems and Robotics.
CONFERENCE THEMES
The following topics are suggested and other related areas
will be considered.
- Computer-aided design
- Computer-based training
- Planning and Scheduling
- Constraint Management
- Intelligent Tutors
- Expert systems
- Knowledge representation
- Learning
- Natural language applications
- Cognitive modelling of engineering problems
- Robotics
- Database interfaces
- Graphical interfaces
- Knowledge-based simulation
- Design Modelling
CALL FOR PAPERS
Authors are invited to submit three copies of a 500 word
abstract. The abstract should have enough details to permit
careful evaluation by a committee consisting of renowed
experts in the field. The abstracts should be accompained
with the following details:
- Authors' address, name, affliation. Indicate the
person to address all correspondence.
- The branch of engineering. If the paper addresses
engineering in general, then should be categorized
under GENERAL DESIGN.
- The topic area.
TIME TABLE
Submission of Abstracts: June 1st 1985
Notification of acceptance: August 1st 1985
Submission of Full Paper: November 1st 1985
INFORMATION
All abstracts should be sent to:
Dr. R. Adey, General Chairman, AIEP
Computational Mechanics Centre
Ashurst Lodge
Southampton S04 2AA
England
Inquires about exhibits, registration should be addressed
to:
Ms Elaine Taylor
Computational Mechanics Centre
Ashurst Lodge
Southampton S04 2AA
England
For more information in US contact:
D. Sriram, Technical Chairman AIEP
Civil Engineering and Construction Robotics
Laboratories
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 13 February 1985, 10:07-PST
From: Jim Hollan <hollan@nprdc>
Subject: Postdocs
This note is to announce the formation of a new collaborative
research group: the NPRDC-UCSD Intelligent Systems Group (ISG). ISG is
concerned with addressing basic research questions involving intelligent
graphical interfaces, computational accounts of cognition, knowledge
representation, human machine interaction, and elicitation of expert
knowledge. The group has excellent computational facilities. Currently
this includes four Symbolics lisp machines, two Xerox Dandy-Tigers, a Xerox
Dorado, and arpanet access via central Vax computers. The Institute for
Cognitive Science, of which ISG is a member, has a network of 15 SUN
workstations and a Vax.
A number of post-doctoral fellowships are available for recent
cognitive science or artificial intelligence PhDs. Fellowships are for
two-years with an option of a third year. Stipend is approximately
30K/year with an additional allowance of 6K for relocation and
professional travel. The postdoctoral fellowships come from ONR (Office
of Naval Research). Fellows will work in ISG on the UCSD campus.
Interested applicants should communicate with James D. Hollan or Donald
A. Norman, Intelligent Systems Group; Institute for Cognitive Science
C-015; University of California, San Diego; La Jolla, CA 92093. Arpanet
addresses: hollan@nprdc or norman@nprdc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 85 06:28:35 PST
From: Judea Pearl <judea@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: AI Research at UCLA
[Edited by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The UCLA Computer Science Department is actively researching in all areas
of Artificial Intelligence, with increasing interest in: robotics &
vision, learning & memory, qualitative reasoning & expert systems,
planning and automatic programming.
Current AI research at UCLA is most focussed in the areas of natural
language processing, cognitive modeling, the analysis of
heuristics and evidential reasoning. Projects include editorial
comprehension, story invention, legal reasoning, intelligent tutoring,
learning through planning, discovery of heuristics, and distributed
inferencing.
Facilities for AI research at UCLA consist of a ring network of Apollo
workstations, which comprises one of the largest Apollo
installation sites in Southern California. Each Apollo workstation
consists of 1.5-4 Mbyte main memory, multi-processing operating
system with multi-windowing, font editing, and SIGGRAPH Core
graphics primitives. Networking is built into each workstation.
Our AI tools environment, called GATE (Graphical AI Tools Environment),
is built on top of T, a lexically-scoped, Scheme-based dialect of Lisp
developed at Yale University. T, designed for efficient implementation
and execution, incorporates object-oriented programing with
message-passing semantics as its most fundamental language construct.
GATE includes a number of interacting packages: Flavors, DELON -- a
language for specifying demons and traps, WEBs -- a slot-filler system
for specifying semantic memories represented by graphical icons
connected by rubberband links, and TLOG -- a logic programming
system which allows both Prolog and T style syntax.
In addition to the Apollos, the CS department maintains a network of 20
Vaxes, which communicate with the Apollo ring via an ethernet gateway.
For more information contact:
Prof. Judea Pearl,
4731E Boelter hall, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(judea@UCLA-CS.arpa)
Prof. Michael Dyer,
3532 Boelter Hall, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(dyer@UCLA-CS.ARPA).
Prof. Margot Flowers
3532 Boelter Hall, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(flowers@UCLA-CS.ARPA)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Feb-85 1333 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #24
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 85 13:33:26 PST
Date: Thu 21 Feb 1985 10:47-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #24
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Thursday, 21 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 24
Today's Topics:
Request - Seminar Tapes,
Functional and Logic Programming,
Correction - Bertrand Constraint Language,
Seminars - Inductive Theorem Proving in Prolog (GE) &
Knowledge-Based Software Development (SU) &
Cooperation Among Intelligent Agents (SU) &
Programming in Concurrent Prolog (CMU) &
Self-Organizing Retrieval for Graphs (UT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 85 20:46:40 cst
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Slightly Depressed....
I always see notices on the AIList digest about fantastic seminars
all over the country (especially at BBN, Stanford, etc.) and get
depressed because :
(1) I can't attend them,
(2) The transcript/recording is never published, nor accessible
(3) So there is no way for an interested person to learn.
I was wondering if somebody/anybody/any organization {BBN/or any
university libraries (Stanford libraries)} would keep recordings
on tape/cassette ??.
(1) Either record any & all public seminars advertised over the net
(Tapes/Video ?).
(2) Or, if some number of people show interest (say 50) within a
specified period of time (2 weeks?) of the first (or last)
time of announcement (on AIList Digest?) then, record the
requested seminar.
(3) Charge some reasonable fee for it (please keep the poor
grad-student in mind; Tapes for grads; Videotapes for industry folks).
I think I should probably be writing this to the respective ad-
mintrative departments and/or to the Librarians.
But, I think :
[1] I don't have the time to write to these administrative
departments.
[2] I don't even have the names of the persons who might be able to
make these (expensive) decisions.
[3] I don't have any clout; It will take more than one person to
voice the need.
Do the Stanford or BBN librarians read this AIList digest?? Can
somebody send this messsage over to a net where this message will
be read by administrators and/or librarians ??
Does anybody else feel so deprived ??
Any other Issues or Ideas or Pros or Cons or Problems ??
--Raj Doshi
Graduate Student,
University of Minnesota
csnet: doshi.umn-cs@csnet-relay
[While seminars are rarely recorded, they usually spring from or lead
to a conference paper or dissertation. Sending a message to the author
(perhaps via the seminar host) will often get you some interesting
pre/reprints or literature citations.
I don't know whether administrators respond to net messages, but you
can often get a lead on the proper address for an administrative
request by writing to "postmaster" at any site. The various postmasters
have been a great help to me in distributing the AIList. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Feb 85 11:09:03-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Functional and Logic Programming (long message)
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Here's a little more for those who have been eagerly
following recent discussions in the Digest about the
relationship between logic and functional programming.
This appears to be a very exciting field just now, with
a rapidly expanding literature, much of it not yet even
published. First, I want to add some bits of information
to the very helpful classification that Reddy recently
sketched for the Digest. Barbutti, Belia, Levi and their
gang in Pisa, Italy may have been the first workers in
this field, with papers going back to the late 70s; their
latest work is on embedding logic programming into
functional programming. Drosten and Ehrich from Braunschweig,
Germany have recently given a fully rigorous translation from
algebraic specifications to logic programs. There are several
functional languages that use unification or narrowing.
Qute by Sato (of Tokyo, Japan) really is cute, and is notable
for its higher order functions. Fribourg in France has done
some really elegant work; and so has Kanamori in Japan; and
Dershowitz and Plaisted are thinking along similar lines at
Illinois; all of these have some interesting ideas about how
to make things more efficient. I also like the work of Haridi
and Tarnlund (Uppsala, Sweden), Lindstrom at Utah (in the
latest POPL), and of course the LOGLISP system of Alan Robinson
at Syracuse.
Uday Reddy was kind enough to send me copies of the unpublished
papers that he mentioned in a recent Digest. I enjoyed reading
them, especially his ideas on how to control control. Reddy's
approach views logic programs as functional programs by viewing
predicates as functions. Unfortunately, his approach is
constructor-based, so you can't give Append an associative syntax
(with which you could write things like [1,2] [3,4] [5,6] to append
three lists (using an "empty" infix syntax). Also, as Reddy notes,
his approach cannot treat all logic programs as functional programs
without somehow extending the basic framework, for example with ad
hoc mechanisms to support set-valued functions. This seems an
interesting area for further research.
Our Eqlog system (see vol.1, No.2, Logic Programming Jnl.) is
misleadingly characterized in Reddy's papers and Prolog Digest
note, and also in Lindstrom's paper and Malachi's Digest note on
Tablog. Eqlog has an equational sublanguage with logical variables,
and uses narrowing to solve equations for values of the logical
variables (this sublanguage has the syntax of OBJ2, for which see
POPL85). However, Eqlog is not purely functional, or even
"equational"; it is a logic programming language, whose logic is
first order Horn clause logic *with equality*. Since this equality
is real *semantic* equality (as opposed to Prolog's syntactic
equality), i.e., it is interpreted as *identity* in models, and the
logic of this equality is the usual equational logic; this is what
gives the semantics of the equational sublanguage. However, Eqlog
also allows real predicates; its Horn clauses can have both
predicates and equations in their heads and tails. The operational
semantics of Eqlog integrates unification with term rewriting; the
result is that Prolog-like clauses (without real equality) are
solved in the usual way with standard unification, while terms are
automatically simplified by term rewriting, and narrowing is used
to solve equations for the values of logical variables, which can
yield "partially resolved expressions". A fair-interleaving
version of the usual Prolog-like backtracking not only takes
care of predicates, but also handles conditional equations
correctly, both forsimplification and for solving; thus, a number
of computational methods appear as special cases. Also, it avoids
the infinite descents that can cause non-termination in Prolog.
This is not just universal unification. It is perhaps worth
emphasizing that these features are not just hacked together, but
are the natural outcome of taking Horn clause logic with equality
as the semantic basis: interleaved unification and rewriting then
give the right operational semantics.
Termination plus confluence of the equations viewed as rewrite
rules is a sufficient conditition for completeness of narrowing.
Since equational goals can contain logical variables, this gives
a powerful "constraint language like" facility for solving over
user defined data abstractions. Our operational semantics (fair
interleaving of unification and rewriting) seems to work reasonably
even without the termination condition; but we no longer have a
*theorem* that guarantees completeness. It would be nice to have a
formal semantics for the non-terminating case, including infinite
(lazy) data structures, but of course equality (in the theory) of
terms won't generally be decidable in such a scheme. Moreover,
some pretty hard math is needed to do it right. So it is very
comforting that we understand the case where the rewrite rules
terminate, even though it's not the end of the story. My objection
to Tablog is just that it is not complete. Without a completeness
theorem, the programmer has no idea which programs are going to
terminate and which are not. This seems like another interesting
area for further research.
By the way, it's worth mentioning that when you program
for a parallel machine, you should probably give preference
to straight term rewriting over unification and narrowing,
since no general implementation of unification can really
exploit the parallelism (by a theorem of Dwork, Kanellakis
& Mitchell, and also Yasuura).
Finally, I would like to mention that if anyone out there
is really turned on by this sort of thing [...], we
would really like to hear from you.
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 19 Feb 85 14:31:30 PST
From: wm@tekchips
Subject: Correction - Bertrand Constraint Language
The seminar on the Bertrand constraint language at the
Oregon Graduate Center will begin at 3:00 pm, not 3:30
as announced in the AIList digest.
Wm Leler
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 85 09:12:08 EST
From: coopercc@GE-CRD
Subject: Seminar - Inductive Theorem Proving in Prolog (GE)
Computer Science Seminar
General Electric R & D Center
Schenectady, N. Y.
Inductive Theorem Proving in Prolog
Prof. Jieh Hsiang
SUNY at Stoney Brook
Tuesday, February 26
1:30 PM, Building K1, Conf. Rm. 3
(Refreshments at 1:15)
ABSTRACT: Prolog is a logic programming language based
on theorem proving techniques such as unification and
resolution. It has gained considerable popularity in
recent years as an alternative approach to programming.
In this talk we introduce the use of Prolog as a deduc-
tive theorem prover for the first order inductive
theory. In addition to the backward chaining and back-
tracking facilities of Prolog, we introduce three new
mechanisms -- Skolemization by need, suspended evalua-
tion, and limited forward chaining. The features of
the method include the ability to automatically parti-
tion the domain of variables according to the manner in
which the predicate symbols are defined, and automatic
generation of lemmas (or inductive hypothesis) under
which the proposition is true. The method also does
not explicitly employ any inductive inference rule.
These new mechanisms are simple enough to be imple-
mented in Prolog without too much difficulty. The
theorem prover has been used in the verification phase
of a Prolog environment for developing data types
currently being developed at Stony Brook.
Notice to Non-GE attendees:
It is necessary that we ask you to notify Marion White
(518-385-8370 or WHITEMM@GE-CRD) at least two days in
advance of the seminar.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 20 Feb 85 00:05:00-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge-Based Software Development (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CS 300 -- Computer Science Department Colloquium -- Winter 1984-1985.
Our eigth meeting will be on Februray 26th, 4:15 in Terman Auditorium:
KNOWLEDGE BASED SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT IN FSD
by
Dr. Robert BALZER
USC Information Sciences Institute
Our group is pursuing the goal of an automation based software development
paradigm. While this goal is still distant, we have embedded our current
perceptions and capabilities in a prototype (FSD) of such a software
development environment. Although this prototype was built primarily as a
testbed for our ideas, we decided to gain insight by using it, and have added
some administrative services to expand it from a programming system to a
computing environment currently being used by a few ISI researchers for all
their computing activities. This "AI operating System" provides specification
capabilities for Search, Coordination, Automation, Evolution, and Inter-User
Interaction.
Particularly important is evolution, as we recognize that useful systems can
only arise, and remain viable, through continued evolution. Much of our
research is focused on this issue and several examples will be used to
characterize where we are today and where we are headed. Naturally, we have
started to use these facilities to evolve our system itself.
( After the presentation Bob will show a Video tape in )
( the Auditorium to show all that, and how it works. )
------------------------------
Date: Wed 20 Feb 85 11:19:46-PST
From: Carol Wright <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Cooperation Among Intelligent Agents (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, February 22, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Jeffrey S. Rosenschein
Stanford University
TITLE: Rational Interaction: Cooperation among Intelligent
Agents
The development of intelligent agents presents opportunities to
exploit intelligent cooperation. Before this can occur, however, a
framework must be built for reasoning about interactions. This work
describes such a framework, and explores strategies of interaction
among intelligent agents.
The formalism that has been developed removes some serious
restrictions that underlie previous research in distributed artificial
intelligence, particularly the assumption that the interacting agents
have identical or non-conflicting goals. The formalism allows each
agent to make various assumptions about both the goals and the
rationality of other agents. In addition, it allows the modeling of
restrictions on communication and the modeling of binding promises
among agents.
This talk describes work done in conjunction with Matthew L. Ginsberg
and Michael R. Genesereth.
------------------------------
Date: 19 February 1985 1134-EST
From: Staci Quackenbush@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - Programming in Concurrent Prolog (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Name: Vijay Saraswat
Date: Friday, February 22
Time: 3:30 - 4:30
Place: WeH 4605
Title: "Programming in Concurrent Prolog"
The talk will briefly introduce Horn logic programming and will then
examine Concurrent Prolog as a concurrent and as a logic programming language.
I will compare CP to CSP and highlight various semantic and operational
difficulties with CP-like `concurrent' languages based on Horn logic. My
thesis is that CP is best thought of as a set of control features designed to
select a very few of the many possible execution paths for programs in a
non-deterministic language. It is perhaps not a coherent set of control and
data-structures for the ideal concurrent programming language. It is certainly
even less a logic programing language than Prolog.
Some of these languages have been proposed as systems programming languages. In
the second half of the talk, I will focus on the difficulty in efficiently
programming such data-structures as arrays, dequeues, heaps etc and propose
the use of associative, commutative and idempotent logic functions (data
structures) as a partial remedy. This also naturally leads to (a slightly
generalised form of) a synchronous WRAM model of computation.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 85 09:41:20 cst
From: briggs@ut-sally.ARPA (Ted Briggs)
Subject: Seminar - Self-Organizing Retrieval for Graphs (UT)
[Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Graduate Brown Bag Seminar
A Self-Organizing Retrieval System for Graphs
by
Bob Levinson
noon Friday Feb. 22
PAI 5.60
We present the theory, design, and application of a self-organizing
intelligent knowledge base in which all concepts are
represented as graphs. The system is designed to support the
expert problem solving tasks of recall, design, and discovery. It
is being applied successfully in organic chemistry to store and
retrieve molecular structures and to reason with organic
reactions. We believe that the system will also be useful in oth-
er domains.
At the basis of the system's design is the production and mainte-
nance of a partial ordering of graphs by the relation
"subgraph-of". We will discuss how this relation can be
considered to be equivalent to "more-general-than", and we
will present a simple, yet powerful retrieval algorithm for
data ordered in this way.
The system exploits a set of concepts that are common sub-
graphs of previously stored concepts (graphs). We will show how
these concepts serve multiple purposes that improve the effi-
ciency and flexibility of the system. Since these concepts can
be "discovered" by the system itself, we say that it is
"self-organizing".
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Feb-85 1140 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #25
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Feb 85 11:39:41 PST
Date: Fri 22 Feb 1985 09:32-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #25
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 22 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 25
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Cheap Lisp Workstations & LISPM Tape Formats,
Literature - OPS4 Book,
Policy - Dubious Humor,
Linguistics - 2nd Person Plural,
Humor - Amirsardarism,
Seminars - The Epistle Project (CLSI) &
Use of Sound to Present Data (SU) &
A Logic of Knowledge and Belief (BBN) &
Computing Conversational Implicature (BBN),
Project Description - Cognitive Complexity (IBMSJ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 85 16:46:45 est
From: fischer@ru-opal (Ron Fischer)
Subject: Cheap Lisp workstations
Has anyone heard of an under $10,000 Lisp workstation with an environment
comparable to Interlisp? If you reply with a mention of a diskless
workstation, please make it obvious that the machine needs a network.
(ron)
------------------------------
Date: 21 February 1985 11:13-EST
From: George J. Carrette <GJC @ MIT-MC>
Subject: LISPM Tape Formats
It seems this question comes up a lot. We don't have any set policy on
tape formats but LMI customers have been provided with the following
support when the need came up: (+ means comes with the system already).
Machine Format Supported
LMI-Backup TOPS-20-DUMPER ANSI-LABELED TAR FIXED-EBCD(IBM)
LMI-LAMBDA + * * * *
VAX/VMS * + *
UNIX * * + + (dd)
The LMI-Backup is similar to ANSI-LABELED in use of file and tape
marks, except lisp-like in its use of LABELS (disembodied plists,
parsed by READ). As I recall JIM at Tycho was able to read it easily
on his 3600. On the other hand the various Symbolics formats looked
considerably hairier and are probably covered by their trade-secret
policy, which is why we didnt try to reverse engineer it and provide
support for it on the LAMBDA, even though people are always asking us to
move code from 3600's to LAMBDAs. But either they usually have some
kind of VAX or Unix handy to make a tape or they have a
non-industry-standard 1/4-inch tape, in which case the easiest thing
is to find somebody with a 3600<->VAX settup to make a copy for you.
-gjc
------------------------------
Date: 18 February 1985 1131-EST
From: Lee Brownston@CMU-CS-A
Subject: book on OPS4 programming
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
"Programming Expert Systems With OPS5," by Lee Brownston, Elaine Kant,
Robert Farrell, and Nancy Martin, is scheduled to be published by
Addison-Wesley on April 15th. It is about 400 pages long, and contains
an introduction to production systems, a tutorial on the OPS5 language,
an extended example of program development, treatment of control, data
representation, and programming style, the RETE pattern-match algorithm
and how to exploit it for efficiency, a general discussion of production
system architectures, a survey of applications, a comparison of related
production-system languages, solved exercises, and much, much more.
The authors are now correcting page proofs and making an index. Things
seem to be on schedule. For those who can't wait until publication,
copies of the page proofs are available from Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Inc., Reading, MA, 01867.
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 20 Feb 1985 08:45-EST
From: mcc@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: Polly Nomial
I was both surprised and dismayed to find "The Adventures of Polly
Nomial," which is a story about a rape, in AIList. It saddens me to
realize that there are people who think there is something "humorous"
about rape, no matter how clever the description. That this "gem" is
still around proves that misogyny still is, too.
mcc@MITRE-BEDFORD
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 12:35 MST
From: May%pco@CISL-SERVICE-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Polly Nomial is Offensive
I am offended at the insensitivity of stories like this and ask the
chairman to deny publication in the future. Whether it is talked about
directly or disguised in a "cute" story, rape is a violent and cruel act
by one human being against another. When it happens to someone you
know, you begin to appreciate the horror of it all.
Sexual fantasies can be fun (and healthy) but not when they are at the
expense of another.
Bob May
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 21 February 1985 13:18:22 EST
From: Purvis.Jackson@cmu-cs-cad.arpa
Subject: 2nd person plural
I have noticed several posts on the AI-list bboard recently that address the
use of alternative plural forms of the pronoun "you" in various
socio-geographical segments of America. Specifically, I recall references
to "y'all" and "youse". Growing up in South Carolina, I frequently heard
the former; while living for the past 5 years in Pittsburgh, I have
frequently heard the latter. For both of these forms, however, I have
noticed 2 pronunciations. "Y'all" is often pronounced "yaw-ul" through the
proper application of the South Carolina low country diphthong. "Youse" is
sometimes pronounced "yooze" around Pittsburgh. None of these forms,
however, seems to me to be as interesting as a form I often heard used in
South Carolina low country "geechie" English, a mix of low country standard
and gullah. In this strain, "you" becomes "yennuh" and is oftentimes barely
distinguishable as a single word because it can be imbedded in phrases that
are delivered with a rapidly rythmic tongue movement. Hence, the phrase
sounds somewhat like one long word. An example, one that I recall quite
clearly, was delivered by Mum Tweedie DeLee, a noted root doctor of
Dorchester County whose practice of midwivery yielded me and three of my
siblings.
On the day of the particular utterance, I and several of Mum Tweedie's
great-grand children were in the back dooryard of her shanty, poking sticks
through a chicken wire fence at a goose, which would peck at the sticks,
flap its wings, and hiss angrily, all of which provided for us a somewhat
frightening source of squeeling glee. Several times, Mum Tweedie came out
onto the stomp and warned us to stop picking at the goose. Each time we
dropped our sticks and pretended to take up a new form of intertainment. On
what must have been the fourth or fifth time on the stomp, Mum Tweedie
charged down the steps and grabbed Yockey, one of the older boys, by the ear
and damned near lifted him clear of the ground. With his attention focused
fully on her, she bent over and placed her mouth close to his firmly pulled
ear and shouted into it "Yennuhadduhbedduhmine" and then let loose his ear.
She then proceeded to use our goose sticks on our backsides to ensure we had
understood her point. After we had received our just punishment, cried for
a spell, and were standing around sniffling, Mum Tweedie called us into the
shanty. Once inside she gathered us around her where she could stroke our
heads and soothe us with whispered words of love laced into further warning.
"Yennuhadduhbedduhmine," she whispered, "Yennuhbedduh." Mum Tweedie lived
to be 117 years old, by all estimates, and I have tried to follow her advice.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Feb 85 10:06:46-PST
From: Shawn Amirsardary <SHAWN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: amirsardarism
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Wow! Thanks Evan for making my contribution to the English language
possible.
Actually the amirsardarism phenomenon comes from having a sufficiently
different set of 'cognitive' rules. Forward amirsardarism is the
application of these rules in a forward chaining paradigm--and hence the
necessary blurting out of irrelevent conclusions. While
reverse-amirsardarism is the application in a reverse or backwards chaining
paradigm. I do believe that reverse-amirsardarism is the worst of the two
since the aforementioned rule set forms logically consistant conclusions in
the reverse mode, which makes it hard to spot. While in the forward mode,
the conclusions are sufficiently illogical to make for good sarcasm.
--Shawn Forward-Amirsardary
(Another application of forward-amirsardarism:
All tykes on bikes should be offered 5 Dollars, then shot
)
------------------------------
Date: Wed 20 Feb 85 09:57:11-PST
From: Dikran Karagueuzian <DIKRAN@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Epistle Project (CLSI)
[Forwarded from the Stanford CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THE EPISTLE PROJECT
Martin Chodorow
Yael Ravin
IBM
T.J. Watson Research Center
Date: Friday, February 22
Time: 2 p.m.
Place: Reading Room,
Ventura Hall.
This talk will be an overview of the EPISTLE natural language processing
system, especially as applied to text-critiquing. The system has four major
components: a text pre-processor, a dictionary, a parser and a set of style
rules. We will describe two implementations that represent different
approaches to parsing and will discuss the style component in detail.
In the second part of the talk we will describe semi-automatic techniques
for enhancing the semantic information contained in the dictionary. The
results of this work will provide the foundation for additional applications
in other areas, such as document abstracting or machine translation.
------------------------------
Date: 19 Feb 85 2133 PST
From: EJS@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Use of Sound to Present Data (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
User System Ergonomics
A human interface journal club and discussion group
On Wednesday February 27th, 12:00 - 1:00 in Margaret Jacks Hall room 352
Stanford University
Dr. Sara Bly from Xerox will speak:
"Beyond Vision: Using Sounds in the Interface"
This talk will focus on the use of sound to present data information.
Multivariate, logarithmic, and time-varying data provide examples for
aural representation. Experiments have shown that sound does convey
information accurately and that sound can enhance graphic presentations.
Methods will be discussed and examples given.
Contact Ted Selker ejs@su-ai.arpa for information on USE.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Feb 1985 16:25-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - A Logic of Knowledge and Belief (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Laboratories Artificial Intelligence Seminar Series
Speaker: Dr. David Israel
BBN Laboratories
SRI International & CSLI
Title: "A LOGIC OF KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF
For Logically Omniscient Yuppies (and other extroverts)"
Date: Friday, March 1, 1985, 10:30 a.m.
Location: 3rd Floor Large Conference Room
BBN Laboratories Inc.
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA
Having done extensive research on the subject--to wit, having read the
Newsweek cover story "The Year of the Yuppie"--I discovered that
orthodox epistemic/doxastic logics had it all wrong. (I assume, of
course, that such logics were meant to apply, inter alia, to Yuppies.)
But the crucial problems lie not in the ascription of logical
omniscience. Nay; it is in the attributions of (pale and sickly)
introspection. Yuppies who worry too much about about inner states,
their own or others', don't get to own BMW's. I shall offer this key
demographic cohort an epistemic/doxastic logic smartly tailored to suit
their needs.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Feb 1985 09:50-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Computing Conversational Implicature (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Laboratories Artificial Intelligence Seminar Series
Speaker: Julia Hirschberg
University of Pennsylvania
Title: "Computing Conversational Implicature"
Date: Tuesday, February 26, 1985, 10:30 a.m.
Location: 3rd Floor Large Conference Room
BBN Laboratories Inc.
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA
Determining what an utterance conveys, beyond its semantic import, is an
important issue in Natural Language Processing. Such research seeks to
provide a principled basis for computational models of human behavior --
and so to support more natural computer-human interaction. To date,
however, results have been limited by the lack of formal representations
of nonconventional inferences and the consequent difficulty of
constructing algorithms for their calculation. The work discussed
examines one class of such inferences, scalar implicature, a type of
Gricean generalized conversational implicature. It proposes a theory of
scalar implicature based upon an analysis of naturally occurring data.
A formal representation of scalar implicature is described as well as
procedures for calculating licensed implicatures. An application to
computer-human question-answering - now being implemented in Prolog - is
discussed, as are other potential uses in Natural Language generation
and understanding.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Feb 85 1348 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Project Description - Cognitive Complexity (IBMSJ)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The Computer Science Department at IBM Research, San Jose,
has a project which is developing the "cognitive complexity"
theory of D. Kieras (formerly at U. of Arizona, now at U. of Michigan)
and P. Polson (U. of Colorado). The theory is being applied
to representation of the user "how to do it" knowledge implied
by the particular design of, for example, an interactive text
formatter. The technology K & P have developed is directed to
representing user "how to do it" knowledge in production rules,
representing the surface design of the application (with respect to
what is seen by the user) as a generalized transition network, and
then deriving some measures of complexity (related to the Card, Moran,
and Newell work) for the design with respect to typical tasks.
The idea is to be able to compare design proposals (with respect to
the ease of learning and ease of use measures indicated by the
theory) at early stages of the design process. [...]
Anyone interested should contact John Bennett, bennett%ibm-sj@csnet-relay
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂26-Feb-85 1043 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #26
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 85 10:36:18 PST
Date: Mon 25 Feb 1985 15:27-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #26
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Tuesday, 26 Feb 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 26
Today's Topics:
Linguistics - Wally,
Bindings - General Research Corp.,
Publications - Request for Sources & TARGET AI Newsletter,
AI Tools - YLISP & KayPro AI Languages,
News - Recent Articles,
Humor - EURISKO & Programming the User-Friendly Dog,
Seminar - Motion Planning with Uncertainty (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 24-Feb-85 18:24:20-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Wally.
There was some discussion recently in the Guardian newspaper here
in the U.K. about the word `wally'. Does the word exist on the other
side of the Atlantic (or elsewhere) and if so what meaning does it have?
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
School of Mathematical Sciences,
Queen Mary College, Mile End Road,
LONDON E1 4NS, UK.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 22 Feb 85 15:41:04-PST
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Research Corp. pointer request
Does someone know the address/phone number of the company ? They apparently
have developed an expert system to tune a VAX VMS operating system we might
be interested in using. It is build on TIMM and is called TUNER.
Thanks for any info.
Rene Bach, Varian Associates
Bach@score
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 85 08:42:26 GMT (Friday)
From: Martin Cooper <Cooper.rx@XEROX.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Slightly Depressed....
I certainly feel the same sense of deprivation, since as far as I'm
concerned, all the seminars are on the wrong side of the Atlantic, and a
very long way from the UK.
I wonder if it would be possible for the existence of related papers
and/or recordings to be mentioned along with the seminar announcements,
or in a related message on this list.
Martin.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 22 Feb 85 10:36:44-PST
From: Ted Markowitz <G.TJM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI newsletter and request for recommendations
I just received a flier from another AI newsletter called 'TARGET
The AI Business Newletter'. In 1985 it promises
Analysis of installed base of AI and standard machines
used for symbolic processing.
The market for natural language.
AI in the micro marketplace.
AAAI/IJCAI coverage.
Outlook on venture capital and corporate funding.
Price: $190/year
Where: Target Technologies, 3000 Sand Hill Rd., Bldg 1, Suite 255
Menlo Park, CA 94025.
--ted
PS: Is there a consensus in the group for which of these 'digests'
is really worth the several hundred bucks/yr.? I'd like to get
my folks to order one, but I want to make sure it's worth
something.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 85 13:23:02 -0200
From: jaakov%wisdom.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (Jacob Levy)
Subject: YLISP available for FTP
Hi!
I am pleased to announce that YLISP is finally available for FTP
from 'maryland.arpa' using user id 'ftp' and password 'anonymous'. The
stuff is in directory YLISP (note capitals); There are 20 files in all
to copy - 16 files containing the system, named FTP←Y.[1-16], a makefile
a recursive copying program named 'copy' and 2 READ.ME files. Make sure
that the receiving system has ~4500 K disk space on the file system you
copy it to.
Before trying to install the system, please read 'READ.ME.FTP'
carefully. All bugs, complaints, requests and suggestions please mail to
BITNET: jaakov@wisdom
CSNET and ARPA: jaakov%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.ARPA
UUCP: (if all else fails..) ..!decvax!humus!wisdom!jaakov
POSTAL: Jacob Levy
Dept of Applied Math,
Weizmann Institute of Science,
Rehovot 71600, ISRAEL
PS - The system will be available on BITNET pretty soon also. Separate
anouncement to BITNET users will follow.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 1985 17:09:06 EST
From: BASKEYFIELDM@USC-ISI.ARPA
Subject: AI Info.
I would like to know if anyone out there has an AI language that can
be run on a KAYPRO 4/84 using the CP/M operating system?
Recent articles:
There is an interesting and introductory article article in the
March 1985 issue of COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS, pp. 69-73, entitled
"Expert Systems on Microcomputers." The article describes the very
basics of decision-support systems and how AI fits in. The systems
covered in the article are M.1 and M.1a (Teknolledge), Expert Ease
(Expert Systems), and MVP-Forth (Mountain View Press). These three
systems all run on the IBM PC/XT.
In addition, there is an article "AI On A Chip" and another, "FORTH
and AI" which prove interestign reading for new people in the AI
field.
Mark Baskeyfield
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, CA 93943
baskeyfieldm@usc-isia.arpa
Thanks!!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 09:27:34 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Articles
Infoworld February 25, 1985 Page 5 Editorial
'The next big lemminglike rush will be to artificial intelligence. AI will
be the most despised and abused [software concept] of the next year. So
in a perverse way, AI is an exciting opportunity for people who recognize
what it can do for customers.'
Mitch Kapor, Chairman of Lotus Development
Some people are avoiding the AI label due to AI-hype and Rube Goldberg
overdesign. Microsoft's Bill Gates has used the term "softer software"
instead of AI. This is for systems that will learn the user's work
patterns and help execute them.
For example, if a person dials up his mainframe, gets some data, does
some spread sheet processing and generates some graphics pasting it into
a report, the system should figure out that is his pattern and start
doing it automatically. Furthermore it should handle a request on
Friday like "generate the usual sales report but give me a separate
graph on what is happening in Europe"
Also software should determine which configuration a user has so he does
not have to enter information as to what graphics card and printer he
is using.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 25 Feb 85 10:48:43-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Recent Articles
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, February 1985:
From Paper Drawings to Computer-Aided Design, by M. Karima, K. Sadhal,
and T. McNeil of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, pp. 27-39:
A survey of techniques and difficulties in automated optical
entry of complex schematics and wiring diagrams. Thirty papers
are referenced.
An Overview of Analytic Solid Modeling, by M. Casale and E. Stanton
of PDA Engineering, pp. 45-56:
Describes a way of modeling complex shapes as composites of parametric
curves and solids (e.g., swept or deformed regular solids). This seems
to combine the volumetric simplicity of CSG representations with the
flexibility of B-rep. Derivation of mass properties is very simple,
although the "inverse problem" of determining whether a point is inside
or outside a volume is a little complex. The ASM approach maintains
a parametric coordinate system so that physical properties (e.g.,
temperature, stress, curvature, color) can be attached to each point
on or in a solid. This makes the technique ideal for finite element
analysis.
Braintrain Seeks Educational Software from Independent Authors, p. 82:
An example is shown of this company's iconic programming language for
the ChipWits computer-graphics robots. Apparently it's a high-level
flowchart language. The simulated robots can be pitted against
various simulated environments. The game software is available for
the Macintosh and Apple II.
Badler Becomes Associate Editor-in-Chief of IEEE CG&A, p. 86:
Norman Badler is interested in artificial intelligence, particularly
as applied to simulation of human motion, so the magazine will no
doubt continue its coverage of AI-related topics.
High Technology, March 1985:
Software Tools Speed Expert System Development, by P. Kinnucan, pp. 16-20:
Describes commercially-available expert system shells, particularly KEE.
Mentions KEE for frame-based representation and for forward chaining
(as well as the usual backward chaining), ART for hypothetical and
multiworld reasoning, and Insight for database access and low price
($95, but without the ability to use variables in rules). Also mentions
M.1, LOOPS, TI's Personal Consultant, Arbie, IN-ATE, and REVEAL.
Expert System Shells Boost A.I. Market, by M. Foley, p. 21:
Further discussion of the same material.
IntelliCorp: The Selling of Artificial Intelligence, by E. Linden, pp. 22-25:
A two-page history and description of the company making KEE.
Prospecting from the Skies, by G. Graff, pp. 49-56:
Interesting discussion of the advances that can be expected soon in
remote sensing >>without<< the use of AI (but with high-resolution
multispectral data and sophisticated location- and time-specific
analysis).
Personal Robots Face Software Challenge, by M. Higgins, pp. 71-73:
Describes the primitive state of personal-robot software.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 19:51:37 est
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher at mit-htvax>
Subject: EURISKO Seminar, Continued
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
TIME: 12 Noon
DATE: Friday, February 22
PLACE: 8th Floor Playroom
HOSTS: Michael Caine, Neil Singer, and Kenneth Pasch.
REFRESHMENTS: t
PLAUSIBLE POSITION GENERATION:
THE FURTHER ADVENTURES OF EURISKO, PART II
Blackstone Le Mot
This talk was to be the second in a series describing the application
of EURISKO, a discovery program, to non-traditional domains. In this
case the domain was position generation, in which the program is given
some knowledge of geometry, anatomy, and the first 37 pages of the
Kama Sutra. The talk is canceled, however, because the slides have not
yet been cleared with Dean McBay and the Ad Hoc Committee. Hence we
instead skip to the third and final talk in this series:
TARGET SELECTION:
THE LAST ADVENTURE OF EURISKO, PART III
Traditional strategic thinking, i.e. from Clausewitz to the present day,
emphasises the need to bring maximum destructive force to bear on the
enemy's armed forces and industrial centers to ensure a swift end to
hostilities. Present day weapons systems have been characterized as
"eggshells armed with hammers," suggesting that in the event of
hostilities, targets must be swiftly chosen, in time-frames requiring
automated response, to avoid the loss of precious megatonnage. In this
experiment we used EURISKO to choose targets in simulated nuclear exchanges,
with extremely exciting results.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 85 19:42:32 est
From: Gary Cottrell <gary@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Programming the User-Friendly Dog
SEMINAR
Saturday, 23 February 1985
55 Cottage St.
9:00 p.m.
Speaker
Garrison W. Cottrell
University of Cottage Street
Department of Dog Science
"Programming the User-Friendly Dog"
A current hot research topic is building user-friendly
interfaces to computer systems. One of the techniques of this
work is to design so-called "habitable subsets" of natural
language that in many cases allow the naive user to begin
productively using the system with little instruction. In this
work, we will show that these techniques, combined with results
from connectionist dog modelling, can be transferred to the ever
growing field of building user-friendly dogs. While the hardware
in this case is an example of a VRISC (Very Reduced Instruction
Set) computer, we will show that it is still possible to program
easily-learned high level commands.
Since it has been shown that in working with such machines,
the user has to do much of the computation of appropriate command
contexts (New Directions in Connectionist Dog Modelling, Cottrell
84), it is important to use English commands that make sense with
respect to the intended effect. For example, many previous
researchers have advocated the use of such commands as "Go on"
(How to Live with Three Dobermans, Kester 84) or "Go play" (Being
Mellow with Your Dog, Ose 73) to mean "Go lie down and quit
bothering me." The obvious mismatch here between the intent and
the usual meaning of "Go on" (i.e., continue) makes it difficult
for new users of the system to adapt to the command language. A
more ergonomically-designed command is "Scram." The command
matches the intent, and "go" is saved for more appropriate
contexts.
The reasons for the present sad state of affairs in most dog
programming systems can be traced to the use of outmoded command
languages and archaic beliefs about the capacities of the dog.
On the first point, many so called "experts" still advocate the
use of "heel" to mean "walk beside me." In this case, there is a
double mismatch: First with the hardware, which as everyone
knows, has no heel; and second with the semantics of the English
word "heel", which might better be used with respect to the male
dog's behavior towards female dogs. The New Age dog programmer
uses the much more natural command "Walk with Me." Addressing the
second point, many dog programmers believe that they have
accomplished much more than is possible with these crude
machines. It has long been known to those on the forefront of
this field (Larson, 84) that such baroque commands strings as:
"Now, JellyBean, you stay here, I have to go to a party and you
can't come. Be a good boy, JellyBean!" are actually interpreted
by the machine as: "blah JellyBean blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
JellyBean," which is certainly not what the user intended. We
will have a demonstration system at the talk employing our
interface, including such useful commands as "Call the Elevator",
"Wag your tail", and "Eat that dog food."
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 1985 16:10 EST (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Motion Planning with Uncertainty (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
On Motion Planning with Uncertainty
Michael Erdmann
Robots must successfully plan and execute tasks in the presence of
control and sensing uncertainty. Said differently, a robot must know
both how to get to a goal and how to recognize success once it has
gotten to the goal. I will present a backprojection algorithm that
computes regions from which motions along particular commanded
directions are guaranteed to successfully reach a goal. I will also
discuss the issue of goal recognizability and the power of the
backprojection approach in terms of the termination predicates
required to recognize success.
Tuesday, Feb. 26, 4 PM, 8th Floor Playroom
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Mar-85 0012 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #27
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 85 00:00:31 PST
Date: Thu 28 Feb 1985 21:58-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #27
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 1 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 27
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - XLISP & Unification & Rete Networks & DUCK,
Applications - CAI & Commonsense Reasoning & Paradox,
Representation - Analytic Solid Modeling,
Bindings - General Research Corp.,
Correction - Webster service,
Linguistics - Wally & Y'alls,
Business - R&D Opportunity & Medicomp AI/DB System,
Seminars - Direct Manipulation Interfaces (CMU) &
Counterfactuals (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 85 15:56:24 EST
From: David←Michael←Fobare%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: XLISP Questions
I am working on a version of LISP called XLISP and am wondering
if anyone else has worked with it. In particular I am having trouble
with the 'Object', 'Class', and 'Keymap' primitives. What are instance
variables? Class variables? Thanks.
David Fobare
------------------------------
Date: Tue 26 Feb 85 10:20:30-MST
From: Pete Tinker <tinker@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Production Systems/Unification
Are there any production systems (backward- or forward-chaining) which
use unification rather than simple pattern matches to bind variables?
-Pete Tinker (TINKER@UTAH-20)
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 85 12:49:42 PST (Wed)
From: Don Rose <drose@uci-icse>
Subject: rete networks
Hello everyone - I am currently familiarizing myself with the subject of
rete networks (esp. with regards to a possible synthesis with current
data-dependency frameworks for truth maintenance); if anyone can point the
way to relevant/interesting articles along these lines (or just on rete
networks alone), I would appreciate your help. Thanks --Donald Rose
drose@uci-icse
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 17:57:23 PST
From: Koenraad Lecot <koen@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: DUCK
Can anybody provide me with references to the DUCK language? I know Smart
Systems Technologies is selling DUCK but I imagine they'll charge for
manuals (smart).
Thanks in advance,
-- Koenraad Lecot
ARPA: koen@ucla-cs.arpa
UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,randvax,sdcrdcf,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!koen
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 15:09:44 est
From: Deepak Kumar <kumard%buffalo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Info wanted - Expert Systems for CAI
I'm taking a course on AI in Medicine where in I have decided
to present a seminar on Intelligent Computer Assisted Instruction
for Medical Diagnosis. I want to emphasize use of already-
existing Expert Systems for CAI applications. After all, when the
knowledge is there, it can be utilized for purposes other than
advising and decision making.
If there are any references or materials on the above domain
I'd like to have it. It need not be specifically to the
area of Medicine. So, if anyone has made any attempts on using
Expert Systems in Education, I'd like to get some experiences
that I can share with my audience.
Thanx.
Deepak Kumar (Dept. of CS, SUNY at Buffalo)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 17:16:42 est
From: arora@buffalo (Kulbir S. Arora)
Subject: Request for bibliography
Is there a bibliography available on Common-sense reasoning systems
(qualitative reasoning, mental models) ?
Kulbir Arora
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 1985 1559-PST (Wednesday)
From: Eugene Miya <eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA>
Subject: info requested -- paradox
Newsgroups: net.ai
Distribution: net
This is for someone else. Send replies to me.
Does anybody have pointers to structures and techniques for dealing with
paradox or apparent contradiction [e.g., light is a wave, light is a
particle]? one suggestion made was to use analogy, but we have a
copy of the "analogy considered harmful" paper by some people at parc.
thanks in advance.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,vortex}!ames!aurora!eugene
emiya@ames-vmsb.ARPA
p.s. usenet responses turned up one ref to work at mit on contradiction.
------------------------------
Date: 26 February 1985 23:16-EST
From: John G. Aspinall <JGA @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Recent Article - representation of solids
In a recent AI digest, I noticed this summary of a paper from IEEE Computer
Graphics and Applications, February 1985:
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
An Overview of Analytic Solid Modeling, by M. Casale and E. Stanton
of PDA Engineering, pp. 45-56:
Describes a way of modeling complex shapes as ...
I'm very interested by these sorts of systems, and have been working with
splines for some time now, so I was quite interested in the paper. If any
reader has deeper knowledge of the system described I would appreciate some
enlightenment about a query of mine. I have read the paper thoroughly, and I
don't think it answers this.
One thing I did not understand was the following: They made a big deal out of
the necessity to represent circles (surfaces of rotation, holes, cylinders,
etc.) which I agree with -- a round object is easily produced in many ways
in the real world (lathes, drills, etc.). But there is no way to exactly
represent a circle as a polynomial of a parametric variable.
That is if x = P(u) and y = Q(u), where P and Q are polynomials, there is no
way to let x↑2 + y↑2 = r↑2 (a constant, independent of u) except the trivial
point solution x = constant, y = constant.
So how do they represent circles? Possibility 1: they represent them
approximately with splines. Problem: suppose you want to model another
cylinder rotating in that hole. It's quite conceivable that the clearances
involved might be 10↑-3 or less of the diameter. That implies an awful lot of
spline-knots. Possibility 2: Circles (and by extension, cylinders etc.) exist
as exact entities in their system. Problem: how do you join that to a spline
solid, for instance when you put a hole in something?
If you have any ideas about this, I'd be very interested in hearing them.
Many thanks for any light you might shed. Oh yes, please reply to me directly.
John Aspinall.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 27 Feb 85 14:36:52-CST
From: CMP.BARC@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: General Research Corp. Query
General Research has two locations:
P.O. Box 6770 7655 Old Springhouse Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93160-6770 McLean, VA 22102
(805) 964-7724 (703) 893-5915
TWX-TELEX 910-334-1193
Dallas Webster
------------------------------
Date: Thu 28 Feb 85 15:22:16-PST
From: David Roode <ROODE@SRI-NIC.ARPA>
Subject: Webster service
In Volume 3 issues 17 and 23 of this digest, mention was made
of an experimental service being developed here at SRI-NIC.
The articles gave the false impression that this was a generally
available, production service. This is in fact not the case.
We have to iron out several issues before the service can be made
public, and an announcement will be made when and if the
online dictionary is available.
[My apologies for picking up the Rutgers bboard announcement and
help file for the WEBSTER program without checking into the
program's availability. It seems there may be copyright or
related issues in addition to software-related ones. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 13:16:03 EST
From: Pete Bradford (CSD UK) <bradford@AMSAA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Wally
As a `Brit', now resident in the US for some 3 years,
and an avid fan of the `Grauniad' newspaper, let me try to
answer Gordon Joly's question. To the best of my knowledge
the word `wally' does NOT exist in the United States. It app-
ears in Websters Dictionary as a Scottish word meaning `fine,
splendid, or sturdy', a long way from its modern day British
use! There is also a word `wallydraigle', or `wallydrag'(!),
also Scottish, which means `a feeble, undergrown or slovenly
creature', perhaps a lot closer to the `wally' we all know --
at least, ONE of the meanings we know!
The nearest equivalents to `wally' over here, in the
sense of a stupid or foolish person, are `jerk',or `nerd'. As
for the other meanings, well, the one meaning that which you
would buy in a Fish and Chip shop is a `dill pickle', or just
plain `pickle'. The other meaning, ie an organ which I, along
with approximately half the human race, possess, is covered
by as many terms in the US as it is in the UK - but NOT wally.
Hope this helps!
PJB
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 85 13:43:58 est
From: "Thomas E. Schutz" <tes%bostonu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Y'alls
Some people in Richmond, Virginia have evolved their own forms
for the singular and plural "you" :
Singular - "y'all"
Plural - "y'alls"
I discovered this while visiting Richmond over summer vacation.
A native of the town addressed me as "y'all"; perplexed, I turned
around but did not see anyone else standing there. Later on
I overheard the word "y'alls," and then everything fell into place.
- Tom Schutz
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 85 16:04 EST
From: White@RADC-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: R&D Opportunity
An announcement will soon appear (estimated 7 - 14 March 85) in the
Commerce Business Daily (CBD) advertizing a research and development
(R&D) program to be undertaken by the Rome Air Development Center
(RADC). This advertisement will be in the form of a Program Research
and Development Announcement (PRDA) which is a notice which provides
information about RADC's interest in R&D in a specific area where the
method for achieving the goal is not evident. This particular PRDA
will contain many different areas of interest. Some will be of
interest to the AI community such as the application of AI technology
in software development environments. The notice you are now reading
is not a solicitation and is merely a "heads up" to encourage
participation. Responses and/or communications are not to be
directed to the address appearing on this notice and should be made
in accordance with directions contained in the CBD announcement.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 85 05:50:10 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Medicomp AI/DB System
Electronics Week February 18, 1985 Page 59
Medicomp of Virginia Inc. is now selling a combination medical records
/artificial intelligence system. The system runs on an IBM Series/1
minicomputer with a dabase covering 3000 diseases, 1000 symptoms and 1000
medical tests. The system had its first sale to Cleveland Clinic. They
purchased it when it solved a baffling case of infectious endocarditis.
It costs $55,000.
They have been maintaining a free telephone hookup to the system for
demonstration purposes.
------------------------------
Date: 25 February 1985 1351-EST
From: Jeff Shrager@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - Direct Manipulation Interfaces (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Artificial Intelligence Lecture Series
COGNITIVE ENGINEERING of DIRECT MANIPULATION INTERFACES
Don Norman
Institute for Cognitive Science
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla CA 92093
2:00 PM, Friday, March 1
Westinghouse R & D Center Auditorium - Bldg 401
Abstract
To program by Direct Manipulation is to program by connecting together
data streams, drawing the interconnections on the screen and letting
the resulting diagram be the program. Direct Manipulation is made
possible by the combination of object-oriented programming languages
(as available on Lisp machines), high-resolution bit-mapped graphics,
and pointing devices. It promises superior performance for that class
of problems that can be characterized in this manner. It allows
concentration upon the semantics of the task rather than the structure
of the programming language. At least, so goes the rhetoric.
Examination of the nature of Direct Manipulation leads naturally to an
examination of the major issues in interface design. It turns out that
one of the major virtues of Direct Manipulation is the feeling of
control that it produces, the feeling of directly manipulating the
computational objects one cares about. This feeling depends as much
upon the skill of the user as the nature of the interface. We meet the
Gulfs of Execution and of Evaluation, gulfs that Direct Manipulation
interfaces promise to bridge more readily than conventional interfaces.
Will Direct manipulation Interfaces live up to their promise? Yes and
no.
Directions
Head east on the parkway, I-376, to the Churchill exit (13). As you
come off, keep bearing right for a few hundred yards to the first
traffic light. Proceed straight through it, across Beulah Road, and
up the R&D entrance road where the guard will point out visitors
parking and reception. You don't need to call in advance; there will
be a few technicians to escort visitors to the auditorium.
In addition to the Westinghouse talk, Don Norman will be speaking in the
Psychology Colloquium Series this Thursday, Feb 28, at 4:00 in the
Adamson Wing (BH). The talk is entitled: "From slips and mistakes to
a theory of action".
------------------------------
Date: Tue 26 Feb 85 09:39:50-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Counterfactuals (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, March 1, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Matthew Ginsberg, Computer Science Department and
Heuristic Programming Project, Stanford University
ABSTRACT: COUNTERFACTUALS
Counterfactuals are a form of commonsense non-montonic inference that
has been of long-term interest to philosophers. In this paper, we
begin by describing some of the impact counterfactuals can be expected
to have in artificial intelligence, and by reviewing briefly some of
the philosophical conclusions which have been drawn about them.
Philosophers have noted that the content of any particular
counterfactual is in part context-dependent; we present a formal
description of counterfactuals that allows us to encode this
context-dependent information clearly in the choice of a sublanguage
of the logical language in which we are working. Having made this
choice, we show that our description of counterfactuals is formally
identical to the accepted "possible worlds" interpretation due to
David Lewis. Finally, we examine the application of our ideas in the
domain of automated diagnosis of hardware faults.
Paula
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Mar-85 0045 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #28
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 85 00:45:14 PST
Date: Sun 3 Mar 1985 22:34-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #28
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 4 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 28
Today's Topics:
Knowledge Representation - Attribution of Characteristics &
RETE Algorithm & Commonsense and Qualitative Reasoning,
AI Tools - KEE Unification & XLISP,
Seminar Summary - Representational Cognitive Modeling (CSLI),
Seminars - Varieties of Phenomenology (UCB) &
Prolog, Databases, and Natural Language Access (SU) &
Connectionist Inference Architecture (CMU) &
Animating Programs Using Smalltalk (GE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 85 07:50:00 EST
From: bogner@ari-hq1
Reply-to: <bogner@ari-hq1>
Subject: ATTRIBUTION OF CHARACTERISTICS
I AM COLLECTING DATA FOR A KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION MODEL, ON THE ATTRIBUTION
OF CHARACTERISTICS TO INDIVIDUALS USING A MODIFICATION OF GEORGE KELLY'S
REP GRID. I AM DEVELOPING AN ARGUMENT AGAINST ATTRIBUTION ALONG BIPOLAR
DIMENSIONS (BOUNDED BY ANTONYMS). IS ANYONE ELSE ADDRESSING THAT OR A
SIMILAR QUESTION???
I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE LISTINGS OF ANY RELATED CONFERENCES, MEETINGS,
TUTORIALS, . . .
SUE
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 1985 9:08:28 EST (Friday)
From: Karl Schwamb <m13820@mitre>
Subject: RETE Algorithm
This is in replay to Don Rose's message to the AIList (V 3, N 27).
The two references below are an excellent place to start learning about
the RETE algorithm:
C. L. Forgy, "Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object
Pattern Match Problem," in ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (V 19, N 1).
C. L. Forgy, On the efficient implementation of production systems,
Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie-Mellon Univ., 1979.
Hope this helps! ...Karl
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 85 08:20 PST
From: Bobrow.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Commonsense Reasoning
From: arora@buffalo (Kulbir S. Arora)
Subject: Request for bibliography
Is there a bibliography available on Common-sense reasoning systems
(qualitative reasoning, mental models) ?
Kulbir Arora
Volume 24 of the AI Journal was devoted to Qualitative Reasoning about
Physical Systems, and is now avalailable as a book from MIT Press.
danny bobrow
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 85 17:12 EST
From: Paul Fishwick <Fishwick%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Qualitative Reasoning
As to the request for a bibiliography for qualitative reasoning, I
suggest reviewing the following 2 references:
1) "Mental Models", edited by Gentner, Dedre and Stevens, Albert,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey 1983.
2) Special Issue of the Artificial Intelligence Journal: Volume 24,
numbers 1-3, December 1984.
They contain a number of very good papers in addition to further
references for more specific topics within QR.
-paul
------------------------------
Date: Sun 3 Mar 85 08:49:32-PST
From: Richard Fikes <FIKES@USC-ECL.ARPA>
Subject: Rule Systems Using Unification
Regarding your query about production rule systems and unification --
The rule system in IntelliCorp's KEE system (Release 2.0) uses full
unification to match rules to goals, subgoals, and items retrieved
from the knowledge base. It has both a forward chainer and a backward
chainer.
richard fikes
(FIKES@USC-ECL)
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 1 Mar 1985 06:37:27-PST
From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
Subject: XLISP
Re: XLISP question in AIList V3.27
There is an article on XLISP in the March 85 Byte magazine. Also,
the recent USENET distribution of XLISP mentioned that the author,
Dave Betz, can be reached as "harvard!betz". I don't know the
USENET path to harvard, nor do I know if betz@harvard.arpa would
work.
Dave's a good guy, please don't bother him with questions if you
haven't read the article (and the code/documentation/examples).
Martin Minow
minow%rex.dec@decwrl.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 1985 1656 PST
From: Larry Carroll <LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA>
Reply-to: LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA
Subject: XLISP
The latest Byte (March '85) has an article by the author of XLISP, David
Betz. It includes a fairly clear explanation of the concepts you're
having trouble with and some examples.
Larry @ jpl-vlsi
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 85 18:28:31 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: XLISP 1.4
The current issue of Byte (March 85) has an excellent article
on XLISP by its creator David Betz. In it he mentions version 1.4
which is supposed to be similar to Common Lisp. Anybody know where a
copy can be obtained?
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 85 16:00:23 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: XLISP
I am in the process of getting the newest version of XLISP to run
on an IBM-PC-AT/DOS 3.0/Computer Innovations ver 2.1/ big-dos2-soft
model. The source is available at HARVARD, which accepts an
anonymous login.
In order to get the thing to recompile (almost 1 hr), some changes
had to be made, described below. Although I have just started to
test it out, any obvious mistakes I may have made I would appreciate
hearing about from an observant reader.
[XLISP ver 1.4 is a public domain version of a COMMON LISP, new
with version 1.4, which was authored and maintained by David Betz]
[The source is 170K, .EXE is 70K, and the manual is 30p]
[Also see March 85 BYTE for an article by Betz on XLISP]
Changes:
1) NIL => 0 from (NODE *) 0
2) deleted references to xlintern()
3) used standard unix "setjmp.h" (bsd 4.1)
4) used a dummy "ctype.h"
The file available on HARVARD is a shell file. Since I am not
running under unix, I had to kludge my own decommutator which I
can send upon request.
Richard K Jennings
AF Sat Cntl Fac
408 744-6427 av: 799-6427 arpa: jennings@aerospace
afscf.xrp@hq-afsc
------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Feb 85 14:50:16-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Summary - Representational Cognitive Modeling (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SUMMARY OF F4 MEETING
At the meeting of project F4 on February 11, Bob Moore presented
arguments for the representational approach to designing AI systems
and modelling mental activities in humans. Moore first noted the
relative ease with which a human can acquire individual beliefs
without disturbing very much of the rest of his mental state. This
supports the idea that distinct beliefs ought to be embodied
more-or-less individually, since acquiring a new belief does not seem
to require wholesale reorganization of one's mental state. Moore went
on to argue that the combinatorial structure of what can be believed
suggests a similar combinatorial structure to how it is believed. The
idea is that the combinatorial structure of the sentences used to
characterize belief states does not serve merely to distinguish one
belief state from another; there are regularities in behavior that
depend on that structure. For instance, having a belief of the form
``if not P, then Q'' is associated with behavior appropriate to Q's
being true when evidence of P's being false is presented, but not
necessarily with behavior appropriate to P's being true when evidence
of Q's being false is presented, even though ``if not P, then Q'' and
``if not Q, then P'' are equivalent under most interpretations of the
conditional. The fact that this and many other structural
distinctions in sentences used to classify belief states correspond to
systematic distinctions in behavior presents a prima facie case that
the belief states themselves are similarly structured. But, Moore
argued, under a conception of representation sufficiently abstract to
cover the kinds of ``representation'' actually used in computational
models of mental states, the claim that mental states involve
``syntactic'' representations--a language of thought--probably comes
to no more than this. Moore concluded by noting that none of these
arguments bear on the question of whether the language of thought is
distinct from natural language, but that empirical considerations,
such as the indexicality of natural language and the difficulty of
stating principles of reasoning that apply directly to natural
language, suggest that the two are distinct.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 85 16:15:29 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Varieties of Phenomenology (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, March 5, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Hubert Dreyfus, Department of Philosophy, UC
Berkeley
TITLE: ``Varieties of Phenomenology: Husserl, Heidegger
and Merleau-Ponty''
A tutorial review of the three most important accounts of
intentionality in recent continental philosophy, with emphasis on
their relevance to current theories of mental representation.
Edmund Husserl begins the phenomenological concern with inten-
tionality. In his earlier work, The LOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, he
holds a view similar to Searle's that intentional content type
individuates mental acts. Later, in IDEAS, he changes to a posi-
tion, which he calls ``cognitive science,'' in which mental
representations are held to be hierarchies of strict rules,
involved in all intelligent activity. I take this to be an early
version of the computational view of the mind.
Husserl's account leads to two important counter-views.
Martin Heidegger in BEING AND TIME argues that intentional states
do not play the central role in intelligent behavior Husserl sup-
posed, and that even in those cases where intentional states are
involved their intentional content can not be treated as abstract
structures. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, like Heidegger, argues for a
primitive form of intentionality which does not involve mental
representation, but whereas Heidegger is primarily interested in
an account of action and its social setting, Merleau-Ponty bases
his critique on a phenomenology of perception and bodily skills.
Together, Heidegger's and Merleau-Ponty's work constitutes
the most powerful critique of cognitivism so far offered.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 28 Feb 85 09:51:18-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - PROLOG, DATABASES, AND NATURAL LANGUAGE ACCESS (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CS 300 -- Computer Science Department Colloquium -- Winter 1984-1985.
Tuesday, March 5, 1985
at 4:15 in Terman Auditorium
PROLOG, DATABASES, AND NATURAL LANGUAGE ACCESS
David H.D. WARREN
Quintus Computer Systems, Inc.
PROLOG is a general purpose programming language based on logic. It
can be viewed either as an extension of pure LISP, or as an extension
of a relational database query language. It was first conceived in
1972, by Alain Colmerauer at the University of Marseille. Since then,
it has been used in a wide variety of applications, including natural
language processing, algebraic symbol manipulation, compiler writing,
architectural design, VLSI circuit design, and expert systems. PROLOG
was chosen as the initial kernel language for Japan's Fifth Generation
Computer Systems project, and the project's prototype Prolog machine,
PSI, has recently been unveiled in Tokyo.
In this talk, I will give an overview of the language, and then focus
on one particular application, a domain-independent system for natural
language question answering, called "CHAT". I will compare the way
Chat plans and executes a query with the query optimization strategies
of relational database systems such as SYSTEM-R. Finally I will
discuss the future prospects for PROLOG in the light of Japan's Fifth
Generation project, and describe the high-performance PROLOG systems
for the SUN and VAX available from Quintus.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 1 March 1985 15:56:29 EST
From: Steven.Shafer@cmu-cs-ius.arpa
Subject: Seminar - Connectionist Inference Architecture (CMU)
AI SEMINAR
Symbols Among the Neurons: Details of a Connectionist Inference Architecture
Dave Touretzky, CMU
Tuesday, March 5, 3:00 pm in WeH 5409
Pattern matching and variable binding are easily implemented in
conventional computer architectures, but not necessarily in all
architectures. In a distributed neural network architecture each
symbol is represented by activity in many units and each unit
contributes to the representation of many symbols. Manipulating
symbols using this type of representation is not as easy as with a
local representation where each unit denotes one symbol, but there
is evidence that the distributed approach is the one chosen by
nature. In this talk I will describe work I am doing with Geoff
Hinton on production system interpreters implemented in neural
networks using distributed representations for both symbols and
rules. The research provides an account of two important symbolic
reasoning operations, pattern matching and variable binding, as
emergent properties of collections of neuron-like elements. The
success of our production system implementations goes some way
towards answering a common criticism of connectionist theories:
that they aren't powerful enough to do symbolic reasoning.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 85 15:13:02 EST
From: coopercc@GE-CRD
Subject: Seminar - Animating Programs Using Smalltalk (GE)
Computer Science Seminar
General Electric R & D Center
Schenectady, N.Y.
Animating Programs Using Smalltalk
Ralph L. London
Tektronix, Inc.
Friday, March 15
1:30 PM, Bldg. K1, Conf. Rm. 2
(Refreshments at 1:15)
ABSTRACT: We discuss our work in program animation
using the Smalltalk programming environment. We strive
to isolate the graphical viewing structure from the
code of the algorithm being animated. In addition to
"procedure calls" this is achieved through a refinement
of the Smalltalk Model-View-Controller construct and
view dependency mechanism, which allows the algorithm
code to broadcast interesting events and supports the
insertion of probes into active values. Multiple, dif-
ferent views of a single object are easily achieved.
There are connections between interesting events and
invariant assertions. Further efforts were made to
ensure smoothness of motion and transitions between
states. A number of particular animations, the evolu-
tion of an animation, and directions for further
research are included. We plan to show a videotape.
Notice to Non-GE attendees:
It is necessary that we ask you to notify Marion White
(518-385-8370 or WHITEMM@GE-CRD) at least two days in
advance of the seminar.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Mar-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #29
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 85 02:29:24 PST
Date: Sun 3 Mar 1985 23:06-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #29
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 4 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 29
Today's Topics:
News - Recent Articles and Rutgers Reports,
Information Science - Xerox NoteCards,
Humor - Kurzweill Reader & Analysis of AIList Contents,
Conferences - AI in Engineering &
Theoretical Issues in Conceptual Information Processing &
Southern California AI Society
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 1985 13:32-EST
From: Leff@laurence, 300C%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa,
Subject: Articles in the Applied Intelligence Reporter
Applied Intelligence Reporter Volume 2 No 3/4 (some material omitted
as it is a repeat of stuff I reported earlier)
Robots in the Workplace: Summary of material from James S. Albus work on
robotics.
An ad from Scientific Data Link 850 Third Avenue, New York NY 10022
(212) 838-7200 for various microfiche copies of technical reports on
artificial intelligence from
MIT 1-513 450 fiche $2100.00
Rutgers 230 reports 264 fiche $1395
SRI 285 reports $1800
Carnegie Mellon 600 papers Part I $2050, Part II $2150 Parts I and II $4000
Stanford 500 fiche $2425
Purdue (Pattern Recognition and Image Processing) 145 reports $1365
Maryland (Computer Vision) 313 reports $1750
Overview of Computer Vision
Tutorial on Lisp Iterative structures
Expert Systems for Executives
AI entering world of art (talks about computer graphics applications to art)
Russel H. Petersen is vice-president of marketing for Synthetic Vision Systems
Kurzweill announced a chip to recognize human speech. This is part of
an effort to build a voice-typewriter.
FMC established an artificial intelligence center in Santa Clara
California.
Synthetic Vision Systems was formed to sell technology to inspect and validate
the manufacture of semiconductor products.
AI companies are forming in the following states in descending order by
employment level: California, Massachusetts, New York, Michigan,
Florida, New Jersey and Texas
Technical Reports from Rutgers University
CBM-TR-139 Localization Problems and Expert Systems Allen Ginsberg
(discusses expert systems that handle localization problems as
opposed to classification systems such as disease diagnosis)
CBM-TR-145 "Shift of Bias for Inductive Concept Learning" Paul E.
Utgoff. $15.00
LCSR-TR-60 "Artificial Intellligence and The Social Sciences: A
Preliminary Report" Saul Amarel
LCSR-TR-61 "Knowledge Representation as the Basis for Requirements"
A. Borgida, S. Greenspan and J. Mylopoulous
LCSR-TR-62 "Introduction to the Comtex Microfiche Edition of the
Rutgers University Artificial Intelligence Research Reports" S. Amarel
LCSR-TR-64 "Leap: A Learning Apprentice for VLSI Design" T. M.
Mitchell, S. Mahadevan and L. I. Sternberg
LCSR-TR-65 "A Knowledge-Base Approach to Design", T. M. Mitchell, L. I.
Steinberg and J. S. Shulman (primarily concerned with VLSI design
issues)
LCSR-TR-66 "Verification-Based Learning: A Generalization Strategy for
Inferring Problem-Decomposition methods" S. Mahadaven.
Artificial Intelligence Reporter December-January 1985
Conference Announcements
The International Federation of Automatic Control
conference on Artificial Intelligence in Economics and Management
Robotics International of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers
Second Annual Robotic End Effector: Design and Applications Seminar on
March 19, 1985 at the Holiday Inn Livonia (detroit)
IEEE Computer Society on Robotics and Automation on March 25-28 1985 in
ST. Louis, Missouri
AT&T Bell Laboratories: Workshop on Artificial Intelligence in
Statistics AT&T Conference Center in Princeton NJ on Apr 15-16, 1985
Association Francaise d'Intelligence Artificielle et Systems de
Simulation in association with the Society of Manufactuirng Engineers
will present Intelligencia 85 at the Parc des Expositions, Porte de
Versailles, Paris May 21-24 1985
Robotics International of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers,
Robots 9 at Cobo Hall, Detroit, Michigan on June 3-6 1985
IEEE Comptuter Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, San Francisco June 9-13 1985
Robotics International of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers will
sponsor the 34d Canadian CAD/CAM and Robotics Exposition and Conference
at the International Society
IEEE Computer Society seminar on Logic Programming in Boston,
Massachusetts
The Institute for Computer Engineering Research in cooperation with
the Intelligent Computer Systems Research Institute of the University
of Miami is presenting ARTELL 85 at the Philadelphia Civic Center on
November 4-7 1985
The Computer and Automated Systems Asssociation of the Society of
Manufacturing Engineers (CASA/SME) are holding Mechatronics/Autofact
Japan 85 at the New Osaka Fairgrounds in Osaka, Japan November 25-28
1985
Also an article urging cooperation between OR and AI.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 85 17:41 PST
From: Halasz.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Information on Xerox NoteCards
This description of the Xerox NoteCards system is a response to
inquiries that have recently appeared on several Arpanet discussion
lists.
A. Background: NoteCards is part of an ongoing research project in
the Intelligent Systems Lab at Xerox PARC investigating "idea
processing" tasks, such as interpreting textual information, structuring
ideas, formulating arguments, and authoring complex documents. The
NoteCards system provides an on-line environment for carrying out this
research. The principal reasearchers involved in this project are Frank
Halasz, Tom Moran, and Randy Trigg.
NoteCards is implemented in Interlisp-D and runs on the Xerox 1108
family of Lisp processors.
B. The System: NoteCards is intended primarily as an idea structuring
tool, but it can also be used as a fairly general database system for
loosely structured information. The basic object in NoteCards is an
electronic note card containing an idea-sized unit of text, graphics,
images, or whatever. Different kinds of note cards are defined in an
inheritance hierarchy of note card types (e.g., text cards, sketch
cards, query cards, etc.). On the screen, multiple cards can be
simultaneously displayed, each one in a separate window having an
underlying editor appropriate to the card type.
Individual note cards can be connected to other note cards by
arbitrarily typed links, forming networks of related cards. At present,
link types are simply labels attached to each link. It is up to each
user to utilize the link types to organize the note card network.
Within a note card, a link is represented by a small, active icon.
Clicking with the mouse in the icon, retrieves the target card and
displays it on the screen.
NoteCards includes a filing mechanism built around a special type of
card called a FileBox. In each FileBox are filed (i.e., linked by a
Filing link) zero or more note cards as well as zero or more other
FileBoxes. FileBoxes serve as a kind of categorization hierarchy for
filing note cards by "topics".
Browser cards contain node-link diagrams (i.e., maps) of arbitrary
pieces of the note card network. Each node in a Browser's node-link
diagram is an active icon that can be used to retrieve the indicated
card. Spatially organized information is also available in the form of
Sketch cards that allow the user to lay out line drawings, text, and
link icons in an arbitrary, zoomable 2-D space.
NoteCards is an environment that integrates several packages already
available in the Interlisp-D system, e.g., TEdit, Grapher, and Sketch.
NoteCards has a full programmer's interface. All of the functionality
in NoteCards is accessible through a set of well-documented Lisp
functions, allowing the user to create new types of note cards, develop
programs that monitor or process the note card network, and/or integrate
new Interlisp packages into the NoteCards environment.
C. Research directions: NoteCards was designed primarily as a
research vehicle. The following are some of the research topics that we
are pursuing using the NoteCards system.
1) User tailorability -- a system description language that a
non-programming user could edit in order to tailor the system to his or
her task and/or interaction style.
2) Argumentation -- use of a "truth-maintenance" mechanism to help
users develop and manipulate alternative argument structures.
3) Psychological issues -- investigations of the ways in which
NoteCards does or does not support real-world tasks.
4) Visual summaries of large networks -- investigations of other ways
to display network maps, including fish-eye graphs, trimmed graphs, 3D
graphs, indented outline, etc.
5) Multi-window management -- investigations of various abstractions
for building general multi-window management tools that take advantage
of inter-card dependencies.
6) Querying networks of cards -- design of a querying interfaces that
allow users to ask questions about the contents and structure of a
network.
7) Multiple user, interlinked NoteFiles -- providing distributed/shared
NoteFiles with links between different NoteFiles.
8) Alternative documents -- explore alternative document concepts, such
as guided tours (i.e., suggested paths through a network of cards).
9) Text retrieval -- investigate several methods for doing text
retrieval based on full-text search and statistical matching.
10) Object-oriented implementation -- we are investigating the
possibility of rewriting NoteCards in Loops.
D. How to get more info:
A technical paper on Notecards is in progress. For information about
the research issues surrounding NoteCards contact Halasz.pa@Xerox or
Trigg.pa@Xerox.
NoteCards is not at this time a Xerox product. However, Xerox Special
Information System's Vista Laboratories offers a limited licensing
agreement aimed at distributing NoteCards to groups doing related
research (Contact: NoteCardsInfo.pasa@Xerox)
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 27-Feb-85 10:22:14-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Humour
Re: Kurzweil Data Entry Machine (Vol 3 # 10 and others)
Can this machine read bewteen the lines ?
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Mar 85 08:58:01-MST
From: Stan Shebs <SHEBS@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Analysis(?) of AIList Contents
Yesterday I culled through 1 1/2 years worth of saved and printed
AIList digests (about 3 inches thick). The result was about 1/2 inch
of individual articles that are still of interest (mostly seminar
notices with abstracts) - about 16% of the original saved stuff.
Since I only printed out about 30% of the digests that actually came
by (the ones that were interesting when I read them), this works
out to approximately 5% of the total volume. This is in accordance
with the general rule that "9x% of everything is b*llsh*t". So
AIList is really not so bad, and the experimental technique has
been corroborated :-)
stan shebs
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 18 February 1985 05:53:59 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Conference on AI in Engg.
CALL FOR PAPERS
FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON APPLICATIONS OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(AIEP)
The purpose of this conference is to provide a forum for
engineers all over the world to present their work on the
applications of artificial intelligence to engineering
problems. The conference will be held from April 15-18 1986
at Southampton University, England and will be preceeded by
tutorials in Expert systems and Robotics.
CONFERENCE THEMES
The following topics are suggested and other related areas
will be considered.
- Computer-aided design
- Computer-based training
- Planning and Scheduling
- Constraint Management
- Intelligent Tutors
- Expert systems
- Knowledge representation
- Learning
- Natural language applications
- Cognitive modelling of engineering problems
- Robotics
- Database interfaces
- Graphical interfaces
- Knowledge-based simulation
- Design Modelling
CALL FOR PAPERS
Authors are invited to submit three copies of a 500 word
abstract. The abstract should have enough details to permit
careful evaluation by a committee consisting of renowed
experts in the field. The abstracts should be accompained
with the following details:
- Authors' address, name, affliation. Indicate the
person to address all correspondence.
- The branch of engineering. If the paper addresses
engineering in general, then should be categorized
under GENERAL DESIGN.
- The topic area.
TIME TABLE
Submission of Abstracts: June 1st 1985
Notification of acceptance: August 1st 1985
Submission of Full Paper: November 1st 1985
INFORMATION
All abstracts should be sent to:
Dr. R. Adey, General Chairman, AIEP
Computational Mechanics Centre
Ashurst Lodge
Southampton S04 2AA
England
Inquires about exhibits, registration should be addressed
to:
Ms Elaine Taylor
Computational Mechanics Centre
Ashurst Lodge
Southampton S04 2AA
England
For more information in US contact:
D. Sriram, Technical Chairman AIEP
Civil Engineering and Construction Robotics
Laboratories
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 85 13:13:12 EST
From: Chris Riesbeck <Riesbeck@YALE.ARPA>
Subject: Workshop - Theoretical Issues in Conceptual Information Processing
*** Call for participants ***
The Second Annual Workshop on
Theoretical Issues in
Conceptual Information Processing
May 2-3, 1985
The Peabody Museum of Natural History
Yale University
New Haven, CT
This year's workshop will focus on new research into memory-based models
of planning, reasoning, natural language processing, learning, and other
issues in conceptual information processing. The format will mix panels
and papers, with ample time for discussion and debate. We hope to
foster inter-laboratory interaction, with a session devoted to "What
we're going to do, we think," including research plans from as many
centers as possible.
Prospective speakers and panel leaders should contact Chris Riesbeck
immediately, and also submit, via mail or netmail, a 2 - 10 page
write-up, for distribution at the workshop, addressing the following
questions, if appropriate:
What specific domains, tasks, and examples will your
laboratory be investigating in the next few years?
What theoretical questions are involved? How does this
research fit in the overall picture? How does it follow from
previous research? What related topics are you NOT addressing?
Submission deadline: March 29. Notification: April 8th. Note: submit
earlier for an earlier response.
Rooms are being blocked at the Park Plaza hotel in downtown New Haven.
Information available from Donna Mauri.
SUBMISSIONS: LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS:
Christopher K. Riesbeck Donna Mauri
PO Box 2158, Yale Station PO Box 2158, Yale Station
Department of Computer Science Department of Computer Science
New Haven, CT 06520 New Haven, CT 06520
Phone: (203) 436-0606 Phone: (203) 436-0606
ArpaNet address: RIESBECK@YALE ArpaNet address: MAURI@YALE
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 85 00:55:16 pst
From: Yigal Arens <arens%usc-cseb%usc-cse.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Southern California AI Society
Announcement of the Second General Meeting of SCAIS
===================================================
and
Call for Abstracts
==================
The second general meeting of the Southern California AI Society will be
held on Monday, April 15 1985, at the University of Southern California.
The meeting will be devoted to the presentation of talks by members of the
local AI community. The talks should discuss recent new research results,
as opposed to being general project descriptions. Everyone interested in
giving a talk (graduate students greatly encouraged), or organizing a panel
discussion, should send a note containing:
1. Title of the talk, or subject of panel
2. General area of AI talk relates to (e.g. vision, natural lang.)
3. Name, institution, phone number, net or USmail address
4. Any audio-visual aids (besides transparency and slide projector)
needed during presentation.
5. Estimate of number of participants from your site.
to one of the following addresses:
ARPANET: scais2%usc-cse@csnet-relay
CSNET: scais2@usc-cse
USMAIL: SCAIS-2
c/o Yigal Arens
Computer Science Department
SAL 200
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0782
This information should be sent as soon as possible, and should arrive no
later than March 25, 1985. The abstracts themselves will be accepted until
April 8. While there will be no refereeing of the submissions, time
constraints will probably require us to limit the number of presentations.
Chances are we will not be able to accommodate requests to speak that arrive
late. We will try to provide at least 15-20 minutes per talk.
We anticipate there being some minor costs associated with the meeting, to
cover the "proceedings", lunch, snacks, etc. These should amount to
no more than $15, exclusive of parking.
The number of parking spaces reserved for the meeting will be 120. This
should be enough, but carpooling is encouraged nevertheless.
The next mailing will be sent on April 1, and will include precise location,
cost, parking arrangements, and schedule.
Yigal Arens
University of Southern California
arens%usc-cse@csnet-relay.arpa
arens@usc-cse.csnet
(213) 743-7848
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-85 1155 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #30
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 85 11:55:05 PST
Date: Wed 6 Mar 1985 09:03-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #30
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Wednesday, 6 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 30
Today's Topics:
Network Lists - New Software Engineering List,
Seminars - Automated Ada Programming using Icons and Prolog (SU) &
INTERNIST Scoring Schemes (SU) &
Modelling Discourse Structure (UCB) &
Semantic Prototyping System (Boston SICPLAN) &
Language Comprehension (UCF) &
A Reductionist Semantics (UCB) &
Motivation Analysis (UCF) &
Intuitionistic Logic (CMU) &
Domains and Intuitionistic Logic (CMU),
Conference - Evolution, Games, and Learning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 26 Feb 85 10:40:42-EST
From: Mark S. Day <MDAY@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: New Soft-Eng List
SOFT-ENG@MIT-XX
Soft-Eng is a list for discussion of software engineering and related topics,
covering such areas as:
Requirements Specification Design
Testing Maintenance Enhancement
Languages Methodologies Tools
Verification Validation Reliability
Debugging Testing Testing Tools
Error handling Recovery Programming Environments
Modelling Documentation Extensibility
Practices Standards Protection mechanisms
Portability Complexity Performance
Software science Management Cost estimation
Productivity Rapid prototyping Reusable software
Professional ethics Configuration mgmt. Quality assurance
Staffing Systems analysis Training & education
Human factors Software: legal issues Real-time systems
Hardware/software tradeoffs Software fault-tolerance
Any and all contributions are welcome (e.g. questions, ideas, "war stories",
proposals, humor, abstracts, conference reports, bibliographies, problems,
reviews, tutorials, solutions, planned or completed projects).
The list is currently unmoderated, but may become a digest if the volume of
mail warrants it.
All requests to be added to or deleted from this list, problems, questions,
etc., should be sent to Soft-Eng-Request@MIT-XX.
[Rather than compete with this list, I shall no longer forward items
about programming languages, environments, man-machine interfaces, etc.,
unless they relate specifically to AI and information science. LISP
and PROLOG articles will still be carried in AIList, of course. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 85 0933 PST
From: Rosemary Brock <RBA@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Automated Ada Programming using Icons and Prolog (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
TITLE: "CAEDE - Carleton Embedded System Design Environment - An
Experimental Design Environment for Ada Using Icons and Prolog"
SPEAKER: Professor Ray Buhr
Department of Systems and Computer Engineering
Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
PLACE: ERL 401, Monday Feb. 25th, 2:30 pm.
This informal talk will provide an overview of CAEDE's approach, status
and capabilities. With CAEDE, multitasking design structures are entered
iconically on the screen of a SUN workstation, using a notation described
in the speaker's "System Design With Ada" book (PH, 1984). The structures
are automatically converted into Prolog facts. Prolog programs process
these facts to generate skeleton Ada programs and to perform structural
and temporal analysis of the designs represented by the facts. Temporal
analysis is based on Prolog descriptions of the temporal properties of the
Ada rendezvous and of the temporal behaviour of tasks. The talk will
describe the iconic interface and the nature of the Prolog representations
and tools. CAEDE is part of a research program at Carleton into
environments and tools for embedded real time systems, with particular
emphasis on communication protocol systems.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Mar 85 11:46:00-PST
From: Alison Grant <GRANT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - INTERNIST Scoring Schemes (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Medical Information Sciences Colloquium
Tuesday, March 5, 1985
Stanford University Medical Center
Room M-106
1:15 - 1:45 P.M.
Speaker: David Heckerman
Title: Probabilistic Interpretation of Two Ad Hoc Scoring Schemes
I will present a new formulation of Bayes' theorem with the usual
assumptions that evidence is conditionally independent and that
hypotheses are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. Within this
formulation, I define a quantity called the Measure of Confirmation
(MC). I will show that MC's satisfy all the axioms of MYCIN's
certainty factors. I will also show that a quantity closely related
to MC behaves similarly to the weighting factors in the INTERNIST-1
scoring scheme. Thus, a probabilistic interpretation will be provided
for these two evidence combination schemes that have been labeled
ad hoc.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 85 16:03:04 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Modelling Discourse Structure (UCB)
BERKELEY LINGUISTICS LUNCHBAG COLLOQUIUM
DAY: Thursday March 7, 1985
TIME: 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 200 Bldg. T-4
SPEAKER: Dr. Livia Polanyi, English Department, University of Amsterdam;
BBN Laboratories
TITLE: ``Modelling Discourse Syntactic and Semantic Structure''
ABSTRACT: The ultimate goal of the research to be discussed is to characterize
the structural and semantic relationships obtaining among individual clauses in
natural discourse. In this talk,a formal linguistic model of discourse structure
will be sketched which is designed to account for the ability of language users
to assign proper semantic interpretations to clauses in naturally occurring
interactively constructed talk despite the interruptions, resumptions, repairs,
and other disfluencies which characterize performance.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1985 00:08:40-EST
From: psm@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: Seminar - Semantic Prototyping System (Boston SICPLAN)
Boston SICPLAN (Special Interest Committee on Programming Languages) is
a local affiliate of the ACM SIGPLAN group and vaguely associated with and
chartered by the Greater Boston area chapter of the ACM. It normally meets
once a month, usually on the first Thursday, almost always at 8 p.m., and
normally at either BBN or Intermetrics. Its talks are often of interest
to people working in the fields of programming languages and compilers,
environments, artificial intelligence, and data/knowledge base management.
[...]
ACM GREATER BOSTON CHAPTER SICPLAN
Thursday, March 7, 1985
8 P.M.
Intermetrics Atrium
733 Concord Ave., Cambridge
A Semantic Prototyping System
Mitchell Wand
Indiana University and Brandeis University
Denotational semantics seems to be a useful language for
specifying the behavior of programming languages. The talk will
describe a set of computer programs that Dr. Wand developed for
testing and exercising programming language specifications given
in this style. It will also give an introduction to the method
of denotational semantics and an overview of how these tools can
be used to construct rapid prototypes of programming languages.
Our March speaker, Mitch Wand, is one of the leading innovators
in applying formal methods to language design and the analysis of
programs and language systems. He is spending the year at
Brandeis University, on leave from the University of Indiana,
where he is a professor. [...]
Our group customarily meets for dinner at Joyce Chen's
restaurant, 390 Rindge Ave., Cambridge at 6:00 P.M. (just before
the meeting). If you wish to come, please call Carolyn Elson at
Intermetrics 661-1840 as early as possible so we can make the
appropriate dinner reservation.
Peter Mager
chairperson, Boston SICPLAN
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 85 18:31:45 est
From: "Robert C. Bethel" <bethel%ucf.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Language Comprehension (UCF)
Date & Time: Tuesday - April 9, 1985 at 6pm.
Location : Computer Center II, Rm #103
University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.
Speaker : Eugene Charniak
Subject : Language Comprehension from an
Artificial Intelligence Perspective
In the first half of this talk will review the work which has been done
on language comprehension within the Artificial Intelligence Community.
Despite the often heated controversy surrounding the area, there is,
in fact, agreement on what the basic model must look like. Furthermore
this model is not, except in retrospect, a completely obvious one.
Unfortunately, in retrospect the model is rather obvious, and offers
little real guidance for someone trying to build such a system.
In the second part of the lecture will suggest how the model should be
extended to answer some of the problems left open in the consensus version.
This will include issues such as the relative importance of syntax and
semantics, limits on inference, and the role of logic.
Robert C. Bethel
University of Central Florida
uucp: {duke,decvax,akgua}!ucf-cs!bethel
ARPA: bethel.ucf-cs@csnet.relay.CSNET
csnet: bethel@ucf.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 85 17:54:05 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - A Reductionist Semantics (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, March 12, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Ned Block, CSLI and MIT
TITLE: ``A Reductionist Semantics''
There are two quite different families of approaches to seman-
tics: REDUCTIONIST approaches attempt to characterize the
semantic in non-semantic terms NON-REDUCTIONIST approaches are
more concerned with relations among meaningS than with the
nature of meaning itself. The non-reductionist approaches are
the more familiar ones (eg, Montague, the model- theoretic
aspect of situation semantics, Davidson, Katz). The reduction-
ist approaches come in 4 major categories:
1. Theories that reduce meaning to the mental (This is what is
common to Grice and Searle). 2. Causal semantics--theories
that see semantic values as derived from causal chains leading
from the world to our words. (Field's combination of Kripke
and Tarski) 3. Indicator semantics--theories that see natural
and non-natural meaning as importantly similar. Their paradigm
of meaning is the way the rings on the tree stump represent the
age of the tree when cut down. (Dretske/Stampe) 4. Functional
role semantics--theories that see meaning in terms of the func-
tional role of linguistic expressions in thought, reasoning,
and planning, and in general in the way they mediate between
sensory inputs and behavioral outputs.
After sketching the difference between the reductionist and
non-reductionist approaches, I will focus on functional role
semantics, a view that has independently arisen in philosophy
(where its sources are Wittgenstein's idea of meaning as use,
and pragmatism) and cognitive science (where it is known as
procedural semantics).
Instead of devoting the talk to trying to answer certain well
known criticisms of functionalist views, I will concentrate on
what one particular version of the doctrine can DO (if the cri-
ticisms can be answered): viz., illuminate acquisition of and
knowledge of meaning, principles of charity, how meaning is
relevant to explanation of behavior, the intrinsic/observer-
relative distinction, the relation between meaning and the
brain, and the relativity of meaning to representational sys-
tem. The point is to give a sense of the fertility and power
of the view, and so to provide a rationale for working on solu-
tions to its problems. Finally, I will sketch some reasons to
prefer functional role semantics to the other reductionist
theories.
A copy of a paper which the talk draws on will be in the cogni-
tive science library.
UPCOMING ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
Andy diSessa (Computer Science Lab at MIT) will be speaking on
``Knowledge in Pieces: Intuitive Knowledge in Physics and
Other Things'' at 4pm on Friday, March 8, in the Beach Room,
third floor, Tolman Hall.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 85 18:31:45 est
From: "Robert C. Bethel" <bethel%ucf.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Motivation Analysis (UCF)
Date & Time: Wednesday - April 10, 1985 (time - to be announced on tuesday)
Location : Computer Center II, Rm #103
University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.
Speaker : Eugene Charniak
Subject : Motivation Analysis, Abductive Unification,
and Non-monotonic Equality
Motivation analysis in story comprehension requires matching an action
mentioned in the story against actions which might be predicted by possible
explanitory motivations. This matching requires matching constants from
the story against skolem functions in the possible motivations (assuming a
normal first order representation of stories, plans, etc.). We will show
that extending unification to allow for unifying two things if they are
non-monotonically equal does exactly what is needed in such cases. We also
show that such a procedure allows for a clean method of noun-phrase reference
determination.
Robert C. Bethel
University of Central Florida
uucp: {duke,decvax,akgua}!ucf-cs!bethel
ARPA: bethel.ucf-cs@csnet.relay.CSNET
csnet: bethel@ucf.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1985 0903-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Intuitionistic Logic (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Speaker: Dana Scott
Date: Wednesday, March 6
Time: 2:00
Place: 2105 DH
Topic: Intuitionistic logic and some models
Abstract: The lambda calculus as usually presented is an equational
theory, but it is also supposed to be a theory of functions. One
way to understand its scope is to discuss models for lambda
calculus in intuitionistic logic and to relate it to the notion of
function appropriate within that framework. However, this first
talk will be just about intuitionistic logic and some of its
interpretations.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1985 0904-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Domains and Intuitionistic Logic (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Speaker: Dana Scott
Date: Monday, March 11
Time: 2:00
Place: 324 Scaife Hall
Topic: Domains and intuitionistic logic (I)
Abstract: Kleene's realizability interpretation in one very
explicit approach to intuitionistic logic. The basics of the
interpretation will be discussed, and it will be explained how
computability theory gets a logical form. In particular, the
effectively given domains become just sets (of a special kind).
Some results from McCarty and others on realizability will be
explained. The way domain models for lambda calculus behave from
this point of view will also be discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 85 09:27:39 mst
From: bbw@LANL.ARPA (Burton Wendroff)
Subject: Conference - Evolution, Games, and Learning
[Forwarded by Golub@SU-SCORE and Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.]
CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
Title - EVOLUTION, GAMES, AND LEARNING: Adaptation in Machines and Nature
Date - May 20 - 24, 1985
Place - Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico
Topics include - biological evolution, deterministic and random
automata, learning algorithms, neural networks, computer
game programs, game theory, allocation mechanisms,
and brain function.
Speakers include - J. ANDERSON, H. BERLINER, M. CONRAD, J. H. CONWAY,
J. D. COWAN, M. DAVIS, J. L. DENEUBOURG, M. W. FELDMAN, P. FREY, I. J. GOOD,
J. H. HOLLAND, J. HOPFIELD, B. HUBERMAN, S. KAUFFMAN, S. KIRKPATRICK,
N. PACKARD, S. REITER, G.-C. ROTA, A. SAMUEL, P. SCHUSTER, T. J. SEJNOWSKI,
J. MAYNARD SMITH, J. W. VALENTINE, L. G. VALIANT, S. WOLFRAM
Registration fee - $50
Contact - For registration information and forms write or call
Evolution, Games ,and Learning
Los Alamos National Laboratory
P. O. Box 1663, MS-B258
Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA
Tel. 505-667-1444
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Mar-85 1812 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #31
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 85 18:11:02 PST
Date: Fri 8 Mar 1985 10:22-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #31
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 8 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 31
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - OPS5 Systems & XLISP and Betz & Prolog in Dr. Dobb's Journal,
Literature - Dreyfus and Commonsense Reasoning &
History of Ideas in Computer Science,
Linguistics - Wally & Y'all & Youse,
AI Literature - The Artificial Intelligence Report,
Seminar - Structural Change Through Experience (Rutgers),
Course -- Cognitive Architecture (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 85 15:07:34 pst
From: susan@aids-unix (Susan Rosenbaum)
Subject: OPS5 Systems
I am looking for pointers to any public domain systems
written in OPS5. Please reply directly to me.
Thanks!
Susan Rosenbaum
(susan@aids)
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Mar 85 14:04:15-CST
From: CMP.BARC@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: XLISP and Betz
XLISP 1.4 is available via FTP at sumex-aim (login anonymous) on the
<info-mac> directory. Documentation is also available there. The source
code will soon (and may already) be available there, too. I think all of
this is also on net.sources as well. David Betz is eager to get XLISP
distributed and can be contacted via
Betz@Havard or cornell!packard!havard!betz@uw-beaver
Dallas Webster
Burroughs Austin Research Center
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27-Feb-85 07:34:37 PST
From: decvax!mcnc!BTS@Berkeley
Subject: Prolog in Dr. Dobb's Journal
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Dr. Dobb's Journal for March is a "Special Prolog
Issue". Only three articles on Prolog, but there
are lots of ads about Prologs for small systems.
-- Bruce T. Smith
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1985 0853-EST (Tuesday)
From: dndobrin@mit-aphrodite (David N Dobrin)
Subject: Common-sense reasoning
About the request from arora@buffalo.
Don't forget about Bert Dreyfus's discussion of common-sense reasoning
and the problems it poses in principle for AI. Still the best.
Hubert L. Dreyfus. What Computers Can't Do. 2nd ed., 1979.
Harper&Row
David Dobrin
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Mar 85 09:09:57-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: History of Ideas in Computer Science
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This was in
response to a query about the history of ideas in computer science.]
If you are interested in doing research in the history of ideas in computer
science, you are going to not only want to search the computer science
literature but the history of science literature and the sociology of
science literature. History of science is a growing field. Berkeley is
strong in this area. An example of the type of articles and journals
you might be interested in is the journal Sociology of the Sciences (this
is in the Green Library) which in 1982 has an article titled "Development
and Establishment in Artificial Intelligence".
Harry Llull
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Mar 85 10:19:28-PST
From: Henry E. Lowood <PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: History of ideas in computer science
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
It sounds to me like what you want is a general overview of the history
of computer science. If that's the case, I would recommend:
Herman Goldstine,
The computer from Pascal to Von Neumann
TK7885.A564 in the Math Library and elsewhere on campus.
Or, for a far less technical approach:
Joel Shurkin,
Engines of the mind.
QA7617.S49 in Math, Green, etc.
It may interest you to know that the Stanford Libraries are starting up a
historical project to document specifically the history of science and
technology at Stanford and in the Silicon Valley since World War II. This
will take many years, of course.
In fact, I'd appreciate online mail from anyone who might be interested
in contributing in some way to this project.
Henry Lowood
Bibliographer for History of Science and Technology Collections, SU
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 4-Mar-85 20:53:48-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Re :Wally
For all potential wallies, there is a manual for your edification !
`How to be Wally' by Paul Manning, published in the U.K. by
Futura Books.
But what about the song `La Wally' in the French film, `Diva' ?
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 85 13:08:26 mst
From: crs@LANL.ARPA (Charlie Sorsby)
Subject: Y'alls
Actually, I think you will find, if you pursue it, that the "y'alls"
that you overheard is actually the possesive form of y'all (i.e. y'all's).
As in "Is that y'all's car?"
Charlie Sorsby
...!lanl!crs
crs@lanl.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 85 09:18 EST
From: D E Stevenson <dsteven%clemson.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: More on y'all.
Just to add more fuel to the fire. In the mountain regions of the Piedmont
(SC-NC), the locals use "y'all" for singular and "all y'all" for the
plural. Really - I kid you not.
steve
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 6-Mar-85 15:53:15-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Youse - The Last Word
It seems that the term `youse' is not the plural of `you',
it is a form of address.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Mar 85 08:44:14-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: The Artificial Intelligence Report
Ted Markowitz recently asked about newsletters. I have never
seen most of them. I have seen a copy of The Artificial
Intelligence Report, however, and I've decided to pass
along, with permission, its description of previous issues.
This may be compared to the contents of some issues of
the Artificial Intelligence Reporter that Laurence Leff
described in AIList V3 N29.
The Artificial Intelligence Report that I have seen contains
10 pages of text (set in 9-inch by 3-inch columns of 12-point
type) along with several pages of publisher's messages and
administrative notes. (This issue may have contained more
self-advertising than most since it was distributed in a mass
mailing to potential subscribers.) The news portion described
past and current research at SRI International.
The following are the topics covered in back issues of The
Artificial Intelligence Report. I'm told that back issues
are still available, but I don't know the price.
Premier Issue
The U.S. Pavilion at Tsukuba Japan -- it's theme: AI; The
Companies: Carnegie Group, Syntelligence; a list of new AI
companies; Foreign AI R&D.
Vol. 1, No. 1, January, 1984
Digital Equipment Corporation's new Artificial Intelligence
Technology Center plus a definition of two classic working
expert systems developed for DEC at Carnegie-Mellon
University: EXCON and EXSEL; An examination of GE's
DELTA/CATS-1 locomotive maintenance system now being field
tested; Artificial Intelligence research at Edinburgh
University; An identification of four AI companies:
Thinking Machines Corp., Inference, Corp., Data Base
Informatica (Italy) and Intelligenetics; A list of
inexpensive AI titles.
Vol. 1, No. 2, February, 1984
The U.S.Department of Defense's AI goals: The Defense
Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency's objectives;
AI activity in the U.S. Air Force, Army and Navy.
Vol. 1, No. 3, March, 1984
AI and the Personal Computer: Expert systems, natural
language, LISP; A look at Perceptronics, an AI company; AI
and the CIA.
Vol. 1, No. 4, April, 1984
Reviews of the U.S. National Science Foundation's
supercomputer report, the System Development Foundation and
the Alvey Report: Great Britain's strategy for meeting the
Fifth Generation Computing Challenge; AI at Arthur D. Little
and at Sussex University.
Vol. 1, No. 5, May, 1984
Artificial Intelligence at the University of California at
Los Angeles; an update on the European Economic
Community's ESPRIT project; a look at two companies now
commercializing natural language understanding systems:
Artificial Intelligence Corporation and Frey Associates; AI
Titles; an evaluation of a number of robotics periodicals.
Vol. 1, No. 6, June, 1984
The AI Machines: LISP Machines/AI Workstations: The Xerox
1100, LISP Machine Inc.'s LAMBDA, the PERQ Machine, the
Symbolics 3600; AI Titles.
Vol. 1, No. 7, July, 1984
The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation;
The Robotics/Artificial Intelligence Database;
Syntelligence; AI as an Investment; AI at FMC; AI Titles.
Vol. 1, No. 8, August, 1984
AI Companies: Teknowledge, The Carnegie Group; An
Established Company's New AI Center: FMC; a new PROLOG
company: QUINTUS; AI at the University of Texas; Robotics
Titles.
Vol. 1, No. 9, September, 1984
AI at AT&T Bell Labs; French AI Companies including Cap
Gemini Sogeti; Expert Systems Reviews; Robotics Reviews;
AAAI-84: A Summary.
Vol. 1, No. 10, October, 1984
Carnegie-Mellon University's Intelligent Systems Laboratory;
The Companies: Symantec, an update, the Tektronix 4404
Machine, Infologics of Sweden; Machine Translation: Where
is it? Where can it go? AI Titles; Review of a new Expert
Systems Directory.
Vol. 1, No. 11, November, 1984
The Fifth Generation Computer: Japan's FGCS Project, The
Fifth Generation Challenge: ACM-84, Fifth Generation
Titles; Japanese AI Companies: CSK and NEXSYS, AI at
Boeing.
Vol. 1, No. 12, December, 1984
AI at Texas Instruments; the MIT AI Lab; Commercializing
Speech Recognition: Kurzweil, Inc.; Japan's ICOT
Conference; Alvey and ICOT: A Cooperative Relationship.
Vol. 2, No. 1, January, 1985
SRI International: The AI Center, The Robotics Laboratory,
The Advanced Information Technology Applications Center, The
Advanced Computer Systems Department, The Financial Expert
Systems Program, SRI's Expert System for the PC, The SRI AI
Consultants, SRI's AI Reports.
Vol. 2, No. 2, February, 1985
AI and the Personal Computer: the Word from Esther Dyson; The
New U.S. Air Force AI Consortium; The Companies: Cognitive
Systems, Inc., the Knowledge Systems Center at Sperry, Inference
joins Lockheed; The Reports; Titles: an AI and Robotics Series,
a review of books on Expert Systems.
Vol. 2, No. 3, March, 1985
AI in Outer Space: NASA's AI Program; LISP on the PC: TLC LISP,
GCLISP; Expert Systems: the Number One Topic; Aboard Japanese
Ships; New Affiliations: at DEC, at Sumitomo.
This newsletter was the first one mentioned in AIList. Since
that time, it has moved from Los Altos to:
Artificial Intelligence Publications
Suite Three
3600 West Bayshore Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303 - 4229
U. S. A.
(415) 424-1447
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 85 18:34:06 EST
From: John <Bresina@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Structural Change Through Experience (Rutgers)
MACHINE LEARNING COLLOQUIUM
Date: March 8th, Friday
Time: 11:00 am - 12:30 pm
Place: Hill 423
Speaker: Robert W. Lawler
Affliation: GTE Laboratories, Inc.
Title: STRUCTURAL CHANGE THROUGH EXPERIENCE
Drawing on data from an empirical study and computer based simulations, I will
explore some problems and tentative solutions arising from the issue of how
specific knowledge structures can change through interactions based on
particular experience. The domain is Tictactoe.
A knowledge structure is here represented as having three parts: a Goal, a
sequence of actions for achieving the goal, and a set of constraints upon
execution of those actions (GAC). Simulations played with such structures
lead to winning and losing games, which in turn leads to the generation of new
structures as modifications of the current GACs. Learning varies with the
flexibility of the opponent's play. Subject to certain limitations, I explore
completely certain classes of strategic play. The most interesting result is
a characterization of play against a moderately flexible opponent, through
which the sequences of derivation of individual GACs can be seen in overview
as folding together into a richly connected network of generability. The
network, summarizing the learnability of strategies, varies with the
flexability of the opponent.
Current work on experience motivated analogy and the inception of multi-role
and interiorized play will be discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Mar 85 13:46:39-PST
From: Paul Rosenbloom <ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New cs/psych course -- Cognitive Architecture
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following new spring course was inadvertantly omitted from the
spring time schedule. The course is intended for graduate students
and advanced undergraduates in both psychology and computer science.
COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURE
An examination of the issues involved in designing a cognitive architecture.
Topics include the role of the architecture in the construction of a general
artificially-intelligent system, the role of the architecture as a large-scale
psychological model, existing (and proposed) cognitive architectures, and the
evaluation of architectures. Prerequisites: Advanced undergraduate standing
and either Psychology 106, Computer Science 223, or equivalent experience.
Course Number: Psych 223/CS 325
Times: MW 10:00 - 11:15, Jordan 100
Units: 3
Instructor: Paul Rosenbloom
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Mar-85 1442 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #32
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 85 14:42:19 PST
Date: Mon 11 Mar 1985 10:39-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #32
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 11 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 32
Today's Topics:
Bindings - Australasia,
Conference - IJCAI-87 Election and Site Selection &
Proposals Solicited for Sites for IJCAI-89,
Lab Description - Research on ICAI at ARI,
AI Literature - Stanford Library Acquisitions & Recent Articles,
Opinion - AI Aims,
Seminars - Japanese Research Environment (MIT) &
Synthesis In Design (CMU) &
Storing LISP Structures in a Database (IBM-SJ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 10 Mar 85 21:40:24 EST
From: stacey (martin stacey) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: Australasia
I'd like to find out who is doing what sorts of AI and
cognitive science in Australia and New Zealand. If you are working
in Australia or New Zealand, or know of people doing AI there, please
send me pointers (names and departments).
Thanks in advance,
Martin Stacey
stacey@cmu-psy-a.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 85 17:59:00 est
From: bellcore!walker@Berkeley (Don Walker)
Subject: IJCAI-87 Election and Site Selection
IJCAI-87 Officer Election and Site Selection
The Trustees of the International Joint Conferences on Artificial
Intelligence, Inc. are pleased to announce that Alan Bundy, University
of Edinburgh, will be Conference Chair for IJCAI-87; John McDermott,
Carnegie-Mellon University, will be Program Chair; and Milan will be
the site, with Marco Somalvico of the University of Milan being
responsible for Local Arrangements. The conference will be held
23-29 August 1987 (Sunday through Saturday).
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 85 18:01:38 est
From: bellcore!walker@Berkeley (Don Walker)
Subject: Proposals solicited for sites for IJCAI-89
The site for IJCAI-89 will be selected at the IJCAI-85 in Los Angeles
this summer (18-24 August). Proposals--for North American locations
only (in accordance with the IJCAI practice of alternating between
North America and other parts of the world; IJCAI-87 will be held in
Milan, Italy)--should be sent by 1 August 1985 to Don Walker, IJCAII
Secretary-Treasurer, Bell Communications Research, 435 South Street,
Morristown, NJ 07960. Note that AAAI will cosponsor the conference
and that the AAAI Office will coordinate local arrangements activities
and support the local committee.
Proposals should respond to the following criteria, which were developed
by the IJCAII Trustees to govern site selection:
1. Local AI Group Support: strength of local AI activity; quality and
breadth of the proposed local arrangements group; potential beneficial
impact of an IJCAI on local activity.
2. Site Accessibility: ease of access for the international AI community
via air and train transportation; convenient access to social centers.
3. Conference Facilities: ability to accommodate 5,000-10,000 people,
with a hall for plenary sessions that can hold the full number and 5-6
rooms for 1,000-2,000 each.
4. Residences and Catering: a range of accommodations from dormitories
to good quality hotels in sufficient quantities and proximity to the
conference site; catering services for meals, breaks, banquets, and
receptions are required.
5. Site Attractiveness: pleasantness of surrounding environment; local
social and cultural attractions for attendees and families.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 85 16:13:00 EST
From: psotka@ari-hq1
Reply-to: <psotka@ari-hq1>
Subject: Research on ICAI at ARI
The Army Research Institute has begun a program of research on
intelligent tutoring systems for application to Army training and
instruction in schools and in the field. The Army has an enormous
need for high quality training in diverse technical fields --
electronics, vehicle mechanics, radar, aviation -- as well as basic
cognitive skills and decision support systems. The initial research
focus is on Intelligent Computer Aided Instruction and related topics
(such as learning, knowledge representation, explanation systems,
mental models, natural language, and direct manipulation interfaces,
reactive environments, inspectable simulations, etc.). The
computational environment is well supported with a variety of micros
(Macs & PC←ATs) as well as 3 Xerox 1108s, 1 1100, and 2 Vaxes.
Currently four professionals (cognitive science, computer science, and
psychology) have sole access to the 4 Lisp machines. A significant
proportion of time is also spent on developing and monitoring research
contracts, making presentations to Army groups, and discussing needs
and the possibility of applying artificial intelligence techniques and
tools to the various problems Army schools and institutions have
defined. Anyone interested in obtaining more information about these
activities is encouraged to call, or send mail or Arpanet to:
Joseph Psotka,
Army Research Institute
5001 Eisenhower Avenue
Alexandria, Va. 22333-5600
(202)274-5540/5565
Psotka@ARI-HQ1
------------------------------
Date: Fri 8 Mar 85 21:27:33-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Latest Math & CS Library "New Reports List" posted on-line.
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.
This is a reminder that the online new reports list
is a gold mine of computer science citations -- you
just have to apply your own screening criteria to
separate the gold from the dross. -- KIL]
The latest Math & Computer Science Library "New Reports List" has been
posted on-line. The file is:
<LIBRARY>NEWTRS at SCORE
<LIBRARY>NEWTRS at SIERRA
NEWTRS[LIB,DOC] at SAIL
<CSD-REPORTS>NEWTRS at SUMEX
<CSM.LIBRARIAN>NEWTRS at TURING.
In case you miss a reports list, the old lists are being copied to
<LIBRARY>OLDTRS at SCORE
<LIBRARY>OLDTRS at SIERRA
<CSM.LIBRARIAN>OLDTRS at TURING
where they will be saved for about six months. [...]
The library receives technical reports from over a hundred universities
and other institutions. The current batch includes - among others -
reports from:
Carnegie-Mellon University. Department of Computer Science.
General Motors Corporation. Research Laboratories. Computer Science
Department.
Mathematisch Centrum. Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica.
Rutgers. Department of Computer Science.
Rutgers. Laboratory for Computer Science Research.
Universitaet Hamburg. Fachbereich Informatik.
U.K. National Physical Laboratory. Division of Information Technology
and Computing.
University of Arizona. Department of Computer Science.
University of California, Berkeley. Operations Research Center.
University of Edinburgh. Department of Artificial Intelligence.
University of Edinburgh. Department of Computer Science.
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Department of Computer
Science.
University of Saskatchewan. Department of Computational Science.
University of Waterloo. Department of Computer Science.
University of Wisconsin, Madison. Computer Sciences Department.
- Richard Manuck
Math & Computer Science Library
Building 380 - 4th Floor
LIBRARY at SCORE
------------------------------
Date: 6 Mar 1985 08:36-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Electronics Week, February 25, 1985
Hewlett Packard will be donating $50,000,000 worth of hardware and
software to various universities. These systems will be HP 9000 series
systems running HPRL. HPRL
- rule based reasoning systems and representational languages
- can call C, Fortran and Pascal
- runs on HP's portable, the Integral Personal Computer
- applications have been written in this system for semiconductor
fabrication, troubleshooting, office autoamtion, and natural
language understanding
- runs under UNIX
Electronic News, March 4, 1985 Volume 31 No. 1539 Page 1
As you may know, Texas Instruments's Explorer was based on the NuMachine
bus and machine design. They were selling a 68010 based version of this
as a high-end engineering workstation. They are not pursuiing that
market. This does not effect its operations in selling the TI Explorer
which is based on the same bus. They are also negotiating to sell
nonexclusive rights to the workstation to Lisp Machine.
IEEE Software March 1985 Page 101
Reprint of an article printed in the New York Times on efforts to use
Aymara, an ancient Peruvian Indian language, as an aid in natural
language translation efforts.
EDN Career News January 1985, page 1
Artificial Intelligence and the Military
ComputerWorld Page 47 February 18, 1985
"Semantics Muddling AI Issues"
International Journal of Man Machine Studies Volume 21 No 3 Sept 1984
An Economical Approach to Modeling Speech Recognition Accuracy 191
An Analysis of Formal Logic as Inference Method in Expert System 213
Users and Experts in the Document Retrieval System Model 245
An Experimental Expert System for Genetics 249
Angewandte Informatik No 11 Nov 84
Design of a Corporate Know-how Database 471
Electronics Week Volume 57 No 36
AI Transforms CAD/CAM to CIM J. R. Lineback
IEEE PAMI Volume 6, Number 6 November 84
Parallel Branch and Bound Formulations for AND/OR Tree Search 768
Computer Aided Design Volume 16 no 5 1985
Wirewrap Design Aid written in Prolog 249
Two algorithms for three-layer channel routing 264
Robotics and Artificial Intelligence
NATO Advanced SND/ES INSTITUTES, Series F
Computer and System Sciences Volume 11
Springer-Verlag 693 pages $62.50
Advances in Computer Vision and Image Processing Volume 1
Image Reconstruction from Incomplete Observations
T. S. Huang JAI Press $52.50
Technology Review Volume 88 No 1 January 85
Automated Factory-Vision and Reality
J. Blumenthal, J. Dray pp 28
The Automated Factory-View from Shop Floor
H. Shaiken pp 16
Research and Development Volume 26 No 10 October 1984
Artificial Perception gives super vision 142
Nauchno-Tekhinicheskaya Informatsiya
Seriya II - Informatsionnye Protsessy I Sistemy Volume 11 1984
Importance of the Expert Information System Developing in Informatics
R. S. Gilyarevskii 1
Some Semantic and Syntax Problems of the PSM Method of Automatic
Hypothesis Outcome O. M. Anshakov, D. P. Skvortsov, J. K. Finn 5
Nonheritibility of Empirical Contradicitons in DSM-methods and
Non-Monotonic Logic
M. I. Zabezhailo 14
Program Realization of Automatic Hypothesis Outcomes of DSM Methods
with Non-Single Element Criterion Sites
M. A. Mikheenkova, V. V. Avidon, S. A. Sukhanova
J. Computer System Science 29 (1984) no 1 8-35
Plaisted, David "Complete Problems in the first-order predicate
calculus"
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 6-Mar-85 12:18:03-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: AI-Aims
The goal of AI research seems, to me, to be to produce a `machine'
that will satisfy the Turing criterion. This is a total waste of
time and effort.
We are going through the second industrial revolution. (Wo)man's
(ie the human race's) muscle power was extended and (s)he is now
extending the mind by the use of computer as a tool (cf expert
systems). But the power of this revolution lies in the extension
of the thinking process and not its paltrey imitation of the mind
(cf my "chalk and cheese" entry on parallel thought processes).
Gordon Joly (with acknowledgment to Richard Winter).
gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 10 Mar 1985 14:04 EST (Sun)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Japanese Research Environment (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Revolving Seminar
March 12, 1985 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
Monica Strauss
Basic Research in Computer Science:
a perspective on the Japanese environment
This talk considers the structure of the computer science community in
Japan. I focus on a central case: the Electrotechnical Laboratory (ETL), a
government research lab under the Ministry of International Trade and
Industry (MITI). I contrast the apparent rigidity of the research
environment imposed by the formal structure with the flexibility of
informal practices. In particular, I consider (1) the importance of
personal contacts in interactions with outside organizations, (2) informal
solutions to budgeting problems, (3) research interactions with industry.
My master's thesis in the Japan Science and Technology Program at MIT is a
comparative case study of MIT and ETL. As an AI researcher, my purpose is
to gain a clear understanding of the conditions, supports, and pitfalls of
research interactions bridging the Japanese and American research
communities.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 85 12:21:50 EST
From: Daniel.Rehak@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Seminar - Synthesis In Design (CMU)
DESIGN RESEARCH CENTER
PANEL DISCUSSION
SYNTHESIS IN DESIGN: CHALLENGES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
AND MATHEMATICAL PROGRAMMING
MODERATOR: Ignacio Grossmann, Chemical Engineering
SPEAKERS: Mary Lou Maher, Civil Engineering
Gary Powers, Chemical Engineering
Sarosh Talukdar, Intelligent Design Lab, DRC
Donald Thomas, Electrical and Computer Engineering
DATE: Monday, March 11, 1985
TIME: 1:30 - 3:00 PM
PLACE: Porter Hall 123B
Synthesis is one of the most important steps in design since it deals
with the problem on how to select and interconnect the components for
integrating a large scale system in an optimal or near optimal manner.
The major challenge for research in this area lies in the development of
systematic strategies and tools that can not only cope effectively with
large combinatorial problems, but that can also produce solutions that
are both innovative and of high quality. This seminar will present an
overview on the type of synthesis problems that arise in several engineering
disciplines and the approaches that have been used to tackle these problems.
The main objective in holding this seminar will be to examine the question
as to what extent common methodologies and tools can be shared among the
various engineering fields for the systematic synthesis of systems. Another
important objective will be to examine the scope and limitations that knowlege
based systems and algorithmic optimization methods have in solving these type
of problems. Specific examples on several synthesis applications will be
given.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 85 14:49:36 PST
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Storing LISP Structures in a Database (IBM-SJ)
[Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
[...]
Tues., Mar. 12 Computer Science Seminar
10:00 A.M. STORING LISP STRUCTURES IN A DATABASE
2C-012 The paging problems that LISP programs with large
knowledge bases incur together with the features
databases provide, such as concurrency control and
crash recovery, make extending LISP to allow
persistent data desirable. Rather than building a
special purpose filing system, an interface to
commercial INGRES was constructed. Polymnia is a
package that has been designed, partially
implemented, and tested on a sizable LISP program
(PHRAN). The speed with which PHRAN executes is
faster with a persistent knowledge base than with a
virtual memory knowledge base when the manner of
knowledge base storage is the only differing factor.
M. Butler, University of California at Berkeley
Host: W. Plouffe (PLOUFFE@IBM-SJ)
Visitors, please arrive 15 minutes early. IBM is located on U.S.
101, about 7 miles south of Interstate 280. Exit at Monterey Road
(82) and turn right if you took 101 south (left for 101 north.)
Continue straight, ignoring the sign for 82, then follow signs for
Cottle Road. The Research Laboratory is IBM Building 028.
For more detailed directions, please phone the Research Lab
receptionist at (408) 256-3028.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Mar-85 1245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #33
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 85 12:45:02 PST
Date: Wed 13 Mar 1985 10:35-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #33
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Wednesday, 13 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 33
Today's Topics:
Linguistics - Hungal,
Expert Systems - Programming Styles,
Surveys - AI in Australasia,
Literature - History of Ideas in Computer Science,
Opinion - AI Aims,
News - AAAI Member Statistics & FMC and Teknowledge & Recent Articles,
Policy - Jokes on Rape,
Seminars - Cheating Husbands and Other Stories (SU) &
The Limits of Calculative Rationality (CSLI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 13 Mar 85 10:20:29-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Hungal
Gordon Cook of Delta Data Systems would like some information about
the Hungal dialect of Korea. In particular, he would like to know
whether any form of automated translation system has ever been
written for this dialect.
Please reply to 200%NJIT-EIES.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS, or call Gordon at
(215) 322-5400 x258 if you have any leads.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 09:41:16 pst
From: Curtis L. Goodhart <goodhart%cod@Nosc>
Subject: Expert Systems vs "Conventional" Programming
I have been involved for two years in a project to apply an existing
expert system development tool to a particular problem that we
have to solve. In this time, starting from scratch, as far as AI and
expert systems are considered, I have developed opinions about the advantages
(and disadvantages) of expert systems, as opposed to traditional programming
methods. I would like to hear from people who feel they have qualified
comments regarding this issue.
In preface to a discussion I'd like to provide a few comments based on my
observations and experience.
Often people outside the field of AI see expert systems as some new kind
of magic. In fact it's not new magic or old magic but rather an area of
computer science that one might say provides styles or methods of programming
that prove useful in tackling certain types of problems.
The most valid two claims of advantages of expert systems that I see are:
1) Expert systems provide cost efficient development for software develop-
ments that will undergo an intensely iterative, or test/modify cycle
(ie the exact procedure for problem solution, the algorithm, cannot
be stated in detail and with confidence prior to initiating software
development).
The main basis of this is held to be a structured framework consisting
of partitioned control, domain knowledge (procedural), and global data
base (which includes domain factual or declarative knowledge). It is
the resulting uniformity and modularity that provide the foundation for
an iterative development cycle.
2) Expert systems, by way of recorded production rule firings, which are
often used, provide for explanation of the "reasoning process" used to
generate the solution. This will be of value only if the end user will
benefit from explanation, or if system development is speeded by expla-
nation as opposed to the sole use of debug tools or methods that are
used in non-expert-system developments.
Again, the degree of benefit would vary according to the characteristics of
the particular application, and the benefit increases for those problems that
will require an intensive iterative type of development. Note that point 1
above points to expert systems as a development tool for the right kinds of
problems.
Some of the other claimed benefits of expert systems seem less supported to
me. For example, I don't see that reasoning with uncertainty must be unique
to an expert system approach. Another point, if "symbolic computation" (as
opposed to number crunching) is a valid claim it appears to me that its basis
must be in the dynamic memory allocation and list processing capabilities of
Lisp and not neccessarily in an expert system approach.
Finally, since the question of advantages of expert systems always comes up,
are there any good studies with hard numbers that can be referred to? For
example, are there any papers that report on a case where conventional and
expert systems approaches were both used on an actual problem and comparisons
made in order to substantiate the advantages (eg show that "rapid proto-
typing" saves development time)? Are there any papers that provide a sound,
and convincing basis for the virtues of expert systems, that could be given
to non-AI persons?
To summarize the question, what advantages (or disadvantages) do expert
systems provide over conventional software approaches. And note, I want to
limit the discussion to expert systems and not address the whole field of AI.
Responses can go to the net, AILIST, and/or to myself.
Curt Goodhart (goodhart@nosc -- on the ARPANET)
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 1985 1159-PST
From: PRICE@USC-ECLC.ARPA
Subject: AI in Australasia
For a 30 page report on AI in Australasia contact:
DEBENHAM - AIIA
Computing Sciences
N S W I T
Box 123 Broadway
NSW 2007
Australia
AIIA (Artificial Intelligence in Australia) publishes a report annually.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Mar 85 10:47:27 PST (Monday)
From: "Bruce Hamilton.OsbuSouth"@XEROX.ARPA
Reply-to: Hamilton.OsbuSouth@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: History of Ideas in Computer Science
I haven't been on the list for a while, but I saw V3 #31 and wondered if
anyone had mentioned the collection
Fritz Machlup and Una Mansfield, Eds., "The Study of Information:
Interdisciplinary Messages", Wiley, 1983, in particular Section 3,
"Intellectual Issues in the History of Artificial Intelligence", by
Allen Newell, with responses by Margaret A. Boden, Avron Barr, Douglas
R. Hofstadter, and Allen Newell.
--Bruce
[Nope. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 85 0:05:24 EST
From: Frank Ritter <ritter@bbn-labs-b>
Subject: response to gJolly
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: AI-Aims
The goal of AI research seems, to me, to be to produce a `machine'
that will satisfy the Turing criterion. This is a total waste of
time and effort. ...
[old zen motto: "if you want to get someplace, you've got to give up
wanting to get to that place"]
Gordon is right in his statement that the power of this revolution lies
in the extension of the thinking process. There are obviously new
ways to think, and new ways to add leverage to man's current cognitive
powers. Whether this intelligence is best done in a brute force manner,
or modelled after human thinking processes is still an open question.
The basics of thought are still very much a research issue.
Which is better is a silly question until we are able to even define
such terms.
Just as man had to study birds, and was able to derive the underlying
mechanism of flight, and then adapt it to the tools and materials
at hand, man must currently study the only animal that thinks
in order to derive the underlying principles there also. The best
way to study the mind is to hypothesis a theory and test it. And in the
process of doing that, insight just might emerge on what powers we have,
how they work, and how to best augment them, and thus give Gordon the
answers he seeks.
Frank Ritter (ritter@bbn-labs-b)
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Mar 85 11:44:13-CST
From: Gordon Novak Jr. <CS.NOVAK@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: AAAI Member Statistics
[Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The membership statistics of the American Association for Artificial
Intelligence provide an interesting picture of where the AI people are:
Calif. 1431 Canada 200
Mass. 709 U. K. 146
Texas 668 Japan 84
New York 451 W. Germany 70
Virginia 317 Australia 34
Penn. 293 France 29
Maryland 278
New Jersey 258 Foreign total: 765
Illinois 173
Total Membership: 7094 [of which 4145 are listed in the directory. -- KIL]
Texas is a strong third, and nearly as big as all foreign countries combined.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 1985 01:04:38 EST
From: Perry W. Thorndyke <THORNDYKE@USC-ISI.ARPA>
Subject: News - FMC and Teknowledge
[Edited by Laws@SRI-AI.]
FMC ANNOUNCES ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE VENTURE WITH TEKNOWLEDGE
SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, March 12, 1985 -- FMC Corporation today
announced that it has entered into a joint venture with Teknowledge,
Inc. in the area of artificial intelligence software development. FMC
has acquired approximately 11% of Teknowledge, Inc. In addition, the
companies have entered into a "strategic affiliation". [...]
Peter E. Weber, Director of Corporate Research and Development at FMC, said the
investment was a key element in FMC's plan to build a premier corporate
capability in artificial intelligence. [...]
Teknowledge will collaborate with FMC's Artificial Intelligence Center, part of
the company's corporate R&D laboratory in Santa Clara, California, to develop
generic software tools. [...]
One of the initial joint projects will develop a tool for use in building
expert systems for real-time process control. This tool could be used to
control such diverse systems as autonomous military vehicles or mineral
refining plants. Another project will develop a tool for use in designing
complex configurations of parts into a final product. This tool could be used
in applications such as product configuration (as in R1/XCON), knowledge-based
CAD/CAM, or planning the steps in a manufacturing process for a metal part.
The Artificial Intelligence Center at FMC, the focal point for the company's AI
activities, conducts basic research in the areas of knowledge systems,
real-time heuristic control, human-machine interfaces, computer-based
instruction, intelligent robotics, and vision. The Center also undertakes
leading-edge applied research focused on the development of software products
for internal use or incorporation into FMC product lines. [...]
Perry W. Thorndyke
FMC Corporation
1185 Coleman Avenue, Box 580
Santa Clara, CA 95052
(408) 289-3112
------------------------------
Date: 10 Mar 1985 20:36-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Baldwin, J. F. and Zhou, S. Q. A fuzzy relational inference language.
Fuzzy Sets and Systems 14 (1984) no 2 155-174
GWAI 83 (Dassel, 1983) Informatik-Fachber 76 Springer, Berlin New York
1983 (It appears that some or all of these items may be in German):
Dilger, Werner and Janson, Agnes
Unification graphs for intelligent backtracking in deduction symbols
Eder, Elmar Properties of substitutions and unifications
Elsinger, N. A technical note on splitting and clausal normal form
algorithms
Horster, Patrick J. Complete reduction systems
Ohlbach, Hans Jurgen A rule-based method of proof using clausal graphs
Habel, Christopher Logical systems and representation problems
Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat Inst. Steklov 137(1984) 80-86
Linear-time recognition of isomorphism of tree-like images (Russian
with English summary) by A. N. Grigor'eva
International J. Comput. Inform. Sci 13(1984) no1
H. R. Lu, Inferability of context-free programmed gammars.
Electron. Comm Japan 67 (1984) no 6 10-17
An extended Fisher criterion for feature extraction--Malina's method
and its problems.
Studies aand Research in Data Processing Masson, Paris 1984 252 pp
Jean-Claude Simon, Pattern Recognition by algorithms.
Inform. Process. Lett 1984 no 1 41-46
P. A. Subrahmanyam, "On embedding functions in logic"
Pattern Recogniton 17 (1984) no 3 331-337
Dean M. Young, Patrick Odell A formulation and comparison of two linear
feature selection techniques applicable to statistical classification
Engineering Cybernetics 21 (1983) no 4 85-92
An information approach to estimation of the usefulness of features in
statistical pattern recognition
RAIRO Inform. Theor 18 (1984) no 2 161-170
Luis Farlinas del Cerro
A resolution principle in modal logic.
AT&T Bell Labs Tech J 63 (1984) no 7 1213-1243
B. H. Juang. On the hidden Markov model and dynamic time warping for
speech recognition -- a unified view
Engineering Cybernetics 21 (1983) no 4 1-11 (1984)
M. I. Sudelkin Search for solutions using Knowledge
Simulation Volume 44 No 1 Jan 1985
Artificial Intelligence Topics at IBM 33
Computer Design Volume 24 No 1 Jan85
Machine Vision Technology is Coming of Age but is not here yet 64
Symbolic Processor Aids Design of Complex Chips 147
Lisp Workstation brings AI power to Users desk 155
Electronics Week Vol 58 No 2 Jan 7 85
Expert System uses AI for Natural Sound
Computer Languages Volume 9 No 3/4 161-182
Huhu: The Hebrew University Hebrew Understander
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 85 14:41:04 pst
From: Curtis L. Goodhart <goodhart%cod@Nosc>
Subject: Jokes on rape
Some things are immoral, period. Rape is one of them, and thankfully
there is still an overwhelming consensus on that (unlike shifts in our
society's view on other issues). In any case, consensus or not, I'd
like to request that such material not be submitted to the net, and if
it is submitted it should be eliminated by the mail reviewer should he
or she see it. Those who have similar feelings should definitely
speak up. Though there is the tendency to fear being labeled a prude,
silence only gives the appearance that there is no opposition or other
side, and consequences will follow. For example, if all the decent
people stay out of politics, by default the government will be run by
indecent people, and we can not complain, indeed we can only expect
the quality of our government to reflect this indecency.
[I apologize to all who were offended by the posting. I have received
a few messages on each side of the issue, but it seems clear that
Poly Nomial and Curly Pi should have been left to make their own way
in the world without the help of AIList. The policy of this list is
to avoid "ethnic" humor or any form of wit at the expense of individuals
or sensitive groups. There may have been a few lapses, but I'll try to
enforce the policy strictly in the future. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Mar 85 17:24:33-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Cheating Husbands and Other Stories (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
This AFLB talk might interest AI and systems people as well. - Andrei
3/14/85 - Yoram Moses(Stanford)
Cheating Husbands and Other Stories:
A Case Study of Knowledge, Action, and Communication
We present variants of the cheating husbands puzzle in order to illustrate
the subtle relationship between knowledge and action in a distributed
environment. We examine the state of knowledge of a message that
a group of wives achieves as a function of how the message is communicated.
We analyze how the states of knowledge arising in the different circumstances
may affect the wives' ability to act and the success of their actions in
achieving their stated goals.
This will be a recreational AFLB. This work is joint with Danny Dolev of
the Hebrew University and Joe Halpern of IBM San Jose.
***** Time and place: March 14, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
[AIList does not, of course, endorse activities of cheating husbands. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue 12 Mar 85 11:26:53-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Limits of Calculative Rationality (CSLI)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI COLLOQUIUM
Speaker: Hubert Dreyfus
University of California, Berkeley
Title: From Socrates to Expert Systems: The Limits of Calculative
Rationality.
Time and Place: March 14, 1985, 4:15, Redwood Hall, rm. G-19
Abstract: An examination of the general epistemological assumptions of
artificial intelligence with special reference to recent work in the
development of expert systems. I will argue that expert systems are
limited because of a failure to recognize the real character of expert
intuitive understanding. Expertise is acquired in a five-step
process; only the first of which uses representations involving
objective features and strict rules. A review of the successes and
failures of various specific expert systems confirms this analysis.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Mar-85 0042 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #34
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 85 00:42:40 PST
Date: Thu 14 Mar 1985 22:33-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #34
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 15 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 34
Today's Topics:
AI Sites - Universities,
Linguistics - Hangul,
Literature - The Journal for the Integrated Study of Artificial
Intelligence, Cognitive Science and Applied Epistemology,
Policy - Humor,
Humor - AI Joke Contest & Eliza & Political/Mathematical Humor & ))) &
Greedy Algorithms,
Course - Nonexistent Objects and Fiction (CSLI)
Seminars - Knowledge-Based Software Development at Kestrel (SU) &
Computational Geometry, Rewrite Rules, etc. (PARC) &
Shape from Function (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 14 Mar 85 12:55:07 EST
From: jaffe (elliot jaffe) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: Universities and AI
About 4 months ago on AILIST I remember a discussion about which universities
were doing AI work and a general listing was given.
1) Can I get a copy of that set of lists?
2) Does anybody have any new information to enter?
Elliot Jaffe
Jaffe@CMU-PSY-A.ARPA
[I'll send Elliot a copy of the list of sites receiving AIList.
See also the November 1983 issue of IEEE Spectrum; it misses
some sites -- SRI, for example -- but the chart of academic and
nonacademic sites on pp. 59-68 is impressive. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 14 Mar 85 08:14 PST
From: Kay.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Hangul
The word "Hangul" (not "Hungal") may refer to a dialect, but that is not
its main use. It is the name of the wonderfully ingenious writing
system that Korean has, named after the emperor who invented it. The
system is interpretable both phonemically and syllabically and is a gem
of design. There are the same number of good automated translation
systems for this as for every other natural language, namely none.
--Martin Kay.
[The last IEEE Computer featured oriental text entry systems; I
remember seeing Korean discussed, so perhaps there are some
appropriate references. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 08:31:31 pst
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@Navajo>
Subject: A place for everything
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I just received volume 1, number 1 of The Journal for the Integrated
Study of Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science and Applied Epistemology.
It is described as "a quarterly journal published by Communication and
Cognition-AI at the State University of Ghent, Blandijnberg 2,
B-9000 Ghent, Belgium."
I imagine they will soon tire of allusions to Browning's "How They Brought
the Good News from Ghent to Aix," if they haven't already.
-v
------------------------------
Date: 14 Mar 85 15:30:43 EST
From: Tim <WEINRICH@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Policy on Humor
[...The policy of this list is to avoid "ethnic" humor or any form of
wit at the expense of individuals or sensitive groups. There may
have been a few lapses, but I'll try to enforce the policy strictly
in the future. -- KIL]
Unfortunately, if you really intend to stick strictly to this policy,
I'm afraid you will end up posting no humor at all, as it seems there are
very few statements and even fewer jokes which no group finds offensive.
Do you realize that, according to this policy, you cannot publish any of
the various humorous versions of Little Red Riding Hood?
I mourn the demise of humor on AIList.
Twinerik
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 16:31:33 pst
From: newton@cit-vax (Mike Newton)
Subject: rape and humor
Though rape is a barbaric act, censorship is a far worse crime for it
affects so many more. Do the people who object so much about the "polly
nomial" story complain so loudly w.r.t. jokes about murder, or, worse,
war?
There is a fundamental difference between an act and writing about an act.
If jokes about a subject are banned, how long is it before satire about
the same subject is banned? Then there is only a small step fiction is
banned. Next comes fact, research...
mike
ps: I realize that the above is a viewpoint some will find objectionable.
Arguments about my first sentence had better be convincing: Though due to
my sex it would be hard to rape me, I have been shot, mugged and robbed --
one of these incidents still bothers me noticeably -- yet I do NOT think
that jokes about these subjects should be censored.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Mar 85 11:11:57-PST
From: Wilkins <WILKINS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: in defense of humor
I am all for decent people expressing opinions and running the
government, but being oversensitive can take the fun out of life.
Any reasonable definition of rape should include the fact that
the raper and rapee are human or at least members of the
animal kingdom. I find it hard to be offended when polynomials
are raped, however. We all know mathematical/computer language
is colorful, but using a verb that would be in poor taste when
applied to humans does not mean its in poor taste when applied
to abstract data structures. For example, killing a line in
your editor is not considered murder.
While the story in question did say Polly Nomial was a
"paragon of womanly virtue", it never said she was a woman
or was human, so one can easily assume she is a polynomial.
The story implies that Curly Pi is a "common fraction" which
is consistent with these characters being abstract mathematical
being. This story was good humor, though admittedly non-mathematicians
might not appreciate it and transfer it into a human domain and
be offended. I personally enjoyed getting the chance to read it.
Striking a blow for more humor and fun in life,
David
------------------------------
Date: Tue 12 Mar 85 13:26:45-EST
From: Bob Hall <RJH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: AI Jokes RESULTS
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Q. "What do you get when you cross an expert system with an
orangutan?"
A. "Another Harry Reasoner."
Yes folks, that's it, the winner of the first annual AI Jokes Contest.
The winner has been awarded his lovely blue and gold Cal T-shirt.
We got many entries (single digits, though), which were much appreciated.
Highlights follow. The names have been withheld just in case the authors
are sensitive about being associated with their entries. (Anyone who
wants explicit credit should send me mail.)
Consensus honorable mentions:
Q. "What did the Apple 5e say when a human fell on it?"
A. "Ureka! (sic) I've discovered gravity!"
Q. "How many expert systems does it take to screw in a light bulb?"
A. "If they're so smart, why don't they know?"
*******************************************************************
Now that you've got a feel for the competition, ANNOUNCING
AI JOKES II: THE WRATH OF CONS
Send your entry for the next, bigger, better AI Jokes Contest to
either me (rjh%mit-oz@mit-mc) or US mail directly to
AI JOKES II: THE WRATH OF CONS
1717 Allston Way
Berkeley, CA 94703
Terms are the same: if yours is the funniest, as judged by an impartial
panel of natural intelligences, you win your choice of a T-shirt from
one of the following schools:
U.C. Berkeley
Cal State, Hayward
Chabot College, Hayward
MIT
Harvard
Leland Stanford Junior College
Doug Flutie's alma mater
Enter Now!! (Include shirt size and school preference)
*******************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: 14 March 1985 0512-EST
From: Jeff Shrager@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Security the MIT way
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
If you have access to MIT-OZ, try sending a message to their operator
from a not-logged-in task. In order to handle dial-in randoms who tend
to do operator sends (and used to get no reply) they've now piped the
operator's message buffer through an Eliza system, which proceeds to
"analyze" the luser's problems. Hack Hack.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Mar 85 08:57:18-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Political/Mathematical Humor
From a WORKS message by Greg Kuperberg (harvard!talcott!gjk or
talcott!gjk@topaz):
"2*x↑5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 24 Feb 85 14:13:34-PST
From: Steven Tepper <greep@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Found: right parens
[Forwarded from the Stanford AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I found a sequence of right parentheses lying around on the Ethernet.
They look like they might have fallen off the end of somebody's Lisp program.
If you lost some and think these might be yours, send me a message identifying
them.
Also, has anyone seen a matched pair of asterisks in Gacha 10? I can get
new ones, but this particular pair had sentimental value.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 24 Feb 85 15:31:58-PST
From: Gustavo Fernandez <FERNANDEZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: RE: Found: right parens
[Forwarded from the Stanford AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Sorry, I have not seen your asterisks, but please! Does anyone know where
the daily bit buckets are stored? I lost some data Thusday night by
doing one too many left shift on a program I was writing on SCORE and
I was wondering whether I might be in some way able to recover the bit
strings. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Gus Fernandez
FERNANDEZ@SCORE
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 85 17:57:17 est
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher at mit-htvax>
Subject: Graduate Student Lunch *SEMINAR*
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Place: *THIRD FLOOR THEORY PLAYROOM*
Date: Friday, March 8
Time: 12 Noon
Hosts: Isaac Kohane and Mike Wellman
COMPUTER AIDED CONCEPTUAL ART
REVOLTING SEMINAR SERIES
presents
GREEDY ALGORITHMS FOR REALLY HARD PROBLEMS
Mike Generous
Penny Weise
Dahlia Fulisch
Perhaps the best known greedy algorithm is Kruskal's Minimum
Spanning Tree algorithm. The concept of "greedy algorithm"
is here generalized to provide a framework in which any
problem can be solved with bounded error in constant time.
The simplest such algorithm is a stupefyingly
straightforward algorithm for finding the maximum of a list
of numbers: take the maximum of the first two elements of
the list. The bounded error arises from the provability of
the correctness criterion "We could have done worse!". The
Satisfiability problem for the predicate calculus is solved
trivially, because we have shown conclusively elsewhere that
we are Satisfied with predicate calculus. The framework
applies also to meta-problem solving (i.e. "What problem
should we sic the greedy algorithm on next"), as we will
demonstrate by applying it to the problem of generating
grant proposals. If there is time, we will give other
examples involving Single-State Automata (Moronotrons) and
Extremist Graph Theory.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Mar 85 16:42:26-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Course - Nonexistent Objects and Fiction (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT
Graduate Seminar - Philosophy
``Nonexistent Objects and the Semantics of Fiction''
Edward N. Zalta, CSLI
The problem of how it is we can think about and tell stories about
what does not exist is one of the foremost problems in the study of
intentionality. We'll begin by asking what an analysis of fiction,
and stories in general, ought to do, and then quickly review the
problems facing the semantic analysis of sentences about nonexistent
objects developed by Meinong, Russell, Quine, and the free logicians.
We then turn to a careful presentation of both Terence Parsons'
neo-Meinongian views (developed in his book: Nonexistent Objects) and
my own, which has a Meinongian flavor. There will be a comparison of
how the language and logic of these theories represent the meaning of
English sentences about nonexistents. Then we shall ask whether these
theories provide a better representation, and do a better job of
analyzing fiction in general, than some current alternatives, some of
which do without nonexistents (Plantinga, Searle, Fine, Lewis) and
some of which appeal to some sort of abstract objects (Kripke, van
Inwagen, Wolterstorff). We'll conclude the course with a brief
examination of how these axiomatized theories fit into a larger
picture of the semantics of language and intensionality.
The first meeting of this seminar will be held in the Venture Hall
trailers conference room, Tuesday April 2, at 1:15.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Mar 85 17:04:08-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge-Based Software Development at Kestrel (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, March 15, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Douglas R. Smith, Kestrel Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
ABSTRACT: KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AT KESTREL INSTITUTE
Kestrel Institute is a non-profit organization with a two-fold
purpose:
Research and graduate education in computer science.
Its main research goal is the formalization and incremental
automation of software development.
Towards this goal, we carry out research in such areas as machine
intelligence, very-high-level languages, algorithm design,
transformation and synthesis, software project management, and
knowledge-base programming environments.
I'll present an overview of current and planned research at Kestrel
Institute and describe our experience with the DSE system, a
knowledge-base programming environment in routine use. The bulk of
the talk will examine two research themes at Kestrel:
Knowledge compilation and,
The use of schemes in program synthesis.
Knowledge compilation involves transforming declarative knowledge plus
directions for its useage into efficient procedural form. The uses of
program schemes and strategies for instantiating them include
knowledge compilation and the design of algorithms from
specifications.
Paula
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 85 15:53:13 PST
From: yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Seminars - Computational Geometry, Rewrite Rules, Etc. (PARC)
[Excerpted from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The next BATS [Bay Area Theory Seminar] will take place on Friday,
March 15 at Xerox PARC (in the auditorium). [...] -- Frances
SCHEDULE
10 a.m. Ronald Graham (AT&T Bell Lab): Remarks on The Finite Radon
Transform
11 a.m. Frances Yao (Xerox PARC): A General Approach to d-Dimensional
Geometric Queries
1 p.m. Andrew Yao (Stanford): Separating the Polynomial-Time
Hierarchy by Oracles
2 p.m. Joe Halpern (IBM): What Does It Mean for Rewrite Rules to be
"Correct"?
3 p.m. Andrei Broder (DEC): Vote Early and Vote Often; The
Distributed Lottery Problem
[...]
A General Approach to d-Dimensional Geometric Queries
Frances Yao
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
ABSTRACT Research results in the area of computational geometry have
been largely limited to problems concerning simple relations between
objects in the plane. In this talk, we shall define what we call a
"generic query" in d-space, and present a uniform solution to it. As
examples of application, the nearest-neighbor query in d-space can be
solved in linear space and sublinear time; the pairwise intersection
problem for polytopes and the construction of minimum spanning trees in
d-space can be solved in linear space and subquadratic time.
What does it mean for rewrite rules to be "correct"?
Joe Halpern
IBM San Jose Research Center
ABSTRACT We consider an operational definition for FP via rewrite
rules. What would it mean for such a definition to be correct? We
certainly want the rewrite rules to capture correctly our intuitions
regarding the meaning of the primitive functions. We also want there to
be enough rewrite rules to compute the correct meaning of all
expressions, but not too many, thus making equivalent two expressions
that should be different. And what does it mean for there to be
"enough" rules?
We give a formal criterion for deciding whether there are enough rewrite
rules and show that our rewrite rules meet that criterion. We develop
powerful techniques to prove these results, that
involve imposing a notion of types on the untyped language FP, and then
using techniques of typed lambda-calculus theory. (Note: This talk is
completely self-contained. No previous knowledge of FP or lambda
calcuclus will be assumed.)
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 1985 22:11 EST (Tue)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Shape from Function (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
AI Revolving Seminar Tues 3/19/85 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
SHAPE FROM FUNCTION VIA MOTION ANALYSIS
with Application to the Automatic Design of
Orienting Devices for Vibratory Part Feeders
TOMAS LOZANO-PEREZ
This talk explores the premise that a device's function can be
characterized by how it interacts with other objects. I focus on
devices for which some aspect of their function can be characterized
in terms of constraints they place on the motions of objects.
Commonplace examples of this class of device abound; any office is
full of them: chairs, cups, rulers, telephones, cabinets, bookends,
etc. In fact, the shape of most objects is constrained by the legal
motions of that object and of objects it must interact with.
I suggest a representation for the function of this class of objects
in terms of motion contraints. These possible--motion constraints are
expressed as an abstract diagram. Combinations of these diagrams
serve both in describing a device's function and in designing devices
with specified behavior.
The design problem for these devices is a kind of inverse of the
motion planning problem in robotics. In both cases we know the shape
of the moving part. In motion planning, we are given the obstacles
and we must find a legal path between the specified origin and
destination. In our view of design, however, we are given the desired
motion (actually a range of possible motions) and are asked to find a
legal shape of the obstacle, that is, the device.
We illustrate our approach to design with a detailed case study of
mechanical part feeders, a class of real devices with an interesting
and direct relationship between shape and function.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Mar-85 1913 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #35
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 85 19:13:21 PST
Date: Fri 15 Mar 1985 17:14-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #35
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Saturday, 16 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 35
Today's Topics:
Literature - Recent Articles,
Seminars - The Berkeley PROLOG Machine (IBM-SJ) &
Tools for Conceptual Modeling (Toronto) &
Innate Linguistic Knowledge (UCB),
Conferences - Intelligent Information Retrieval &
ACM Northeast Regional Conference &
System Sciences Software Track
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 Mar 1985 17:27-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Cybernetics: Theory and Applications Hemisphere, New York, N. Y. 1983
Donald C. Gause Gary Rogers Cybernetics and Artificial Intelligence 339-360
Ya Z. Tsypkin The theory of adaptive and learning systems 57-89
____________________________________________________________________________
Zh. Vychisl. Mat. i Mat. Fiz 24 (1984) no 9 1392-1401
I. V. Issev Design of pattern recognition and classification algorithms
by the covering method (in Russian)
____________________________________________________________________________
Information Sciences 33 (1984) no. 3 197-207
Rudolf Kruse Statistical Estimation and Linguistic Data
____________________________________________________________________________
Kexue Tongbao (English Ed.) 29 (1984) no 7 861-866
Xin Zhan Wu On the classification entropy criterion in pattern
recognition
____________________________________________________________________________
Figural Synthesis Erlbaum Hillsdale NJ 1984
David H. Foster Local and Global Computational Factors in Visual
Pattern Recogniton
____________________________________________________________________________
Journal Multivariate Analysis 15 (1984) no 2 147-163
Richard A. Olshen, Louis Gordon
Almost surely consistent nonparametric regression from recursive
parrtitioning schemes
____________________________________________________________________________
Raoro Inform. Theor. 18 (1984) no 3 191-208
J. P. Jouannaud H. Kirchner Constructing a smallest simplification ordering
____________________________________________________________________________
Studia Logica 42 (1983) no 4 443-451
J. A. Kalman Condensed detachment as a rule of inference
____________________________________________________________________________
Engineering Cybernetics 21 (1983) no 5 107-115
V. M. Sumarokov System Modelling of Information Structures of Data BAses
____________________________________________________________________________
Communications, Pure and Applied Math 37 (1984) no 6 815-848
Jacob T. Schwartz Micha Sharir On the Piano Movers' Problem V. The case
of a rod moving in three-dimensional space amidst polyhedral obstacles.
____________________________________________________________________________
Discrete and Applied Math 9 (1984) no 3 269-295
51
Walter Whitely, A correspondence between scene analysis and motions of
frameworks
____________________________________________________________________________
Engineering Costs and Production Economics Volume 8 No 3 Dec 15 1984
Two Heuristic Methods for Grouping Inventory Items Page 211
____________________________________________________________________________
Computer Decisions Volume 17 Number 1 jan 15 1985
Expert Systems Get Down to Business
A. Lampert 138
____________________________________________________________________________
Theoretical Computer Science Volume 34 NO 1-2 Nov 1985
T. Sato H. Tamaki Enumeration of Success Patterns in Logic Programs pp
227
____________________________________________________________________________
The Institute April 1985 Volume 9 Number 4
Page 8 "Optical Crossbar Switch to be Developed"
Work done on a 32 by 32 crossbar to implemented with optical switch
technology
Page 8 "VLSI called second-best for future architecture"
Discussion of various architectures in Connection Machines and Lisp
Machines.
Page 9 "Reddy calls for Design Library to Help Build 'superchips'"
Discussion of chip libraries and needs for special purpose computers
and chips in AI work
____________________________________________________________________________
Infoworld March 18, 1985 Volume 7, Issue 11
"Pathfinder Aims at Resale"
Pathfinder from KDS Corp of Wilmette has been announced which reads up
to 256,000 facts and converts them into a set of rules. Designed to
allow novices to devlop expert systems. Available on IBM PC with work
being done on Apple II and Macintosh versions. The Apple and Macintosh
versions will run the resulting expert system only and not be able to
create new expert systems.
____________________________________________________________________________
The Artificial Intelligence Report
Artificial Intelligence Publications
3600 West Bayshore Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA (415)-424-1447
Volume 2 Number 1
Describes various AI work at SRI-International
Knowledge Based Systems: Prospector and HYDRO
Natural Language Processing
Planning Problem-Solving and Deduction: electromechanical system
assembly and disassembly planning, distributed AI
Image Processing Computer Vision
Distributed Data Management
Automatic Program Syunthesis
Inference Machine Architecture
SHAKEY: mobile robot
STRIPS
LIFER: programmable natural language system
TEAM: natural language and databased
QA4, QLISP, AI languages
LADDER: distributed data base access
MEDINQUIRY: medical patient management and clinical research
Robotics Lab
the problem of identifying objects in a jumble of parts
using multiple arms
arc welding
visual inspection
AI and the Military
expert system for loading military cargo planes AALPS
ADVISOR: system used by planes returning from missions
FLIREX: Flight rules expert system
SAMPL: mission planning
CHATTER: natural language system
Advanced Computer Systems Department
Systems Life Cycle Management, computer architecture, simulation,
Computer System Performance Prediction, Data Base system Design,
Office Automation System
feasibility studies of expert systems in monitoring earth-orbiting
spacecraft for malfunctions and planning of space missiONS
expert system for the design of consumer good packaging, loan
application checking
Financial Applications
International Bank Loan Evaluations, Commercial Loan Evaluation,
Financial Planning, Insurance Underwriting, Financial Product sales,
Insurance Claims Processing
SRI has developed a PC based expert system.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 16:16:57 PST
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - The Berkeley PROLOG Machine (IBM-SJ)
[Excerpted from the IBM-SJ Calendar by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Wed., March 20 Computer Science Seminar
10:40 A.M. THE BERKELEY PROLOG MACHINE
Cafe. A The Berkeley Prolog Machine (PLM) is a co-processor
architecture designed for efficient execution of
Prolog programs. It is the first prototype of a
logic processor for our Aquarius heterogeneous MIMD
machine. Currently, it is attached to an NCR/32
system which provides the memory and I/O subsystem as
well as processing power for other operations not
suited to the functional unit of the PLM (e.g.,
floating point operations). This paper describes the
architecture of the PLM and some aspects of its
implementation. We conclude with an analysis of some
performance data obtained from a simulation of the design.
Prof. A. M. Despain, Computer Science Division,
University of California at Berkeley
Host: G. Langdon, Jr. (LANGDON@IBM-SJ)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 85 13:19:09 est
From: Voula Vanneli <voula%toronto.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Tools for Conceptual Modeling (Toronto)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEMINAR - Tuesday, March 19,
at 2 p.m., SF 3201
Hannu Kangassalo
University of Tampere, Finland
"Comic - A Project for Developing Tools for Conceptual
Modelling and Information Construction"
Abstract: The goal of the project is to develop concepts,
methods and software tools to support end users and data
administrators in their work for developing a conceptual
schema on a graphical workstation. A graphical language,
Concept D contains two sublanguages, one for describing
independent concept defninitions and one for describing the
conceptual schema.
The information given in the conceptual schema is stored
into the data base from which it can be analyzed and
manipulated for different purposes, e.g. for producing
a data base schema. The presentation gives also the
outline of the architecture of the comic-system which
is being developed at the University of Tampere.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 85 15:27:07 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Innate Linguistic Knowledge (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, March 19, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Janet Dean Fodor, University of Connecticut and
CSLI
TITLE: ``A Formal Theory of Innate Linguistic
Knowledge''
An infant must be innately provided with some sort of
representational medium in which to record what he observes
about his target language. It has occasionally been suggested
that the formal properties of this mental metalanguage could be
the source of universal properties of natural languages. This
is quite different from the standard (= substantive) approach,
which assumes that children are born with certain statements of
the metalanguage innately tagged as true.
I propose to take the formal approach seriously. That way
to do so seems to be to try for a theory which accounts for ALL
universals in the same way, i.e., solely on the basis of what
can and cannot be expressed in the metalanguage. The attempt
is very informative, regardless of whether it ultimately
succeeds or fails.
Success is by no means guaranteed, for the formal theory
overthrows many familiar assumptions. For example, it can be
shown to be incompatible (on standard assumptions about chil-
dren and their linguistic input) with the existence of any con-
straints on rule application or on derivational representa-
tions. All the work of distinguishing well-formed from ill-
formed sentences must be done by rules only. Constraints can
determine the shape of the rules, but cannot tidy up after them
if they overgenerate.
It is easiest to see how to set about formulating grammars
of this kind within the framework of GPSG, and it is encourag-
ing to find that a number of universals do fall out as conse-
quences of the GPSG formalism. But there are problems too.
Syntactic features, in particular, create headaches for learna-
bility.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 09:25:52 est
From: rada@nlm-mcs (Roy Rada CSB)
Subject: Conference - Intelligent Information Retrieval
CALL FOR PAPERS
Session(s) on Intelligent Information Retrieval are
being organized for the upcoming "Expert Systems in Govern-
ment Conference". Papers are requested on any of a wide
variety of topics, such as adaptive document or query
description, knowledge-bases to guide document search, and
classification of documents via semantic parsing. The
Conference is not restricted to Government-related work. If
you are interested in submitting a paper or organizing a
session, please contact Roy Rada at
National Library of Medicine
Bethesda, MD 20209
phone 301-496-2475
ARPA net: Rada@NLM
Permission has been secured from the Editor Donald Kraft of
the Journal of the American Society of Information Science
(JASIS) to have the best papers considered for publication,
perhaps as a special issue.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE CONFERENCE FLIER
Expert Systems in Government Conference
October 23-25, 1985
THE CONFERENCE objective is to allow the developers and
implementers of expert systems in goverenment agencies to
exchange information and ideas first hand for the purpose of
improving the quality of existing and future expert systems
in the government sector. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has
recently been maturing so rapidly that interest in each of
its various facets, e.g., robotics, vision, natural
language, supercomputing, and expert systems, has acquired
an increasing following and cadre of practitioners. [...]
Additional information may be obtained from the Program
Chairman:
Dr. Kamal Karna
MITRE Corporation W852
1820 Dolley Madison Boulevard
McLean, Virginia 22102
Phone (703) 883-5866
ARPANET: Karna @ Mitre
-- Roy Rada
------------------------------
Date: 13 Mar 1985 10:38-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN@BBNG>
Subject: Conference - ACM Northeast Regional Conference
I am chairing the natural language session and
especially encourage people to submit papers in that area.
Thanks. -Brad Goodman
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL ACM NORTHEAST REGIONAL CONFERENCE
"Integrating the Information Workplace:
the Key to Productivity"
28-30 October 1985
Sheraton-Tara Hotel
Framingham, Mass.
and
The Computer Museum
Boston, Mass.
The conference sessions are grouped into tracks corresponding to major areas
of interest in the computer field. Papers are solicited for the Conference's
Artificial Intelligence Track. The Track's program will emphasize "real world"
approaches and applications of AI.
Topics of interest include:
- Expert Systems
- Natural Language
- Man-Machine Interface
- Tools/Environment
- A.I. Hardware
- Robotics and Vision
Papers are invited. Two copies of an abstract (maximum 500 words) should be
submitted for review by April 1 to the Program Chairman, ACM Northeast Regional
Conference, P.O. Box 499, Sharon, MA 02067. Three copies of the final paper,
in camera-ready form, should be sent by July 1, 1985 to Dr. David S. Prerau,
Track Chairman, Artificial Intelligence Track, ACM Northeast Regional
Conference, GTE Laboratories Inc., 40 Sylvan Road, Waltham, MA. 02254.
For additional information on the Conference, write:
ACM Northeast Regional Conference
P.O. Box 499
Sharon, MA. 02067
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 85 07:46:44 EST
From: "Bruce D. Shriver" <shriver.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - System Sciences Software Track, Revised
CALL FOR: Papers, Referees, Session Coordinators, Task Forces
=============================================================
SOFTWARE TRACK of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
========================================================================
HICSS-19 is the nineteenth in a series of conferences devoted to advances
in information and system sciences. The conference will encompass develop-
ments theory and practice in the areas of systems architecture, software,
decision support systems, and knowledge-based systems. The conference is
sponsored by the University of Hawaii and the University of Southwestern
Louisiana in cooperation with the ACM and the IEEE Computer Society. It
will be held on Jan. 8-10, 1986 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Papers, referees,
and session coordinators are solicited in the following areas:
Software Design Tools, Techniques, and Environments
Models of System and Program Behavior
Testing, Verification, and Validation
Professional Workstation Environments
Alternative Language Paradigms
Reuseability in Design and Implementation
Knowledge-Based Systems Software
Algorithm Analysis and Animation
Visual Languages
Authors please submit 250 word abstracts by May 1, 1985. Session
and Task Force Coordinators should submit a 350 word proposal for
the session or task force by Apr. 1, 1985. Referees should submit a
list of the topics and the number of papers they are willing to review
May 15, 1985. Authors should submit six (6) copies of the full paper
(not to exceed 26 double-spaced pages including diagrams and references)
by July 5, 1985 directly to:
Bruce D. Shriver
HICSS-19 Software Track Coordinator
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
PO Box 218, Route 134
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
(914) 945-1664
compmail+: b.shriver
csnet: shriver.yktvmv@ibm-sj
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Mar-85 0036 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #36
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 85 00:36:07 PST
Date: Sun 17 Mar 1985 22:35-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #36
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Monday, 18 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 36
Today's Topics:
Applications - SIGART Special Issue on AI in Engineering,
Programming - 4th-Generation Languages & AI Programming & KBES,
Literature - Recent Articles & Principles of OBJ2,
Seminar - Discourse Semantics for Temporal Expression (BBN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Friday, 15 March 1985 22:17:23 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: SIGART Special Issue on AI in Engineering
The special issue on AI in engineering (SIGART Newsletter) will be
available sometime in the middle of April or begining of May. It will
be around 90+ SIGART pages and contains contributions from over sixty
researchers from 6 countries. Copies of this special issue are sent
to SIGART members at no extra cost. If you are not a member and
interested in getting a copy then extra copies are available at
$5.00 each from the SIGART-ACM office.
Sriram
------------------------------
Date: 14 March 1985 0809-EST
From: Dave Touretzky@CMU-CS-A
Subject: 4th generation languages
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This was
in response to a question about 4th-generation languages.]
4th generation languages are not programming languages in the usual sense.
They allow you to define database files, process transactions
against databases, and generate reports from them. For example, you can say
"For every state, for every product we sell in that state, list the
salesmen who sell that product, their annual sales, their commissions, and
their office location, sorted by annual sales." The actual command language
uses a slightly more complex syntax, but it's still pretty close to English.
These systems are not just report writers. They allow you to extract, sort,
copy, and update databases. They use clever hashing and indexing algorithms
for fast retrieval. Thus, one can write substantial data processing
applications in them, using their simple English-like commands, without
ever learning how to "program". This is a far cry from conventional data
processing as taught in universities, which emphasize languages like COBOL
or PL/I. The database access algorithms used by 4th generation languages
are more sophisticated than anything you would expect someone with a
two or four year degree in data processing to come up with.
Martin's complaint is based on the following scenario. A student is hired
by a local DP shop and, for his first assignment, asked to generate a
sales report. He goes off for a month and returns with a huge piece of
PL/I code, nicely structured and commented, and mostly debugged, that
does the job. But he could have done the same thing in two days if he'd
just used RAMIS, or FOCUS, or one of the other 4th generation languages
that run on IBM mainframes. Martin's point is valid. Much of routine DP
programming is becoming obsolete -- except in the universities.
Now, not all university CS programs are designed to produce data processing
technicians. I don't think MIT or CMU teaches much COBOL these days. But
your average rinky-dink CS department, which just graduated from punched
cards a few years ago, would be wise to teach more than just COBOL
or PL/I (or even Pascal) to its students if it wants them to be useful
in the real world of DP.
[Some other languages that James Martin cites in the March CACM are
SAS, Natural, Ideal, Nomad, Application Factory, ADF, CNS, DMS,
Mapper, and [for DB query only] QBE. He excludes Smalltalk and
VisiCalc. C is 3rd-generation and LISP is 5th-generation. Martin
seems interested only in languages for commercial DP. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 85 21:03:19 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Programming
In response to benefits of AI versus 'common' software:
Our application is to improve the efficiency of a huge, real time,
reliable, control system. Based upon about a year's worth of research, my
opinion [not yet that of my employers .. but hopefully soon to be that
of my immediate bosses] is that arguing about the utility of Expert Systems
is like arguing about the utility of the "if" statement in a programming
language. There are situations where they are useful, and there are
applications where they are not. In a simple, overengineered application
they look great -- in tough problems they provide no panacea.
The question to ask is how should they be used, and how can we
use them to do our job. First I will describe what we initially thought.
Then I will transition to my current view.
Like everybody else, we read the standard AI texts, visited the
AI demo's, and read the AI and other journals -- all talking about
specialized expert systems that configure vaxes, identify fingerprints,
prospect for oil, fix locomotives. We said: let us go out and find
such an application within our organization. We found it, and my boss
sent me out to develop a briefing to convince the world that it was
what should be done.
Based upon, in hindsight, some poorly thought out logic from
one of our contractors -- we thought to remove our dependance upon
experts with expert systems. Is not that what happened in the above
cases? We made an important and subtle mistake: expert systems
should be targeted towards *people* not *areas* *of* *expertise*.
This can be understood from two perspectives: 1) an expert
system is only as good as the rules within, and they must continue
to evolve, and 2) if the expert only uses the system a part of the
time, then he never becomes proficient with it or the knowledge
within it to use it effectively. In our case, we could have had one
operator using 15+ different expert systems created by different
contractors, with vastly different knowledge structures at one time.
The difference between expert systems should now be clear: an
expert system is tied to a person's job; commom software is tied to
a specific technical area. There is a lot of common ground here, but
the difference is distinct.
Why? Anybody with experience with expert systems understands
how quickly massive rule bases become unwieldy -- just like nested
if statements. Keying expert systems to people keeps them small,
and permits the integrity of the distributed knowledge base to
be effectively managed. Our expert system became a network
of distributed expert systems, mapped very closely to our current
organizational structure. Our thinking was that individuals
within an organization drive its evolution, and we should apply
expert systems and let nature take its course.
Our organization is a learning one, and so must be the entity
we set up. The expert systems must contribute to flexibility and
fluidity of the organization -- by permiting the programmer and the
user to meld into one. People, once again, will be responsible for
what their computer does.
No one is advocating total elimination of all computers in
favor of expert systems. We will have our share of big number crunchers.
Personal expert systems will provide the interface to these machines
in the terms meaningful to specific experts. Personal expert systems
will also provide interfaces with each other.
With these insights, we looked again at our organization. We
also considered inexpensive commercially available products such
as the PC-AT, and the PC-AT-II-jr due out this summer with a 600MB
removable optical disk. After some analysis of what our experts
were actually doing most of the time, our transitional approach became
clear: 1) use off-the-shelf micros to automate the routine tasks
that micros do better than experts and 2) slip in expert system
technology to these PC's to permit the experts to easily offload
all their well understood "routine" tasks and 3) put all these
machines into a network which permits expert systems to talk to
each other under the supervision of expert people. We can also
build "learning systems" by extending this approach.
I welcome comments on this matter; especially those that are
critical (but not abusive).
Richard Jennings Arpa: jennings@Aerospace
AFSCF/XRP AFSCF.XRP@AFSC-HQ
PO 3430
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3430 AV: 799-6427 comm: 408 744-6427
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 15 March 1985 22:37:58 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-isl1.arpa
Subject: KBES - comments
This is in reference to Goodhart's comments on expert systems.
Knowledge-Based Expert Systems (KBES) are supposed to differ from
conventional programming languages in the following manner:
1. Completeness : Knowledge in a KBES can be incrementally
added, while it is very difficult to make any changes to a
conventional program.
2. Uniqueness: A conventional program is supposed to give an
unique answer for a certain input data. KBES can come up
with a number of possible solutions, ranked in a certain
order.
3. Sequencing: In a KBES sequencing does not matter.
The above differences can be clearly seen in a production-based expert
system, since the knowledge tends to be separate from the inference
mechanism. The production system programming can be viewed as a
different programming methodology. Production system programming is
also closely related to the decision table approach used in the early
70's.
Only when an EXPERT'S knowledge is included in the knowledge-base we
have an KBES. Otherwise we are talking about knowledge-based systems.
Even your algorithmic program can be viewed as a knowledge-based
system; only it doesn't have the specialist's knowledge. Any decent
(engineering) KBES would combine the specialist's knowledge with the
algorithmic knowledge.
Building a KBES is quite a painful task. Before you venture into
building one, study the pros and cons properly. Make sure that proper
experts are available.
Regarding inexact inferences, experts will never say anything with
100% certainty. Hence a KBES should handle uncertain information.
[A different viewpoint is expressed in a Consultants in Information
Technology study done in late 1983 for the British Alvey Committee (as
reported in Expert Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, July 1984, pp. 19-20).
They conclude that expert systems are easier to construct than is
generally believed, and that academic concerns about search, conflict
resolution, and uncertain knowledge are largely irrelevant to the
commercial expert systems now under development. (These systems
generally avoid applications that require tentative hypotheses or must
deal with uncertain data other than the user dialog.) -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 15 Mar 1985 08:53-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Electronics Week March 4, 1985 page 77-78
Announcement of Timm, an expert system development kit for the PC.
Electronics Week March 11, 1985 page 65-66
Describes work on testability and testing of electronic circuits using
AI. Part of a larger article on the military's new push for
reliability.
I just received an announcement of a journal called "New Generation
Computing." Cost of a subscription is $96.00 to be obtained from
Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.
Attn: D. Emin
175 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10010
They also are willing to send out sample issues.
Table of Contents: Volume 2 No 3
Preface:
Communication and Knowledge Engineering I. Toda
Efficient Unification over Infinite Terms J. Jaflar
Fair, Biased and Self-Balancing Merge Operators: Their Specification and
Implementation in Concurrent Prolog, E. Shapiro and C. Mierowsky
A Multiport Page-Memory Architecture and a Multiport Disk-Cache System
Y. Tanaka
Functional Programming with Streams-Part II, T. Ida and J. Tanaka
ORBIT: A Parallel Computing Model of Prolog H. Yasuhara and K. Nitadori
Serialization of Process Reduction in Concurrent Prolog A. J. Kusalik
The following are NTIS publications noted in SIGPLAN (Volume 20 Number 3
March 1985). Prices are paper copy prices.
PROLOG Programming Language. 1974-August 1984 (Citations from the
INSPEC: Information Services for the Physics and Engineering
Communities Data Base) PB84-874775 $35.00
Grasp; Uma Proposta Para Extensao Do Lisp (In Portugese)
N84-27463/8 $4.50
Kanji PROLOG Programming System (In Japanese)
Also can be found in Mitsubishi Denki Giho Volume 58 n6 p 9-13 1984
PB84-218197) $11.50
Enhanced Prolog for Industrial Applications
Same article as above page 5-8
PB84-218197 $11.50
The Artificial Intelligence Report Volume 2 No 2
Discussion of AI and the Personal Computer by Esther Dyson
Discussion of Air Force new AI Consortium involving Syracuse University,
University of Rochester, Rochester Institute of Technology, SUNY at
Buffalo; Rensselaer Polytechnic; Clarkson University; Colgate
University; University of Massachussetts
Cognitive Systems Inc.: System for portfolio analysis
AI at Sperry
Review of Hewlett Packards Integrated Personal Computer
Agreement between Inference Corp and Lockheed Corporation
Reviews of AI growth: AI is growing at 50% a year, 53 million in 1983
and $142 million in 1984; 70 million in Lisp Machines sale for 1984 and
in 1989 310 million in Lisp Machines; natural language systems did 16
million in sales with 200 million in 1989
AI company percentage break down by state: California 30 per cent,
Massachusetts 24 per cent; New York; 12 per cent; Michigan and Florida
eight per cent each; New Jersey 5 per cent and Texas 3 percent
Gartner Group estimates $183 million in Lisp machine sales broken down
by company:
Symbolics 88 million
Lisp Machine, Inc 37 million
Xerox 35 million
Texas Instruments 23 million
A series of AI titles available from National Bureau of Standards is
available for $100.00 total from Business/Technology Books
Expert Systems: Principles and Case Studies Reviews
Artificial Intelligence Report Volume 2 Number 3
AI at NASA: Lists research activities at various centers of NASA.
A lot of work is done in robotics for space applications and space
station as well as basic research in many areas of research.
Current Projects include: Lisp Machine for space applications,
smart checklist for procedural execution which knows about human factors
pilot training system; life support system controller; visual pattern
recognition for interpretation of scanning electron microscope pictures
of airborn sulfuric acid particles; aircraft design expert system;
system to assist helicopter crews; pilots associate
An expert system has been developed to assist in monitoring Halley's
Comet.
List of Lisp and Prolog vendors for the PC including reviews of some
products.
Description of project to replace harbor and river pilots on Japanese
ships.
Dec has signed agreements with the following vendors to jointly market
products:
SRL+ and PLUME from Carnegie Group
PROLOG II from Prologia
GCLISP from Gold Hill Computers
ART from Inference Corporation
Agreement between Sumitomo Electric Industries to market Silogic's
Knowledge Workbench in Japan
AI area breakdown of papers submitted to 1985 IJCAI
Expert Systems 111
Natural Language 99
Knowledge Representation 77
Learning and Knowledge Acquisition 75
Perception 61
Automated Reasoning 49
social implications of AI 4
Geographic Breakdown
US 460
Europe 150
Asia 79
Canada 29
------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Mar 85 16:42:26-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Principles of OBJ2
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORT
A new CSLI Report by Kokichi Futatsugi, Joseph Goguen, Jean-Pierre
Jouannaud, and Jose Meseguer, ``Principles of OBJ2'' (Report No.
CSLI-85-22), has been published. To obtain a copy of this report
write to David Brown, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford 94305 or send net
mail to Brown at SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: 13 Mar 1985 15:10-EST
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Discourse Semantics for Temporal Expression (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
The next BBN Artificial Intelligence seminar will be at 10:30 AM on
Tuesday March 19, in the 2nd floor large conference room at 10 Moulton
St. Erhard Hinrichs of Stanford and Ohio State wil speak on "A
Discourse Semantics for Temporal Expressions in English". His abstract follows:
Apart from the semantic properties of tenses, temporal
conjunctions, and temporal adverbials in discourse, I will
discuss the contribution of Aktionsarten to the shift of
reference time. Adopting the classification of Aktionsarten into
states, activities, accomplishments, and achievements suggested
in Vendler(1967), only accomplishments and achievements lead to
the introduction of a new reference point, which moves the time
frame of a narrative forward, whereas states and activities are
ordered with respect to previously introduced reference points
and therefore do not move the time frame of the narrative. These
properties of Aktionsarten turn out to be relevant for the
analysis of both tenses and temporal conjunctions.
The semantics of temporal frame adverbials in the sense of
Bennett/Partee(1972) can best be accounted for by means of a
reference point scoreboard, which is designed to keep track of
context information. I will demonstrate how this approach to
frame adverbials can acount for phenomena such as restricted
quantification and reference time nesting.
I will further suggest how to incorporate the interpretation of
temporal expressions in discourse into the framework of discourse
representation structure (DRS) developed by Kamp(1981). I
propose to augment DRS theory by a modified version of the system
of event structures proposed in Kamp(1979). However, unlike
Kamp's original structures, the event structures I am proposing
offer a formal implementation of the three-dimensional tense
logic of Reichenbach(1947).
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂19-Mar-85 1737 @SRI-AI.ARPA:LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #37
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 85 17:37:22 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 19 Mar 85 13:04:14-PST
Date: Tue 19 Mar 1985 10:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #37
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Tuesday, 19 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 37
Today's Topics:
Expert Systems - RULEMASTER Language,
Humor - ))) & Sesame Street FA,
Policy - Censorship & Rape,
Seminars - Social Effects of Computing (SU) &
Expert Systems in China & TUILI (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 85 10:42:55 EST
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: RULEMASTER Language
Has anyone heard of the RULEMASTER language for building expert systems?
It is an inductive system; i.e it learns rules from examples, can
interface with lisp, pascal, c, or fortran, and can access databases.
It was developed under the direction of Donald Michie and sold by
Radian Corp. I am considering going to take their tutorial course
and would like to know if anyone has heard of or used this language.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 16 Mar 85 04:47:58-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: RE: Found: right parens
RE:
Sorry, I have not seen your asterisks, but please! Does anyone know where
the daily bit buckets are stored? I lost some data Thusday night by
doing one too many left shift on a program I was writing on SCORE and
I was wondering whether I might be in some way able to recover the bit
strings. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Formerly, the NSA sent all dropped bits to the shredder, but these
days they are transported nightly via Federal Express to MCC where
they are trying to solve the problems that escaped the rest of y'all.
Earlier this week a comment was overheard between two members of
a visiting Russian delegation to Texas' high-tech city: "Dammit,
comrade, they look all alike." I no longer wonder what they were
refering to.
[Hey, if you think this is lousy humour, watch David Letterman sometimes.
I figure Johnny Carson supports him to justify his own whopper of a salary]
------------------------------
Date: 15 Mar 85 19:01:21 EST
From: Carl.Ebeling@CMU-CS-UNH
Subject: Sesame Street FA
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I was watching Sesame Street today (getting the kid started early) and it
appears that they are teaching some beginning theory. They had a box that
accepted only the letter 'A'. Next week they're going to cover regular
expressions and the Pumping Lemma.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 15-Mar-85 11:05:43-GMT
From: DIANA HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <"[140,153]%edxa"@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Censoring jokes about rape
[Though rape is a barbaric act, censorship is a far worse crime for it
affects so many more.......]
I'm not going to answer your first point because, like you, I have
never been the victim of rape and hence cannot compare the effects of
rape with those of censorship. But I will just say that FEAR of rape
has profoundly affected the lives of at least as many people as
censorship; indeed, it even acts as a kind of censorship - a
censorship of behaviour, of being afraid to say certain things, go to
certain places, enter into certain kinds of relationship, even to be
out of doors at certain times of the day. And to imply
i) that rape is a normal part of human(male) behaviour, or
ii) that the victim enjoyed it
(the Poly Nomial joke does both) is to encourage an acceptance of attitudes
that lead both to rape and to that fear.
[There is a fundamental difference between an act and writing about an act.
If jokes about a subject are banned, how long is it before satire about
the same subject is banned? Then there is only a small step fiction is
banned. Next comes fact, research...]
There is actually a very big leap between banning jokes which casually
make assumptions that are damaging to a group of people, and
banning satire which questions people's assumptions. For example, you would
probably not want to encourage the circulation of a joke that took it for
granted that the victims of shooting, mugging or theft enjoyed the experience?
In a sense, such jokes have already been censored - no-one even writes or
tells them!
[..Any reasonable definition of rape should include the fact that
the raper and rapee are human or at least members of the
animal kingdom. I find it hard to be offended when polynomials
are raped, however.......]
I'm very surprised that David enjoyed the joke, since he seems to have missed
its main point. The point of the joke is that the language used to describe
mathematical functions can be neatly turned into a description of a piece
of human behaviour. It certainly would have been very funny, if it had not
required the acceptance of the two appalling assumptions regarding rape
that I noted above.
Apropos, I should like to know how AIlist readers would have reacted if
the joke had referred to 'Paul E Nomial', the 'epitome of masculine qualities',
instead of a clearly female character? Would the joke still be funny?
Would it still be less offensive than censorship?
Diana Bental
University of Edinburgh
mail: bental%edxa@ucl-cs
------------------------------
Date: Fri 15 Mar 85 13:30:09-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Reply to Diana Bental
This discussion of morality on the network should really be conducted
on Human-Nets, but I'll permit it to continue on AIList for awhile.
(I.e., I can't resist putting in my two-cents worth.)
Diana Bental claims that the Impure Mathematics story depicts
Poly Nomial as enjoying being raped. I have reread the story
and can find no support for this view (aside from a very cryptic
remark about having "satisfied her hypothesis"). The entire
tone of the story is just the opposite.
She also claims that the humor in this piece is in its use of
mathematical terms to describe human behavior. I think it equally
supportable that the humor is in attributing human emotions to
mathematical entities, as David Wilkins said. No doubt both
viewpoints contribute to the mental gymnastics that we call humor.
As for the offensiveness of this or any other text, I believe that
people regard the public distribution of material offensive when
1) the depicted behavior is threatening to them or to their society, and
2) the material is likely to promote such behavior.
(There is also a second category of offensive material, namely anything
that one finds personally disgusting or frightening. In this case,
however, we seldom object to others having access to the material unless
it is forced upon them. My wife, for instance, used to have a very
strong fear of snakes and worms, but she never felt that such subjects
should be banned from the public media.)
In support of this view, I submit that subjects we would find very
offensive on TV would be perfectly acceptable in a scientific treatise
or an X-rated videocassette -- the latter media are less likely to
have an effect on social behavior. We perceive less threat in graphic
portrayals of war attrocities than in Bugs Bunny hitting Elmer Fudd.
Many people have recently found words such as "he" and "chairman"
offensive even in technical texts, precisely because they believe that
such language does affect our society adversely.
I think we all all agree that point one is applicable here: rape is
abhorrent. (The question of whether it is "normal human (male)
behavior", in the absence of strong social sanctions, could be
discussed at great length.) Ms. Bental's comments about the fear
of rape being as harmful as censorship are well taken.
The applicability of the second point is more doubtful.
It may be true that if AIList sanctions such material, the material is
more likely to be distributed through other channels having more
effect on social behavior. This is far fetched, but is essentially
identical to the reasoning behind much of the "sexist language"
controversy. Rape is a sufficiently serious social problem that we
must consider the possibility of such influences.
Let's not get carried away, however. Impure Mathematics >>is<< funny,
or at least witty, regardless of whether it has to be banned for
social reasons. It does not "require the acceptance" of rape, and
might be funny even if it did require a "willing suspension of
disbelief". (Cartoons are often based on unbelievable premises.)
The story is not intrinsically offensive, any more than is the word
"he" or the biblical story of the flood; those of us who enjoyed it
are not perverts or misogynists.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 85 15:23 IST
From: Henry Nussbacher <VSHANK%WEIZMANN.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Humor
I too cast my vote for humor. Not to repeat what others have said
(Issue #34), I have found that computers have been filled with violence
and I do not find it intentional. How often do we say 'Let me execute
the program...', and realize what we are saying? In VM, when issuing the
CMS START command, CMS replies with 'EXECUTION BEGINS...'. A non-
computer person looking over your shoulder might be offended if they
recently had a person they know executed. The Wylbur operating system
uses the command KILL to force a user off the system, and VM uses the
command FORCE to do the same. Not very nice language. When a user
complains that their terminal is 'dead', they say that their terminal is
'hung'. Not very nice language, indeed. I have often heard users
complaining that the system just 'died'. There used to be a regression
analysis package that was extended with new functions and was named
RAPE (and forced to change its name to RAPFE a few years later).
I could go on and on. The point is the author of Poly Nomial didn't
intend to glorify rape. No one in their right mind likes rape. But
censoring humor is not going to stop rape.
Henry Nussbacher
Weizmann Institute of Science
Rehovot, Israel
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 18-Mar-85 14:55:12-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Jokes←P ?
Curtis L. Goodhart's comments (Vol 3 # 33) are very important. AI is a male
dominated domain and that should change. The situation is, of course, moving
forward, but what we really need is a change of attitude.
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@uk.ac.ucl.cs
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 85 13:45:24 pst
From: wfi <@csnet-relay.arpa,@ucsc.CSNET (Wayne F. Iba):wfi@ucsc.CSNET>
Subject: rape and censorship
[ Though rape is a barbaric act, censorship is a far worse crime
for it affects so many more. ]
This might have some validity (and I emphasize might) if we were talking
about censorship in the context of some government official dictating
to various publishers what's to be printed and what's not. However,
in the context of the present discussion, we are referring to editorial
decisions. Any printed newspaper will print only what it wants with respect
to anticipated reader reaction. They generally won't print items which
might tend to reduce their readership. For Ken to withold such items
in the future is not the same as censorship. Just as you can choose to
read a newspaper or not, you can choose to read this newsletter.
I am adding my voice to those requesting that such not be printed.
Even if I am in the minority, I submit that if for no other reason, we
refrain from printing such on the basis that computer science and AI
are heavily male dominated to begin with, and that printing
stories about rapes in a context which might be amusing,
is no way to encourage female involvement.
--wayne
------------------------------
Date: Fri 15 Mar 85 12:23:04-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Social Effects of Computing (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CS 300 -- Computer Science Department Colloquium -- Winter 1984-1985.
Our final presentation will be on
Tuesday, March 19, 1985
at 4:15 in Terman Auditorium
Rob Kling
Department of Information and Computer Science
University of California, Irvine
THE SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF COMPUTERS, COMPUTING, AND COMPUTERIZATION
Research on the social impacts of computing indicates few
"deterministic" consequences of introducing computer-based systems
into social settings such as organizations. Jobs may become more or
less skilled; decisions may be "better" or more confused; power may
shift to or from central administrators. Much depends upon the kinds
of systems introduced, who controls them, and the particular practices
and procedures that people develop to use the computer systems and the
services that they support. The social consequences of computer use
are often very "context sensitive." Moreover, computer-based systems
which can be perfectable under static laboratory conditions and when
supported by a rich array of resources may be very problematic when
introduced into dynamic social settings, settings rife with social
conflict, or settings where support resources are limited.
This talk will examine some organizing ideas to help understand
the context-sensitive character of computerization. One cluster
of ideas is embodied in web models and these will be explained in
the talk.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Mar 85 12:19:29-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Expert Systems in China & TUILI (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SPEAKER: Dr. Ru-qian Lu, Professor and Head of Department of
Computer Science, Institute of Mathematics, Academy of Science,
Beijing, China
ABSTRACT: This will be a combination of two talks:
1. DEVELOPMENT OF EXPERT SYSTEMS IN CHINA (SELF EXPLANATORY)
2. TUILI - A GENERAL PURPOSE TOOL FOR DESCRIBING
EXPERT SYSTEMS (ABSTRACT BELOW)
DATE: Friday, March 22, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
Since the seventies, more and more people are involved in developing
expert systems. But most of them are special-purpose systems,
containing only knowledge and experiences of a special field, even of
a special person (such as an experienced doctor of traditional Chinese
Medicine). Despite the advances in the field of knowledge
representation, general-purpose tools for describing expert systems
are still rare and in the early stage of their development. In many
cases, they are only new versions of existing special-purpose tools
with minor extensions.
Tuili (Tool for Universal Interactive Logical Inference) takes the
generality as one of its important design goals. The main mechanism
of its knowledge representation are production rules, but other
mechanisms can be simulated as well. Here are the main
characteristics of Tuili:
1. Not only predicates, but also predicate procedures are allowed
in production rules.
2. The parameters of predicates and predicate procedures are
pattern elements of different data types.
3. A new principle of semantic pattern matching is proposed. Users
are allowed to define their own pattern matching rules.
4. Users can define their own probability functions, attribute
functions and their propagation rules during the course of
inference.
5. Rule bases and data bases are modular structured.
6. The control structure is represented as production rules, they
form the meta-structure, which can be organized hirarhically to
form a multi-level control structure.
7. The system provides a rich set of built-in control strategies to
be chosen from by users. They can define their own strategies,
too.
At present, Tuili is being used to write an expert system for brain
diseases and one for teaching traditional Chinese Medicine.
Paula
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Mar-85 1930 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #38
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 85 19:30:35 PST
Date: Thu 21 Mar 1985 17:07-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #38
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Friday, 22 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 38
Today's Topics:
Psychology - Real-Time Decision Making,
Games - Mastermind Rules,
Humor - Stray Parens and Brackets,
Linguistics - Hangul,
Programming - Fourth Generation Languages,
News - Misrepresentation & Recent Articles,
Seminars - Semantic Interpretation Against Ambiguity (UToronto) &
Massive Parallelism (UToronto) &
Category Theory (UCB),
Conference - Expert Weapons Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 85 11:32:43 pst
From: Cindy Mason <clm@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: decision making references
Does anyone know of references to
Real time multi-agent decision making strategies
Real time single-agent decision making strategies
OR
Heuristics that humans use in real time situations
in either group or solo problem solving?
Any leads on these topics will be appreciated.
Cindy Mason (clm@lll-crg)
------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Mar 85 16:37:38-CST
From: Charles Petrie <CS.PETRIE@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Mastermind Rules Request
Does anyone have the set of "if/then" rules for playing
some version of mastermind?
[Several algorithms and sets of rules have been published
in the SIGART Newsletter. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 20 Mar 85 08:16:56-CST
From: Jim Miller <HI.JMILLER@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: stray parens and brackets
Some of us recipients of the aforementioned stray parens here at MCC would
appreciate it if the Interlisp programmers out there would set #RPARS to NIL,
so that the pretty printer does not substitute square brackets for multiple
parens. Many of us are working in Zetalisp, which does not recognize square
brackets as anything special, and trying to infer how many parens are
implied by a random square bracket is very difficult and time consuming.
Thanks for your consideration in this matter.
Jim Miller
MCC / Human Interface
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 09:16:13 PST
From: hplabs!tektronix!jans@mako
Subject: Hangul
AIList Digest Friday, 15 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 34
Date: 14 Mar 85 08:14 PST
From: Kay.pa@XEROX.ARPA
The word "Hangul" (not "Hungal") may refer to a dialect, but that is not
its main use. It is the name of the wonderfully ingenious writing
system that Korean has, named after the emperor who invented it.
Hangul refers not to an emperor, nor a transcription system, but the Korean
language in general. Written Korean is called "Hangul" in much the same way
as written English is called "English". The emperor in question is actually
King Sejong. (of the Koryo dynasty???) This enlightened leader did not
actually invent the language, but commissioned a team of scholars to the task.
Hangul has the distinction of being the most modern natural language
trascription system (ci 1400, 1477 sticks in my mind for some reason) and the
only one in wide use that was designed and implemented, rather that growing
from common use. Prior to it's invention, the Korean Language was written in
bastardized Chineese. It's success is evident in Korea's near 100% literacy
rate, which is (by far) the highest among developing nations, and is among the
highest in the world. (In fact, higher than good ol' USA!)
The "Golden Age" of King Sejong's reign also featured the development of
Korea's modern legal system, the first modern navy in the Orient, and numerous
other developments in the arts and sciences.
:::::: Jan Steinman Box 1000, MS 61-161 (w)503/685-2843 ::::::
:::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans Wilsonville, OR 97070 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 85 22:07:29 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Fourth Generation Languages
Re: Comments by Touretzky.
I think the gist of the matter boils down to whether languages
or engineering should be taught in computer science departments. My
undergraduate professors did not consider software creation to be
worthy of academic credit (extreme) [course 16, MIT, 78], but in
retrospect (see the discussions on SOFT-ENG) may have had a point.
We just recieved an Aero from VPI. Given a task, he worked
out a solution, found a machine, looked at several available languages,
chose FORTRAN and wrote a program in about 4 hours to help him. The
design is separate from the coding or implementation. [Since then, he
became frustrated with FORTRAN, BASIC and Z-100 assembler .. and is
now happily working with XLISP 1.4].
In this context how does one exploy the concept of "shells"
for expert systems? If one knows that a shell is applicable, I can
clearly understand (what I presume would be) Martin's argument to
use it. If one is not sure, how should one's time be budgeted towards
understanding the problem, understanding the shell(s), selecting
a shell, and implementing a solution?
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 19 Mar 85 14:19:11-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Misrepresentation
[Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Recently, another incidence of someone misrepresenting themself as
a AAAI employee/consultant has occurred. This person named
"Judy Robbins" is calling AAAI members inquiring about their
interest in attending one of the AAAI's many workshops and seminars.
The AAAI does have a workshop program that focuses on well defined,
narrow technical topics. No one from the AAAI office is involved
directly with the coordination of any of these workshops. So, if this
person calls you, please try to catch her phone number and address and
send it to us.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
[There was a previous incident in which someone used the AAAI
name to solicit salary information. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 1985 11:52-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
High Technology April 1985
41-49: Discusses DARPA Advanced Computer Research effort.
This includes the AI work, past civilian spinoffs of DARPA computer
initiatives, moral and social issues as well as results of interviews
with researchs who have problems with DARPA's efforts
3: add from AT&T describing expert systems for phone compnay cable
maintenance (which runs on the 3B2 computer), statistics (particularly
regression) expert systems , silicon compilers and systems to derive
new rules from existing rules in its database.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Dec Hardcopy March 1985 Volume 14 no 3
43-49: AI for Micros minireviews of Golden Hill Common Lisp and Lisp/88,
micro prolog, Insight, Expert System Tool Kit (running under Forth) and
Expert Ease. Also includes some general AI info for those not familiar
with AI.
18: evaluation of AI market potential.
Estimated 1984 AI products sold $140,000,000 worth with 5 billion
dollars by 1990. Another study estimated that 'overinflated product
claims' and "brain drain from university to industry" would slow
growth down to 50 per cent a year (1 billion in 1989).
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
IEEE Computer February 1985 Volume 18 Number 2 (Special Issue on
Hardware Description Languages)
Temporal Logic for Multilevel Reasoning about Hardware Ben Moszowski
Hardware Verification Fumihiro Maruyama and Masahiro Fujita
(Discussed application of theorem proving and PROLOG to hardware verification.)
Concurrent Prolog as an Efficient VLSI Design Language Norihisa Suzuki
A Transformation Model for VLSI Systolic Design MOnica S. Lam and Jack
Mostow
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Byte March 1985 Volume 10 No. 3
Page 10: "TI Offers AI Software for IBM PC, TI Professonal"
"Texas Instruments planned to announce Arborist, a decison-analysis
tool for managers, late last maonth. Arborist, an expert system that
allows you to enter information in a natural-language format, sets up
decision trees that can be graphically displayed. It is expected to
sell for about $500.00"
Page 221 "An XLISP tutorial" tutorial on a public domain version of
LISP (written in C)
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Electronic News Monday, March 18, 1985
Page 24: PE Group named Richard W. Peebles director of research for
their AI group. He was a manager of DEC's project to design office
systems based upon AI technology.
Page 61: Vuebotics (a company making machine vision systems) filed for
Chapter 11
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Electronics Week March 18, 1985 Page 48
Interview with Danny Hillis of Thinking Machines, Inc.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Department of Computer Science and Engineering Southern Methodist University
Dr. Chao-Chih Yang
Professor
Department of Computer and Information Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama
"Representations and Implemenations of the Decision Tables"
1:30-2:30 PM Friday March 22, 1985
Decision table definiitions; some representations such as functional
approach, logical approach, and relational database approach.
Implementations by a LISP program and PROLOG program.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 85 14:09:46 est
From: Voula Vanneli <voula%toronto.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Semantic Interpretation Against Ambiguity
(UToronto)
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
(SF = Sandford Fleming Building, 10 King's College Road)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEMINAR - Tuesday, March 26, 3 pm,
SF 1105
Professor Graeme Hirst
Dept. of Computer Science, University of Toronto
"Semantic Interpretation Against Ambiguity"
A semantic interpreter must be able to provide feedback
to the parser to help it handle structural ambiguities. In
Absity, the semantic interpreter we describe, this is done
by the "Semantic Enquiry Desk", a process that answers the
parser's questions on semantic preferences. Disambiguation
of word senses and of case slots is done by a set of pro-
cedures, one per word or slot, each of which determines its
correct sense in cooperation with the others. A partially
disambiguiated procedure's remaining possibilities are
well-formed Frail objects that can be seen and used by other
processes, including the Semantic Enquiry Desk, just as a
person can see many of the details of a partly developed
"instant" photograph. It is from the fact that partial
results are always well-formed semantic objects that the
system gains much of its power. This, in turn, comes from
the strict correspondence between syntax and semantics in
Absity.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 85 14:11:41 est
From: Voula Vanneli <voula%toronto.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Massive Parallelism (UToronto)
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
(GB = Galbraith Building, 35 St. George)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE/THEORETICAL ASPECTS/SYSTEMS SEMINAR
Thursday, March 28, 11 am, GB 220
Professor Jerry Feldman
Dept. of Computer Science, University of Rochester
"Massive Parallelism in Nature and in Computer Science"
Human brains made of millisecond components (neurons)
can carry out complex perceptual tasks in less than a second
i.e. in about a hundred sequential time steps. This compu-
tational constraint, among others, suggests that the algo-
rithms employed by nature are quite different from those of
conventional AI. Several groups have been exploring the
direct use of "connectionist" computational models and have
obtained some promising results. The talk will describe a
model of massively parallel computation, its application to
problems of vision and language, and some of the issues it
raises for theoretical and systems work on parallel computa-
tion.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 85 16:40:56 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Category Theory (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, March 26, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: George Lakoff, Department of Linguistics, UC
Berkeley
TITLE: ``Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: A Guided
Tour''
I'll be presenting an overview of what's in my new book:
WOMEN, FIRE AND DANGEROUS THINGS: WHAT CATEGORIES REVEAL ABOUT
THE MIND. Here's some of what the tour will cover:
- Prototype effects are surface phenomena that have sources in
cognitive models of four types: scalar, propositional, meto-
nymic, and radial.
- Why prototype and basic-level effects are inconsistent with
classical theories of meaning, including all theories in which
symbols (that is words, and mental representations) are taken
as being given meaning by virtue of their relation to external
reality. These include model-theoretic semantics, internal-
representations-of-external-reality, Fodor's `semantically
evaluable' representations, etc.
- The logical inconsistency of model-theoretic semantics and
all theories in which meaning is based on truth and reference.
- How cognitive model theory gets around these problems.
- Whorf and Relativism: Why there are hundreds of positions on
linguistic relativity which are not totally relativistic, and
why at least one such position is probably true.
- Why categorization phenomena are inconsistent with a view in
which (a) thought is merely a matter of symbol manipulation and
(b) the mind is independent of the body. They are, however,
consistent with information processing approaches in which the
mind is not separate from and independent of the body.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 85 11:29:58 EST
From: Morton A Hirschberg <mort@BRL-BMD.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems in Government Symposium
I am organizing the sessions on Weapon Systems at the upcoming Expert Systems
in Goverment Symposium to be held in McLean VA, Oct 23-25. Weapons Systems
topics include adaptive control, electronic warfare, star wars, and target
identification. Anyone wishing to organize sessions and/or submit papers
can contact me (soon). Mort
mort@brl-bmd
Morton A. Hirschberg
USA Ballistic Research Laboratory
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066
AMXBR-SECAD
301-278-6661
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Mar-85 0042 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #39
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 85 00:42:32 PST
Date: Sat 23 Mar 1985 22:49-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #39
To: AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA
AIList Digest Sunday, 24 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 39
Today's Topics:
Policy - Sexism in AI/AIList
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Mar 85 16:40:06-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Sexism in AI
The response on this list-policy topic (Impure Mathematics/Humor/Rape/
Censorship/Sexism) clearly makes this special digest issue necessary.
A few readers have complained, however, that the discussion has already
been out of hand and that it is my job as moderator to reject such
submissions. I therefore request that readers direct their further
replies to each other rather than to the list unless they introduce
AI-related issues that are not considered below.
The AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA mailbox is still open for administrative
discussions, and copies of significant messages to that mailbox are
available to interested parties. I will reply as I have time,
but will not necessarily answer messages cc'd as a courtesy. It would
be impossible for me to agree with more than half of the opposing views
that have been expressed, but I am generally pleased with the quality
of the arguments that have been presented.
[My] official list policy is a composite of my own views and those that
I perceive the readership to hold, so your feedback on this and other
matters has been helpful in establishing digest policy.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 19 Mar 1985 12:58:53-PST
From: robbins%lite.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Jeff Robbins CSC/CS 523-4880)
Subject: Another comment on Polly Nomial
From: MOLSON::S←ROGENMOSER "Sharon Rogenmoser (CSC/CS-TSS) 523-4529
To: LITE::ROBBINS
As far as the story goes, I agree with everyone that complained about it.
It wasn't funny. And it wasn't just a play on mathematical terms. It
very obviously associates Polly as a young woman at the beginning of
the story. And the reason she had such a terrible thing happen to her
was that that she was feeling 'adventurous' that day, so wandered off
where she wasn't supposed to be.
The story very much parallels (no pun intended) what woman are told all
their lives. And the moral of the story is 'don't allow them freedom'.
Don't you find it interesting that there was nothing mentioned about
Curly doing anything wrong.
I disagree with all the men that commented what a terrible thing censorship
was. This story explains what a female should expect if she steps out
of the bounds society (or the laws of mathematics) has laid down for her,
just like most of our fairy tales do.
The message is very much there. And as long as 'innocent' stories are
allowed to circulate without question, the message will be considered
true.
It scares me.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1985 11:15 EST
From: MONTALVO%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Polly Nomial
From: Ken Laws <Laws at SRI-AI.
It may be true that if AIList sanctions such material, the material is
more likely to be distributed through other channels having more
effect on social behavior. This is far fetched, but is essentially
identical to the reasoning behind much of the "sexist language"
controversy.
The effect that such jokes have on social behavior does not
necessarily have to be rape in order to be unacceptable. If it
encourages the threat of rape or ridicule of women, which is not so
far fetched, it's unacceptable.
Let's not get carried away, however. Impure Mathematics >>is<< funny,
or at least witty, regardless of whether it has to be banned for
social reasons.
It was not so long ago that exclusively male clubs existed where women
were kept out by law, the threat of violence, or ridicule. Such jokes
where part and parcel of keeping up the threat of rape or ridicule
which many women have experienced. They are means of excluding women
from exclusively male domains, since mostly men enjoy these jokes and
most women are offended by them. Some men are also threatened by
these kinds of jokes; if they don't find them funny by laughing
openly, their masculinity may be questioned. I feel that AIList is no
place for such material because it gives the list the aura of an
exclusively male club.
Fanya Montalvo
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 16-Mar-85 6:20:58-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Top-Down AI.
The demise of humour on the AI-Digest would indeed be a sad event.
I see humour as one of the most functional and dynamic parts of the
list. This follows from the thesis of `The Moon is a Harsh Mistress'
by Robert Heinlein. In this fiction, the central character is `Mike'
who is a self-aware computer who is trying to understand the human
race. His main avenue of research is a massive analysis of jokes
and non-jokes. (I hope the title of the novel is not construed as
sexist!)
Gordon Joly
gcj%edxa@uk.ac.ucl.cs
[I recall a science fiction story in which humor disappeared from the
world once it was realized that jokes (as opposed to puns) were
just tools of aliens studying the transmission of information in our
species. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 13:16:30 est
From: Elias Israel <me%brandeis.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Poly and good taste....
WARNING! Yet another two cents' worth on the same old topic follows:
Normally, I wouldn't say anything, but here at Brandeis we have been
grappling with this very subject. The "Women's Coalition" (a Brandeis group)
is sponsoring "Women's Month" and they have addressed this recently. The
point of contention seems to be about images of men and women in the
mainstream of society. Some people contend that images of men and women in
mainsteam societal activities now actively or passively advocate violence
against women. Not just pornography, about which there has always been this
complaint, but also TV, movies, magazines and, yes, even jokes have been
blamed as vehicles for these images.
The next point that some people make is that the existence of these images
promote violence against women by creating an atmosphere in which violence
against women is considered acceptable behaviour.
This last point is, to my mind, less clear than many people might think. I
see this question as a kind of chicken-and-egg situation. Which came first:
violence against women, or depictions thereof? I think this question has to
wait for some more conclusive evidence concerning the acquisition of
attitudes that promote violence against women. Where do these attitudes come
from?
I also have a problem thinking that humour might be a significant vehicle
for these images (assuming that they exist in any of the other cases,
something which seems likely to be true) Humour, by its nature, says "here's
a story that you should not take seriously". I don't think that the author
of Poly Nomial intended to rationalize rape any more than a person might
rationalize infant killing by telling dead-baby jokes. The funny part of
the Poly Nomial story was that you could use mathematical terms to describe
a piece of human behaviour. Alas, the behaviour depicted was also something
that is regarded as distasteful and wrong, at least by most responsible
adults. Herein lies the rub. Some people, when they read Poly Nomial, don't
separate the linguistic games from the act that the story depicted.
Understandably, this story can offend when the point of the story seems to
be the act of rape rather than the wordplay.
What to do, what to do?
I guess the only real solution is to be careful about what we post to the
net. There seems no reason in hurting people's sensibilities. At the same
time, however, I think when we get offended by something that comes across
the net, we should each try to be a little less sensitive. We should try
"not to ascribe to maliciousness that which can be adequately explained by
ignorance" (quote stolen from the 4.2BSD fortune program :-).
In any case, maybe we should let Poly rest and get back to artificial
intelligence (ok, an occasional joke or two would be nice too :-).
======================================================================
Elias Israel
All opinions above are mine, but you know all that.....
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 85 10:13 IST
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Humor
I would like to request that all seminar announcements no longer be posted
in AIlist. These seminars are scheduled for places like Stanford and MIT
which I can't attend and therefore I find offensive. You see, it is sort
of like rubbing my nose it, saying, "Ha ha, we have this great seminar and
we know you can't attend since you are located 5,000 miles away". I find
this lack of sensitivity on the part of AIlist for people located in
foreign countries most offensive.
You may not find it offensive but I do!!
Henry Nussbacher
Rehovot, Israel
[Please do not reply to this message until you have taken note
of the subject line. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 21 Mar 1985 11:12-EST
From: mcc@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: Rape Jokes and Policy
What if the joke in question were a "nigger" joke, or that it were
about Paul E. Nomial, as Diana Bental suggested, who was raped or
sodomized by a homosexual? What if Paul E. Nomial (or Polly
Nomial, for that matter) were a five year old and the story were
about sexual assault on a child? Would it still be funny? And if
not, why not? Would Ken Laws have included them in AIList? Would
David want any of these censored? If so, why censor any of these
and not the original Polly Nomial?
As far as David thinking that censorship is a crime that is "far
worse" than rape because "it affects so many more" --that is
bullshit. I have never been a victim of a rape, either, but the
statistics tell us that 50% or more of the women in the U.S. today
have been victims of rape or will be at some time in their lives.
Too many of my friends have been assaulted. There is a good chance
that some of the women who read AIList, the wives, mothers,
daughters, sisters, friends, co-workers or girlfriends of many of
the men who read AIList have been or will be victims of rape. In
addition, the fear of rape is debilitating, and it affects 100% of
the women in this country, and their friends, co-workers, husbands,
fathers, sons... EVERYONE!!!
Regarding freedom and restriction thereof, the precautions we take
in an effort to avoid rape are frustratingly inconvenient and
inadaquate to say the least. At school, we were ordered not to
EVER jog alone because women had been raped while jogging alone at
9:00 am, 4:30 pm, and (of course) at night. I resent having to
think twice about taking a course that ends at 10:00 pm. Sometimes
I can't even walk to my car after dark without wishing I had a can
of mace on hand.
And it bugs me that I can't even read AIList without being harassed.
Maryellen C. Costello
mcc@MITRE-BEDFORD
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 85 08:46:20 mst
From: crs@LANL.ARPA (Charlie Sorsby)
Subject: Re: Reply to Diana Bental
Your reply to Ms. Bental makes a lot of sense to me. It seems to me that
there is all to much of a tendency among people to want to BAN anything
and everything that offends THEM. The rationale seems to be that it is
only a "tiny" step from that which they want to ban to some [to all or to
them] undesirable action by society, but it is a "huge" leap from banning
what they want to banning the next logical item in the chain.
And, of course, there is the widely held belief that outlawing the
INSTRUMENT of an undesirable action rather than the action itself is
going to save us all from the action. It doesn't matter to proponents
of this approach that the item banned may well have some perfectly
legitimate purpose for the majority of its users. If the item is
banned, the activity will magically go away. In the case of jokes, it
is only WORDS that they would have us ban to cause this magic. I am
well aware of the power of words, but this is ridiculous.
Charlie Sorsby
...!{cmcl2,ihnp4,...}!lanl!crs
crs@lanl.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 85 13:52 EST
From: Sheehan.henr@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: AIList Digest V3 #37
Diana Bental's assessment of the polynominal joke and censoring
ramifcations is excellent.
Tom Sheehan
------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Mar 85 12:13:37-PST
From: VARDI@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Censoring Humor
The pious claims about censorship are misleading. Clearly, not every
thing should appear on a bboard. I can easily come up with something that
would be so offensive that the most liberal moderator would can it.
I find the Poly Nomial joke very offensive to me as a man. Since I believe
that there many others who find such pieces offensive, they should be kept
out of AIList. I see it as the moderators duty.
Moshe Vardi
CSLI, Stanford University
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 21-Mar-85 16:40:34-GMT
From: JANE HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <Hesketh%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Humour
Two points to add to the debate:
1. I'm surprised that so many people dismiss humour so casually
as light entertainment, when it can be a particularly good
way of displaying power. Would the creator of Poly Nomial
care to make a sexist joke if s/he were being interviewed
by a woman for a much wanted job? And if the roles were
reversed?
2. I often find it illuminating, when looking at questions
of sexism, to translate into another realm such as racism
or religious prejudice, in which our sensitivity is not
so dulled. I doubt whether clever tricks like the Poly Nomial
story would be regarded as humorous if their context
were something as ugly as apartheid or sending Jews to
the gas chambers.
Jane Hesketh
------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 85 23:50:26 CST (Fri)
From: ihnp4!utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-di!yali@Berkeley
Subject: Discussion of rape, jokes, censorship.
I agree with Ken Laws that AILIST is probably
not the best forum to discuss such issues. However,
since he chose to include the original Polly Nomial
article in the digest, it is only fair that some follow-ups
criticising that article also be allowed to appear.
I also agree with Diana Bental that articles such as
the one under discussion may encourage an acceptance of
attitudes that lead to rape (of women) being regarded
as the prerogative of a man. Moreover, I think that
the humour in such an article itself depends, to some
extent, upon the reader being able to identify with
such attitudes. After all, why is it that one almost
never sees (at least in mainstream N. American circles)
jokes whose humour is based on incidents of homosexual
rape of men by men? Would the readers of AILIST find
such a joke as funny as the Polly Nomial article?
If not, why not? Is it because such behaviour or humour
is not "normal"? Is it the case then that rape of
women by men is in some sense regarded as normal?
Or perhaps I should be more charitable. Perhaps it is
the case that such jokes are made in order to allow
us to sublimate our fear of heterosexual rape, which after all
is a rather common phenomenon in our society. That is,
perhaps we men are all really identifying ourselves with Polly Nomial,
the rape victim. Perhaps.
Yawar Ali
BNR, Ottawa (Canada).
ihnp4!utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-di!yali
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Mar-85 2237 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #40
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 85 22:37:25 PST
Date: Sun 24 Mar 1985 20:12-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #40
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 25 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 40
Today's Topics:
Courses - AI Short Courses,
AI Tools - LISP for Amdahl470/V6 or V8 & 4th-Generation Languages,
Planning - Real-Time Multiagent Planning,
Expert Systems - Assembly Language as Expert System,
News - Opportunities in Sweden and Cambridge,
Survey - Recent Articles,
Seminars - Marker-Passing During Problem Solving (UPenn) &
Rational Interaction: Cooperation Among Intelligent Agents (UPenn) &
Vision System of Mobile Robot (UPenn) &
Counterfactual Implication (UPenn),
Conference - Rewriting Techniques and Applications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 85 12:35:35 est
From: Alan Oppenheim <avo@MIT-BUGS-BUNNY.ARPA>
Subject: AI short courses
I'm trying to find a TOP QUALITY 3 or 4 day short course on AI/expert systems.
One that I've recently heard about is called knowledge-based systems and AI
offered by Integrated Computer Systems. If anyone has attended this course,
or is familiar with any other similar course I would apprciate their
comments and suggestions. Please send any replies to avo@bugs-bunny.
Al Oppenheim
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 85 10:50 PST
From: "B.S.Radhakrishna Sharma" <bsharma%wsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: PUBLIC DOMAIN LISP FOR AMDAHL470/V6 OR V8
CAN ANYONE SEND ME POINTERS TO ANY REASONABLY GOOD LISP AVAILABLE ON
PUBLIC DOMAIN
THANX,
BSHARMA@WSU
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 22 Mar 85 10:24:20 PST
From: tekig5!sridhar%tektronix.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: 4th generation languages
From the discussions on the above and from the March CACM, I've become
intrigued by 4GL's and am seriously thinking of incorporating them in my
present project. If anyone could give me pointers to where I can get hold of
the technical details, I'd be very grateful. Thanks.
Sridhar
(arpa) sridhar%tekig5@tektronix
(csnet) sridhar%tekig5%tektronix@csnet-relay
(usenet) { decvax,ucbvax,ogcvax,ihnp4,allegra,purdue,psu-eea, masscomp,
mit-eddie,mit-ems,uoregon,psu-cs,,uw-beaver,ucbcad ,tekred }
!tektronix!tekig5!sridhar
USMAIL: Tektronix, Inc., MS C1-952, PO Box 3500, Vancouver, WA 98661
------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 1985 21:53-EST
From: gasser%usc-cse.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Real Time Multi Agent Planning
I know of many good references on multi-agent planning and decisionmaking,
but few that I know of address the issues of real time decisionmaking.
The best overall reference I have seen is a RADC report written by people
at AI&DS: "Distributed Decision Making Environments." This is easily the
best survey of Distributed AI extant (Unfortunately I don't have the
report with me at the moment and can't give you the number. It may be for
limited distribution.) Also see the work on the Vehicle Monitoring
Testbed (Lesser, Corkhill, et al. at UMASS), the Contract Net (Randy Davis
and Reid Smith), the Rand Corp Air Traffic Control and RPV projects
(Steeb, Cammarata, etc.- there is a real time element here), the SRI work
on multiagent planning (Konolige, Appelt, Genesereth, Rosenschein). Most
of these groups publish regularly in IJCAI and AAAI Proceedings since 1979
or so. Also see the reports on the annual workshops in Distributed AI in
SIGART #'s 73, 80, and 84.
Several people have tried to integrate time into planning - notably:
Steve Vere at JPL (DEVISER) - see IEEE PAMI 5/83 pg. 246 (One of the best
actual planning systems.)
James Allen at Rochester: "Towards a General Theory of Action and Time"
AI Journal 23 (1984) pg. 123-154.
William Long, Reasoning about state from causation and time in a medical
domain, Proc AAAI 83
Drew McDermott, A temporal logic for reasoning about processes and plans,
Cog Sci, 6 1982, pg 101-157
Kahn, K. and G.A. Gorry: Mechanizing temporal knowledge, AI Journal,
9, 1977, pg 87-108
Gary Hendrix, Modelling Simultaneous actions and continuous processes
AI Journal, 8, 1977, pg 47-68.
Mark Fox's thesis and follow-on work out of CMU Robotics Institute.
We have started a distributed problem solving project here at USC Computer
Science as well, and are investigating temporal planning, joint planning
among agents, evolutionary-opportunistic reasoning, the roles of agent
models, and how agents jointly handle anomalies. Our particular focus
applies knowledge from organization theory and the sociology of work to
multi-agent problem solving.
-- Les Gasser
Asst. Professor
Dept. of Computer Science, SAL-200
USC
Los Angeles, CA. 90089-0782
ARPANET: GASSER%USC-CSE@CSNET-RELAY
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 85 16:14:58 pst
From: Vish Dixit <dixit%usc-cse.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Assembly Language as Expert System
I agree with Curtis Goodhart's comments on Expert systems.
It raises the following questions:
1. is an Expert System simply a programming methodology?
2. must it be written in a particular language for it to
be an ES?
3. Must it embody large/imprecise body of knowledge and
employ heuristic/adhoc rules?
4. finaly, what is the most important charasteristic of an ES -
programming style, language, or the domain?
Also, there seems to be a craze for writing ES for every problem.
(You know that when even the campus recruiters start asking about them.)
If only programming methodology (Forward production System)
is the criterion Assembly language programs would qualify to be called
Expert Systems. (?)
Here it goes:
An assembly language program is written as a sequence of instructions
of the form <operation> <operand> <operand> ...
The <operands> are usualy the internal registers and some memory.
The internal registers and the memory could be considered as the
database (short term memory). Each instruction is simply a Rule of
the expert system. The Rules are <condition> <action> pairs.
In the assembly program, the conditions and some
actions are implicit to save the space.
Thus the instructions
ORG 2000H
MOV A,B
....
ORG 3000H
MOV A,B
...
JNZ 2000H
actually stand for the rules: (PC is program counter)
<PC=2000H OR PC=3000H> then <MOV A,B> <PC++>
<PC=??? AND NZ> then <PC := 2000H>
The order of these rules is immaterial.
The microprocessor control simply looks at whatever rule has its condition
satisfied, fetches it and executes it until it is explicitly put into
Halt mode or it none of rules can be applied (PC runs over). The
actions, conditions, etc are very restricted, nevertheless they are there.
signed -:)
USENET: ...!{sdcrdcf,randvax}!uscvax!dixit
CSNET: dixit@usc-cse.csnet
ARPA: dixit%usc-cse@csnet-relay.arpa
MABEL: (213) 747-3684
USMAIL: EE-systems, SAL-337, Univ. of Southern Calif.,
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0781
------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 85 1808 PST
From: Bengt Jonsson <BXJ@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Possibilities to visit Sweden
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A new research institute for Computer Sciences is now being formed in
connection with the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
They are interested in furthering contacts with other research groups.
Areas of interest include parallel machine architectures, logic
programming, design of integrated circuits and computer networks.
There is also interest if someone likes to visit Stockholm for X
months of research. Persons interested in this can send a message to
BXJ@SAIL
------------------------------
Date: Fri 22 Mar 85 10:33:28-PST
From: Evan Cohn <COHN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Free Trip to Cambridge (England)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Each year the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory pays for a graduate
student from North America to visit the Laboratory for a few weeks over the
summer. By doing this we hope to learn about some of the latest research in
the USA .. and to make a friend. All we expect is that the selected person
will interact with relevant students and faculty members at Cambridge. We will
pay travel to and from Cambridge and provide accomodation in Wolfson College
plus reasonable living expenses (including hire of a bicycle). This year we
can only provide accomodation between 8 July and 14 September.
The selection of our summer visitor is competitive. We base our decision
mainly on the research achievements and potential of the candidate, but also
on the relevance of his interests to those of the people here.
If you would like to apply for the visiting studentship please send a one
page desciption of your current research to:
Mike Gordon
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory
Corn Exchange Street
Cambridge
CB2 3QG
England
Please also arrange for a letter of reference on your behalf to be sent to
this address.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 23 Mar 85 14:27:10-CST
From: CL.SHANKAR@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: Plug for FREE TRIP TO CAMBRIDGE
[Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I was one of the two people who made the trip out there last summer,
and I must say it is a great deal. Cambridge is a wonderful little
university town and the CS department is really friendly. I didn't
find out everything about the dept. but their main strengths are:
Networks, Dist. systems, Comp. Architecture, Prog. language theory
and implementation, Natural language understanding, graphics,
VLSI design automation, Program and Hardware verification, etc.
The place is infested with americans, and one of these, Larry Paulson,
will be visiting here in early April. It's really a fantastic
experience, and I'll be glad to provide more details to anyone
who is interested.
Shankar
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 1985 09:51-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Electronics Week, February 4 1985
Page 28-30 "Investment Shifts in AI"
Describes Corporate and venture capital funding for AI
Page 51-62
Discusses many AI efforts and systems in different areas (including many
that are not the usual examples given of AI successes). Also discusses
AI tools.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
High Technology, March 1985
Page 6: short article on IBM efforts in speech recognition
Page 80: shot article on Hitachi's robot hand. Based on shape-memory
alloy techniques. This hand is 1/10 the previous weight and is
described as being almost as good as the human hand.
Page 16-25: articles on expert system shells, a one page business
outlook for expert system shells, and a special article on Intellicorp.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 85 19:34 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: seminar announcements (PENN)
Here are descriptions of some upcomming seminars at the University of
Pennsylvania. All will be given in the Moore school building (33rd and
Walnut, Philadelphia).
MARKER-PASSING DURING PROBLEM SOLVING; Jim Hendler (Brown)
3pm Tuesday March 26; 216 Moore School
A standard problem in Artificial Intelligence systems that do planning or
problem solving is called the "late-information, early-decision paradox." This
occurs when the planner makes a choice as to which action to consider, prior
to encountering information that could either identify an optimal solution or
that would present a contradiction. As the decision is made in the absence of
this information it is often the wrong one, leading to much needless
processing.
In this talk I describe how the technique known as "marker-passing" can be
used by a problem-solver. Marker-passing, which has been shown in the past to
be useful for such cognitive tasks as story comprehension and word sense
disambiguation, is a parallel, non-deductive, "spreading activation"
algorithm. By combining this technique with a planning system the paradox
described above can often be circumvented. The marker-passer can also be used
by the problem-solver during "meta-rule" invocation and for finding certain
inherent problems in plans. An implementation of such a system is discussed
as are the design "desiderata" for a marker-passer.
RATIONAL INTERACTION: COOPERATION AMONG INTELLIGENT AGENTS
Jeffrey S. Rosenschein (Stanford)
10:30 - 12:00 Thursday, April 11; 216 Moore School
The development of intelligent agents presents opportunities to exploit
intelligent cooperation. Before this can occur, however, a framework must be
built for reasoning about interactions. This talk describes such a framework,
and explores strategies of interaction among intelligent agents.
The formalism that has been developed removes some serious restrictions that
underlie previous research in distributed artificial intelligence,
particularly the assumption that the interacting agents have identical or non-
conflicting goals. The formalism allows each agent to make various
assumptions about both the goals and the rationality of other agents. In
addition, it allows the modeling of restrictions on communication and the
modeling of binding promises among agents.
VISION SYSTEM OF MOBILE ROBOT, Saburo Tsuji (Osaka University)
3pm Monday, April 1st, 216 Moore School
This paper describes model-guided monitoring of a building environment
by a mobile robot. The prior knowledge on the environment is used as a
priori world model and constraints for image analysis. The world model
is arranged in a hierarchy with three levels so as to provide coarse to
fine structures of environment; 1D route, 3D work space and 2D patterns
of specific obects. In the preliminary experiments, a mobile platform
with a TV camera is driven around passages of a building via a given
route and reports changes there to a human operator. It stops every few
meters, takes pictures and finds correspondences between line features
detected in the image and those in the image model generated from the
work space model. Mismatched lines are further examined to detect
changes in the scenes. The drawbacks in the system design are
discussed, and a brief overview of hardware and software systems of a
new mobile robot is described.
COUNTERFACTUAL IMPLICATION; Matt Ginsberg (Stanford)
2pm Friday, May 3rd, 216 Moore School
Counterfactuals are a form of commonsense non-monotonic inference that has
been of long-term interest to philosophers. In this talk, I discuss the
problem of deriving counterfactual statements from a predicate calculus
database, and present a formal description of this derivation that allows the
encoding of some context-dependent information in the choice of a sublanguage
of the logical language in which we are working. The construction is formally
identical to the "possible worlds" interpretation due to David Lewis.
A concrete example is given which uses counterfactual implication for the
purpose of diagnosing digital hardware, and the talk concludes with a
discussion of possible applications of counterfactuals elsewhere in AI.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Mar 1985 1049-PST
From: JOUANNAUD@SRI-CSL.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Rewriting Techniques and Applications
*****************************************
* First International Conference *
* on *
* Rewriting Techniques and Applications *
*****************************************
To be held
in
Dijon, Burgundy, FRANCE
from May, 20 to May, 22, 1985.
Sponsored
by
NSF, CNRS, ADI
Bull
University of Dijon
City Council of Dijon.
Program Committee
*****************
Jan Bergstra, Amsterdam
Joseph Goguen, SRI-International
John Guttag, MIT
Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, Nancy (co-chairman)
Pierre Lescanne, CRIN
David Musser, General Electric Labs (co-chairman)
Peter Padawitz, Passau
David Plaisted, Chapel Hill
Ravi Sethi, Bell Labs
David Turner, Kent
Warning: Since Dijon is a very attractive city, and welcomes many
peope late spring and summer, your Hotel reservation Form must arrive
no later than April 10th. No reservation can be garanteed after that
date. [...]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂28-Mar-85 1331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #41
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 85 13:31:16 PST
Date: Wed 27 Mar 1985 23:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #41
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 28 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 41
Today's Topics:
Applications - AI Music Composition & Language Teaching &
Composition for Machine Translation,
Games - GO Algorithms,
AI Tools - RuleMaster,
Recent Articles - Survey & Robotics,
Description - Computer Science in Greece,
Policy - Censorship & Replicative-Media Viruses,
Seminar - Constructive Type Theory (UTexas)
Conference - Commercial AI Forum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 85 15:20 EST
From: Eleanor Hare <eohare%clemson.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: AI Music Composition
Does anyone know of any work currently being done
in composition of music? Are there
any bibliographies about?
Please reply direct to EOHARE@clemson (not member of this list)
Eleanor Hare
DCS
(803) 656-3444
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 85 12:28 EST
From: Ethel Schuster <Ethel%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Looking for a paper
I am looking for a paper that was presented at the 1980 AISB conference
which was held in Amsterdam in July. The title of the paper is
"A Rather Intelligent Language Teacher" by S. Cerri and J. Breuker.
I would really appreciate it if anyone who has a copy of the procedings
could send me a photocopy of the paper at the following address:
Ethel Schuster
Department of Computer and Information Science/D2
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 26 Mar 1985 07:01:28-PST
From: sclark%nermal.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
Subject: REQUEST FOR INFO
A colleague and I will be presenting a paper and a workshop on machine
translation at the Society for Technical Communication's International
Technical Communications Conference in May. We are designing the
workshop to show technical writers ways to make their writing more
conducive to being translated by machine. We welcome any ideas and
suggestions from the AIList community.
Regards,
Sharon Clark
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 85 08:40:31 pst
From: stever@cit-vax (Steve Rabin )
Subject: GO Algorithms
[Forwarded from Arpanet-BBoards by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am looking for pointers at algorithms for playing the oriental
game GO, or contact with authors of computer programs which play GO.
Reply to stever@cit-vax or cithep!cit-vax!stever. Thanks!
------------------------------
Date: Tue 26 Mar 85 09:55:09-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: RuleMaster
Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE asked about RuleMaster in a recent digest.
I found the following information on p. 107 of Expert Systems, Vol. 1,
No. 2, October 1984:
RuleMaster: inductive rule-generator and rule language. Primitive
attributes characterising problem domain are coded in C as
external routines. RuleMaster is suitable for implementing
both heuristic models and deep models of expertise. For
VAX machines and Unix machines in general (including SUN
workstation), $15,000. Further information may be obtained
from Intelligent Terminals Ltd., George House, 36 North
Hanover Street, Glasgow G1 2AD, Scotland.
The same company offers several other inductive rule generators for
a variety of hardware systems and programming languages.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 24 Mar 1985 21:38-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Survey
International J. Systems Sciences 15 (1984) no 11 1231-1246
Blesiada, Henryk "Calculating the growth function of a developmental
system in the case of asynchronous elementary operations"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Pattern Recogniton 17 (1984) no 2 205-210
L. Bobrowski, W. Niemiro "A method of synthesis of linear discriminant
function in the case of nonseparability"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Cybernetics 19 (1983) no 6 843-848
S. S. Epshtein A. L. Goralik "Information additivity conditions in
object and phenomena recognition problems
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Podstawy Sterowania 13 (1983) Ewa Grabska no 4 279-292
Compositing nets and their application to pattern representation
203-214 Marian Loboda "Classification of strings of the sample by means
of canonical systems"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
BOOK (in French): Laurent Miclet Structural methods for pattern recognition.
Scientific and Technical Collection on Telecommunications Editions
Eyrolles, Paris 1984
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
M. Yu Moshkov "Uniqueness of minimal tests for pattern recognition
problems with linear decison rules" (in Russian)
Combinatorial-algebraic methods in applied mathematics 97-109
Gorkov Gos. Univ., Gorki 1981
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
M. Richetin and F. Vernadat Efficient regular grammatical inference for
pattern recognition. Pattern Recognition 17 (1984) no 2 245-250
259-273 A. G. Wacker "Average classification accuracy over collections
of Gaussian problems - common covariance matrix case"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
BOOK: J. W. Lloyd Foundations of logic programming. Symbolic
Computation. Artificial Intelligence Spring Verlag, NY 1984
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Cybernetics 20 (1984) no 1 147-152 M. K. Morokhovets "A modified
unification procedure"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
C. R. Acad. Bulgare Scie. 37 (1984) no 6 741-744
A. Atas Radenski "Functional Programming in the Style of Logic
Programming"
------------------------------
Date: 25 Mar 1985 09:47-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Robotics
Electronics Week, January 21, 1985
"Robots get Smart in Japan" Discusses an organ playing automaton from
Sumitomo Inc. (designed as a technological tour de force), Hitachi's
mobile robot (which can climb stairs) and Toshiba's climbing robot.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 25 Mar 85 14:18:42-PST
From: C Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Science in Greece
Here is a piece I wrote for the EATCS Bulletin on the occasion of the 12th
ICALP. [...]
COMPUTER SCIENCE IN GREECE
There are two Departments of Computer Science in Greece, one in the University
of Patras and one in the University of Crete at Iraklion; there is also a
Division of Computer Science in the Department of Electrical Engineering at the
National Technical University of Athens. Departments are also being started at
the University of Athens and the Athens Business School, and there are several
isolated computer scientists at other Universities, such as the University of
Thessaloniki. Finally, there are three newly founded Departments of Computer
Technology in the Institutes for Technical Education.
The most pressing problem is, of course, qualified academic personnel. Most
Departments have tried to tap the Greek computer scientists of the diaspora,
with varying success. Many Greek computer scientists are currently in the
transition from a career abroad, typically in the U.S., to an academic career
in Greece, and the ``re-entry problem'' has proven formidable. The
two-year obligatory military service and its inflexible rules is not the least
of the problems. In all, this is a very critical moment for Computer Science
higher education in Greece.
Outside Academia, there is of course a large market for computer usage, a
growing software industry, and a number of hardware ventures in the making.
Very recently, there has been a considerable high-level government
involvement in all aspects of Informatics, via the Governmental Council for
Informatics.
As for research, in Patras there are research groups in Computer Architecture,
Numerical Analysis, and Workstations. In Crete, the interests range from
Databases and Office Automation to VLSI. In Thessaloniki, there is research
activity in Logic Programming, Architecture, and Numerical Analysis. Now, in
Theoretical Computer Science, there is one group at the Division of Informatics
at the National Technical University of Athens, with Leo Guibas, Foto Afrati,
Lefteris Kiroussis, Andreas Stafilopatis, and Christos Papadimitriou on the
faculty, and a group of graduate students. There is only a two-year military
service and a volume of intractable legislation between Mihalis Yannakakis and
this group. The interests range from Algorithms, Complexity, Geometry,
Database Theory, Automatic Program Synthesis, Combinatorial Optimization, and
Parallel Computation. Also at NTUA there are faculty members with research
interests in Databases, Hardware, and Logic Programming, as well as people
working in related fields, such as Communication, Signal Processing, and
Control.
Christos H. Papadimitriou
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 85 02:41:52 pst
From: newton@cit-vax (Mike Newton)
Subject: Rape jokes & Policy
Regarding your [mcc@mitre-bedford] recent posting to AIList-Digest:
I believe the words "censorship is a far worse crime for it affect so many
more" were mine and not "David's".
Cold hard (horrible) figures: Regarding your numbers (believing the 50%
-- from what i have read 12% -- either is horrible enough) 50% of women raped
times 52% of the population being female yields 26%. Vastly different
than censoring everybody (100%).
Though I believe the story would have been censored if it had been
"a five year old" (this year's current fad) that does not mean it should
be censored. I cannot guess whether Ken Laws would have censored
"Paul E. Nomial", though, again, I hope he, nor anyone else, would act
as a censor for (against!) me.
[In point of fact, it was I who "reported" the story to AIList
in the first place. Had I chosen not to do so, this would
hardly be censorship. I also regard it as my duty to keep
offensive or pointless material out of AIList (as a courtesy
to the readership and because of Arpanet policy); some
censorship is therefore unavoidable. -- KIL]
Do you think rape does not affect the male part of the population? I am
sure fear of rape does is not 'debilitating ... 100% of the women in
this country' for I know too many women that will not let their lifes be
curtailed in this manner. I also know that the reverse implication is
equally false. The women that I have been close too I care about. I
and a friend have gone to sessions held by the local police -- sessions
that invited women and their partners to come -- and have been one of
two or three males out of a group of 20. I still VERY MUCH believe
against censorship.
Equally, men are about 7 times more often killed by the firing of a gun
than women. Should I ask that gun jokes be forbidden?
Finally, your line "And it bugs me that I can't even read AIList without
being harassed" leaves me with a bitter taste. Harassment implies intent,
intent which I doubt the original poster, or the moderator, or any reader
felt towards you.
mike
------------------------------
Date: 25 Mar 85 14:10:30 PST (Monday)
Subject: Censorship vs Sexism
From: "Bill Wu.osbunorth"@XEROX.ARPA
The response so far illustrates the diffulty of keeping cool during the
discussion of a sensitive subject. Are we all scientists? Let us
examine the facts and data.
Those who claim that jokes on rape, such as Poly Nomial, can actually
increase the number of rape please show me actual data which support
your conjecture and procedures of collecting and interpreting them.
Those who claim that even a small step of censorship can lead to a
bigger censorship please show me actual data which support your
conjecture and procedures of collecting and interpreting them.
So far I only find two facts. For those who feel offended by that joke
want to censor it, who gives you the right to censor when YOU feel being
offended. For those who feel the joke amusing (or not offended) want to
keep it, who gives you the right to speak in this forum when YOU feel
like it?
Why don't we let our moderator decide what to be put in the distribution
list. If you do not like his policy, send a message to HIM ONLY.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Mon 25 Mar 85 17:32:35-PST
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Evolution and Polly Nomial
[Forwarded from the AIList-Request mailbox, with permission. -- KIL]
An evolutionary perspective on the Polly Nomial story may help in
suggesting alternative actions that can be taken to end the propogation
of such material which are not censorship.
The Polly Nomial story can be properly viewed as an EMAIL or
copy machine "virus". What persuades people to reproduce and propogate
it is that it is a clever telling of a story using mathematical
terms. The disturbing content (which is its meta-message that rape is
exciting, adventurous, and a top choice as a topic for humor) is, for a
sufficient number of people, either missed or not disturbing enough to
counter the cleverness, so the story is kept "alive" in the
"replicative" media. The rape content itself is not keeping the story
going, because we do not see other humourous items on rape in the
R-media. But the rape content seem to be an inseparable part of the
story, and gets propogated along with the cleverness (like sticking
ammendments on bills in Congress).
But, if there were an alternative story which made just as
clever use of mathematical terms, and had a fun and exciting plot, it
would get propagated quite well. After one had seen
the alternative story, one would not be as likely to propagate "Polly
Nomial". A competing "species" might therefore take over the "niche"
that "Polly Nomial" has in the R-media. My suggestion is that someone,
even the original author of "Polly Nomial", come with a competing story,
and throw it into the replicative media (electronic mail, bulletin
boards, and copy machines) and see what happens.
[Someday there will be AI (or other buzzword) systems to translate
documents into alternative styles, with or without semantic modification
to accentuate particular effects such as puns and alliteration. We
will then be able to produce as many variants of the Poly Nomial
style as we wish -- but will no longer have any interest in doing so.
Such is the nature of art. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 27 Mar 85 01:40:39-CST
From: CL.SHANKAR@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Constructive Type Theory (UTexas)
Colloquium: David Turner, Wed. Mar. 27, Pai 3.14, 4PM
Title: Constructive type theory as a programming language
Abstract: Constructive type theory is a formal logic and set theory which
has been developed by Per Martin-Lof as a foundation for constructive
(or "intuitionist") mathematics. Curiously, it can also be read as a
(strongly typed) functional programming language, with a number of unusual
properties, including that well-typed programs always terminate. The talk
will give an overview of the main ideas in constructive type theory from
the point of view of someone trying to use it as a programming language.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 26 Mar 85 10:26:09-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Commercial AI Forum
I have received literature touting the Gartner Group's first annual
forum on AI, Commercial Artificial Intelligence: Myths and Realities,
May 20-22, Century Plaza Hotel, 2025 Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles.
The $800 seminar ($700 with payment by March 31) consists of a
couple of talks and a series of panels by knowledgeable executives and
corporate officers. Topics include AI in computer operations,
manufacturing, financial services, office information systems, user
interfaces, personal computers, and specialized hardware, as well as
management and investment.
For more information, contact Ashley Pearce, (203) 967-6757,
Gartner Group, Inc., P.O. Box 10212, Stamford, CT 06904.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂29-Mar-85 2336 @SRI-AI.ARPA:LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #42
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 85 23:36:22 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 29 Mar 85 21:32:44-PST
Date: Fri 29 Mar 1985 21:06-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #42
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 30 Mar 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 42
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - AIList Mailboxes,
Applications - Chemistry AI Expert Systems & Spelling Check Algorithms &
Planning in a Dynamic Environment & Associative Processing,
Help Wanted - AI Lecturer,
AI Tools - MacIntosh Lisp,
Games - GO,
Recent Articles - Expert System Shells & Survey,
Linguistics - Development of Pidgin, Creole, and NL,
Description - Edinburgh Intelligent Knowledge Based Designer System,
Conference - Workshop on Expert Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 29 Mar 85 09:51:10-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: AIList Mailboxes
I have recently been getting many messages in inappropriate mailboxes.
In most cases I can deduce the sender's intention and forward to the
appropriate mailbox, but it would be a help to me if readers would
observe the following convention:
AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA - Submissions for broadcast to the list.
AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA - Messages related to list administration
or policy, for private reply.
Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA - Messages unrelated to AIList policy.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 85 12:38:12 EST
From: Morton A Hirschberg <mort@BRL-BMD.ARPA>
Subject: Request for chemistry AI expert systems
I am looking for information about expert systems in chemistry. More
specifically, documentation if any exists, such as rules or flow
charts. They need not be in the public domain. Of course, more
information is better (prices for commercial stuff). Thanks.
Mort
[Some of the famous systems are Stanford's DENDRAL and META-DENDRAL
for mass spectrometry and NMR analysis, SUNY(Stonybrook)'s SYNCHEM
system for chemical synthesis, Stanford's MOLGEN and GA1 for DNA
analysis and synthesis, Stanford's CRYSALIS for protein
crystallography, UCSC's SECHS for chemical synthesis, and Rand's
SPILLS for locating and identifying chemical spills. I don't know
which of these are commercial systems, though IntelliCorp (formerly
IntelliGenetics) has derived commercial systems from some of them.
For rules and other info I would suggest that you do a search of the
chemical literature or contact the universities for technical reports;
the AI conference proceedings and journals would discuss mostly the
data structures and reasoning methods. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 03/28/85 13:34:17
From: ADIS@MIT-MC
Subject: Spelling Check Algorithms
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Does anyone know of some good references for spelling checking
algorithms? Human or written references acceptable.
Andy diSessa (ADIS@MC)
[Check the following from Communications of the ACM:
J.L. Peterson, Computer Programs for Detecting and Correcting
Spelling Errors, Vol. 23, No. 12, Dec. 1980, pp. 676-687.
Replys in Vol. 24, No. 5, May 1981, pp. 322 and 331-332;
Vol. 24, No. 9, Sep. 1981, pp. 608-609; and Vol. 25, No. 3,
Mar. 1982, pp. 220-221.
P. Robinson and D. Singer, Another Spelling Correction Program,
Vol. 24, No. 5, May 1981, pp. 296-297, followed by R. Nix,
Experience witha Space Efficient Way to Store a Dictionary,
pp. 297-298. Replys in Vol. 24, No. 9, Sep. 1981, pp. 618-619
[from a pseudonymous Joaquin Miller], and Vol. 25, No. 2,
Feb. 1982, p. 159.
M. Mor and A.S. Fraenkel, A Hash Code Method for Detecting
and Correcting Spelling Errors, Vol. 25, No. 12, Dec. 1982,
pp. 935-938.
D.J. Dodds, Reducing Dictionary Size by Using a Hashing Technique,
Vol. 25, No. 6, June 1982, pp. 368-370.
J.J. Pollock and A. Zamora, Automatic Spelling Correction in
Scientific and Scholarly Text, Vol. 27, No. 4, Apr. 1984, pp. 358-368.
These papers provide references to dozens of others. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 85 08:57:42 pst
From: coates%usc-liddy%usc-cse.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: World models for Planning in a Dynamic Environment
Does anyone know of research on representation scemes for
world knowledge that facilitate planning for an agent which actually
executes in a dynamic domain?
I am interested in modelling an agents ability to detect
anomalies iplan due to unexpected results during plan execution.
Additional complications in plan enactment may occur if the world
contains other agents whose behavior is unpredictable.
If anyone can recommend papers on appropriate knowledge
representations and/or methods for anomally detection in dynamic
worlds contact me at: COATES%USC-liddy@USC-CSE.CSNET
[I have sent a copy of Les Gasser's reference list. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Fri 29 Mar 85 16:14:33-PST
From: MOHAN@USC-ECLC.ARPA
Subject: Associative Processing
I am working on identifying system software requirements for an array processor
(based on associative processing and cellulaer array processing). The processor
is to be used primarily for Artificial Intelligence and Image Undersatnding
tasks. Main system software requirements would be in the area of a suitable
language, its compiler and an operating system. (A host computer is assumed
to be attatched to this processor).
Some pointers to relevant work and literature will be welcome. Please send
mail to me or to AIList.
Thanks.
Rakesh Mohan
ARPA- mohan@eclc
US Mail- Rm #224 Powell Hall
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90007.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 85 21:23:43 pst
From: jeff@aids-unix (Jeff Dean)
Subject: wanted: travelling AI lecturer
I've just received a request from someone at California State
Polytechnic (in San Luis Obispo) for a lecture on "AI" (yes, that
provides considerable leeway). Unfortunately, San Luis is a
little out of the way for most of us, being halfway between SF and
LA (a four hour drive from either place). However, if there are
any ("qualified") folks out there who might be interested in
making a presentation, please let me know. Thanks...
P.S. There is no expiration date on this opportunity, but
the presentation should be given during the school year.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 29 Mar 85 09:18:40-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: MacIntosh Lisp
I have heard a rumor that Expertelligence of Santa Barbara has now
come out with their version of a Maclisp/Commonlisp for the 512K
MacIntosh, priced just below $500. I haven't checked it out, but
(805) 969-7871 was given as the phone number for more information.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1985 0555-PST
From: MEYERS%UCI-20A@UCI-ICSA
Subject: game of GO
In response to a query about Go programs:
Wilcox, Bruce and Walter Reitman
The Structure and Performance of the Interim.2 Go Program.
IJCAI, 1979. pp.711-719.
Address: University of Michigan
205 Washtenaw Place
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
Unfortunately, this is the most recent work I know of; it references
most other work. Theirs is a long-term, conceptual approach. Also:
David J H Brown
Hierarchical Reasoning in the Game of Go.
IJCAI, 1979. pp.114-116.
Address: Computer Science Department
Teesside Polytechnic
Middlesborough, Cleveland, England
Good luck!
Amnon Meyers (meyers @ uci) (2-dan)
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1985 09:52-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Expert System Shells
Infoworld April 1, 1985 page 46 Volume 7 no 13
There is a review of a revised version of "Expert Ease." This is a
system which sets up a classification system based upon examples given
by the user. Many feel that it is not a true "AI" system but rather a
decision table development tool that is being marketed by people as an
AI system for the purposes of making a fast buck.
It is has dropped in price from $2,000 to $695.00 and is being marketed
by Human Edge Software. The ratings are:
two out of a possible four diskettes
performance: good
documentation: fair
ease of use: good
error handling: excellent
support: good
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Electronics Week, March 25, 1985 page 35
NIXDORF has announced an expert system shell which runs on its 32-bit
minicomputer, the 8832. The cost is $47,00 at current exchange rates.
Nixdorf is also selling a system called Twaice which is designed to
build expert systems to help diagnose malfunctioning objects.
There is also a joint venture between the British Racal Electroinics
and Norway's Norsk data selling an expert system shell. Matra S. A. is
selling an AI system for military training.
Also there are a few paragraphs on GCLisp's Golden Common Lisp.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 1985 18:10-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Survey
ComputerWorld March 18, 1985 "Engineers behind Expert Systems"
A reprint from Patel Harmon, Dave King "AI in business"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
JACM Vol 32 no 1 Jan 1985
1 Three Approaches to Heuristic Search in Networks A. Bagchi and A. Mahanti
28 And/Or Graph Heuristic Search methods
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
IEEE Trans on Industrial Electronics Vol 32 No 1 Feb 85
Design and Implementation of a Binocular-Vision System for Locating
Footholds on a Multi-Legged Walking Robot F. Ozguner S. J. Tsai Page 26
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
ComputerWorld March 25 1985 Page 11
Usefulness of micro expert systems called limited
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 85 18:40 CDT
From: Patrick←Duff <pduff%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Development of Nat. Langs., Pidgin, Creole, Lang. Trans/Unders/Gener.
I have a newspaper clipping which quotes Dr. Laurence McNamee, a
linquistics professor at East Texas State University, as follows:
"Theories on the origin of language became so rife and
so romantic that in 1886 the Linguistic Society of Paris
passed a resolution outlawing any more theories on this
topic, a resolution that has since been reaffirmed.
"The truth is that scholars simply do not know how
languages developed because they have never observed one
develop. We have seen many languages die, and recently
even witnessed the rebirth of a language (Hebrew), but
never a language from its initial stage."
Can anyone elaborate on the resolutions and why the issue came up?
Derek Bickerton writes in "Creole Languages" (Scientific American,
July 1983, pages 116-122) that new languages have developed...
"... many times over the past 500 years among the
children of slaves and laborers who were pressed into
service by the European colonial powers.
"These laborers, who were shipped from many parts
of the world to tend and harvest crops in Africa, the
Indian Ocean region, the Orient, the Caribbean and
Hawaii, were obliged to communicate within their
polygot community by means of the rudimentary speech
system called pidgin. Pidgin speech is extremely
impoverished in syntax and vocabulary, but for the
children born into the colonial community it was the
only common language available. From these modest
beginnings, new native languages evolved among the
children, which are generically called creole
languages. It can be shown that they exhibit the
complexity, nuance and expressive power universally
found in the more established languages of the world."
"... scholars have noted a remarkable similarity
of structure among all the creole languages. It can
now be demonstrated, by considering the origin of
creole language in Hawaii, that similarities among
creoles cannot be accounted for by contact with other
languages, either indigenous or imported. The finding
suggests that what is common to creole languages may
indeed form the basis of the acquisition of language
by children everywhere. There is now an impressive
body of evidence to support this hypothesis: between
the ages of two and four the child born into a
community of linguistically competent adults speaks
a variety of language whose structure bears a deep
resemblance to the structure of creole languages...."
Besides recommending that interested parties read this Scientific
American article, I'm curious about whether it would be useful to use
a creole language as an intermediate language for translation, what
"pidgin speech" with its "impoverished syntax and vocabulary" could
tell us about how to design command languages for computer systems,
whether the current state-of-the-art in natural language parsers and
generators are up to the task of using pidgin or creole, etc.. After
looking at some of the sample sentences in the article, it seems to
me that it would be easier for a computer program to generate or
understand a sentence in Pidgin or Hawaiian Creole than it would be
for it to handle the English equivalent.
regards, Patrick
Patrick S. Duff, ***CR 5621*** pduff.ti-eg@csnet-relay
5049 Walker Dr. #91103 214/480-1905 (work)
The Colony, TX 75056-1120 214/370-5363 (home)
(a suburb of Dallas, TX)
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 29-Mar-85 17:06:35-GMT
From: GIDEON FH (on ERCC DEC-10) <G.Sahar%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Edinburgh Intelligent Knowledge Based Designer System
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
DEPARTMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Alvey Large Scale Demonstrator Project
"Design to Product" at the University of Edinburgh:
The Alvey Directorate have awarded a major contract to a consortium of
companies and universities: GEC Electrical Projects, GEC Marconi Research
Centre, GEC Avionics, Lucas CAV, the National Engineering Laboratory and
Edinburgh, Leeds and Loughborough Universities. The part of the project
to be carried out at Edinburgh will involve the development of a novel
Intelligent Knowledge Based Designer System. This Designer System will
enable a design engineer to communicate interactively the conceptual
function and form of a design, and to interface the resulting product
description to a manufacturing capability. It will be implemented in
POP-11, Prolog and Lisp, running in the Poplog environment, under the UNIX
operating system.
Further information is also to be had from tims%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa.
If you are interested and have questions, don't hesitate to ask them.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 85 18:03:46 cst
From: porter@anl-mcs (Porter)
Subject: Workshop on Expert Systems
Workshop on Knowledge Engineering/Expert Systems
The twenty-fourth annual workshop sponsored by the Western
Committee of the IEEE Computer Society will be held September 4-
6, 1985 at the UCLA Conference Center at Lake Arrowhead. The
subject of the workshop is: "Knowledge Engineering: How?"
Sessions are planned on knowledge acquisition, knowledge
representation, inferencing strategies, and programming
environments.
Topics of discussion include the following: Are there domain-
specific approaches to knowledge acquisition? How can an expert
system tell when it is in an area outside of its competence?
What is the best way to choose inference strategies? How much
can expert system builders help? How important are user models?
How does one deal with the uniqueness of an expert's knowledge?
How do questions of acquisition relate to representation and
inference strategies?
Due to the limited facilities, attendence will be by invitation.
People working in the knowledge engineering and expert systems
area are encouraged to contact the program chairperson, Greg
Kearsley, Courseware, Inc., 10075 Carroll Canyon Road, San Diego,
Ca 92131, (619) 578-1700 or the general chairperson, Sig Porter,
Merdan Group, Inc. 4617 Ruffner Street, Box 17098, San Diego, CA
92117 (619-571-8565).
(note: Greg will be out of communication until about April 20,
and Sig will also be unreachable until April 8.)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Apr-85 1156 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #43
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 85 11:55:46 PST
Date: Mon 1 Apr 1985 09:39-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #43
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 1 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 43
Today's Topics:
Expert Systems - EURISKO & DENDRAL/META-DENDRAL & OPS5 for PCs,
News - MCC's Bob Inman named to SWB's board of directors,
Symbolic Math - Functionals,
Meeting - NAIL Journal Club,
Seminars - Plans and Situated Actions (UCB) &
Models in Syllogistic Reasoning (CSLI) &
Programming Descriptive Analogies by Example (MIT) &
Functional Role Semantics (CSLI) &
NL Understanding and Generation (CMU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 30 Mar 85 18:18:45-PST
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: EURISKO
Does anyone know who in the Stanford area is actively working with
EURISKO, if anyone, now that Doug Lenat is in Texas?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 85 09:02:48 mst
From: cib@LANL.ARPA (C.I. Browne)
Subject: DENDRAL/META-DENDRAL
Can anyone tell me where either source or object code for DENDRAL and
META-DENDRAL may be obtained? SUMEX advises that they no longer either
support or distribute the program, and refer me to Molecular Design
Limited. While that company markets several interesting programs,
neither DENDRAL nor META-DENDRAL is among them.
It would be a pity if such programs have disappeared from the scene and
become unavailable to sites wishing to include them in an AI library.
Thank you.
cib
------------------------------
Date: 30 March 1985 1049-EST
From: Peter Pirolli@CMU-CS-A
Subject: OPS5 for PCs
I just received a flyer for a language called TOPSI which is supposed
to be an OPS5 clone developed for CP/M and MS-DOS machines. Here are some
quotes from the flyer:
"TOPSI has the full power of the original language PLUS extensions to
improve its computational and list management capabilities. Usage of
memory and computer time is optimized for use on home computers."
"TOPSI rule are written in a simple, legible form and compiled into a
memory-efficient data structure enabling fast execution."
"TOPSI's rule base and data base can be saved separately allowing a system
to be exercised easilty with different data sets."
"TOPSI is available on 5 1/4 in diskettes for 65k CP/M systems or MS-DOS
with at least 128k of memory. It comes complete with a users manual,
example programs, a tutorial section on writing your own production systems,
and a 30 day warranty."
The company is:
Dynamic Master Systems Inc.
P.O. Box 566456
Atlanta, GA 30356
[404] 565-0771
------------------------------
Date: Sat 30 Mar 85 15:21:43-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: MCC's Bob Inman named to SWB's board of directors
[ from the Austin American Statesman - March 30, 1985 ]
Bob Inman, chairman and chief executive officer of MCC has been elected to the
board of directors of Southwestern Bell Corp.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 09:48:24 PST
From: "David G. Cantor" <DGC@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: If f(f(x)) = x↑2 - 2, what is f(x)?
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Q: "Can a computer solve the query:
"If f(f(x)) = x↑2 - 2, what is f(x)?
If so, how?"
[This question was forwarded to the Prolog Digest
a few weeks ago by Nils Nilsson. -- KIL]
The solution is essentially contained in the
article by Michael Restivo in the March 20
issue of Prolog Digest.
The nth Tchebycheff Polynomial may be defined
as
n n
T (x) = u + v ,
n
where u = (x + d)/2, v = (x - d)/2, with
d = sqrt(x * x - 4).
It is easy to check that, when n is an integer,
the powers of d cancel and hence that the above
functions are really are polynomials. These
polynomials satisify numerous identities. The
pertinent one here is that
T (T (x)) = T (x) .
m n m * n
This can be verified by elementary algebra (note
that u * v = 1). It holds certainly for all complex
numbers m and n, subject to choosing appropriate
branches of the mth and nth power as well as the
square root, in the complex plane.
The function
f(x) = T (x)
sqrt(2)
then satisfies
f(f(x)) = T (T (x))
sqrt(2) sqrt(2)
= T (x)
sqrt(2) * sqrt(2)
= T (x)
2
= x * x - 2,
and hence solves the original problem.
As to how a computer could solve this:
It need only search the mathematical literature
to find a paper by Michael Fried giving all
solutions to the functional equation (due to
Issai Schur):
F (F (x)) = F (x) .
m n m * n
Fried shows that, under very general conditions,
the solutions are either
n
F (x) = x or F (x) = T (x) ,
n n n
as given above. The computer then need only recognize
that the given function
f(x) = T (x) .
2
Alternatively it could recognize the latter first,
and be led to study identities of the Tchebycheff
polynomials.
-- David G. Cantor
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 85 12:13:39 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: NAIL! (Not another implementation of Logic!) Journal Club
[Forwarded from the Stanford BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
There is a meeting of people interested in implementation
of database systems with a "knowledge" component, i.e., a logical
language providing access to a database.
We primarily read and present papers, and present our own ideas
on the subject.
The first Spring meeting is 1PM Weds. 4/3, in 252MJH, and
subsequent meetings are Wednesdays, 11AM in 301MJH.
You can get on the nail list by mailing to mailer@diablo
a message with *subject heading* add <yourname> to nail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 85 14:45:45 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Plans and Situated Actions (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, April 2, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Lucy Suchman, Intelligent Systems Laboratory,
Xerox PARC
TITLE: ``Plans and Situated Actions: the problem of
human-machine communication''
Researchers in Cognitive Science view the organization and
significance of action as derived from plans, which are prere-
quisite to and prescribe action at whatever level of detail one
might imagine. Mutual intelligibility on this view is a matter
of the recognizability of plans, due to common conventions for
the expression of intent, and common knowledge about typical
situations and appropriate actions. An alternative view, drawn
from recent work in social science, treats plans as derived
from situated actions. Situated actions as such comprise
necessarily ad hoc responses to the actions of others and to
the contingencies of particular situations. Rather than depend
upon the reliable recognition of intent, successful interaction
consists in the collaborative production of intelligibility
through mutual access to situation resources, and through the
detection, repair or exploitation of differences in understand-
ing.
As common sense formulations designed to accomodate the
unforseeable contingencies of situated action, plans are
inherently vague. Researchers interested in machine intelli-
gence attempt to remedy the vagueness of plans, to make them
the basis for artifacts intended to embody intelligent
behavior, including the ability to interact with their human
users. I examine the problem of human-machine interaction
through a case study of people using a machine designed on the
planning model, and intended to be intelligent and interactive.
A conversation analysis of "interactions" between users and the
machine reveals that the machine's insensitivity to particular
circumstances is both a central design resource, and a funda-
mental limitation. I conclude that problems in Cognitive
Science's theorizing about purposeful action as a basis for
machine intelligence are due to the project of substituting
plans for actions, and representations of the situation of
action for action's actual circumstances.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 27 Mar 85 17:18:44-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Models in Syllogistic Reasoning (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, April 4, 1985
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall ``Manipulating Models in Syllogistic Reasoning''
Room G-19 Marilyn Ford, CSLI
Discussion leader to be announced
Johnson-Laird has argued that reasoners do not use formed rules of
inference in solving problems involving syllogistic reasoning, but
rather that they come to a solution by manipulating mental models. I
will show that while this certainly appears to be true, a number of
details of Johnson-Laird's theory appear to be incorrect. An
alternative theory will be presented. --Marilyn Ford
------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 1985 12:06 EST (Thu)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Programming Descriptive Analogies by Example (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
AI REVOLVING SEMINAR
Programming Descriptive Analogies By Example
Henry Lieberman
Before making programs that can perform analogies by themselves, we can
attack the more modest goal of being able to communicate to the computer an
analogy which is already understood by a person. I will describe a system
for "programming by analogy", called Likewise. This new approach to
interactive knowledge acquisition works by presenting specific examples and
pointing out what aspects of the examples illustrate the more general case.
The system constructs a general rule which abstracts out the important
aspects so the rule can be applied to "analogous" examples. Given a new
example, the system can then construct an analogy with the old example by
trying to instantiate analogous descriptions which correspond to the
descriptions constructed for the first example. If a new example doesn't fit
an old concept exactly, a concept can be generalized or specialized
incrementally to make the analogy go through. The operation of the analogy
system on a typical concept learning task is presented in detail.
Tuesday April 2, 1985 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
------------------------------
Date: Wed 27 Mar 85 17:18:44-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Functional Role Semantics (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, April 4, 1985
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall ``Two Cheers for Functional Role Semantics''
Room G-19 Ned Block, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
There are two quite different frameworks for semantics:
REDUCTIONIST approaches attempt to characterize the semantic in
non-semantic terms. NON-REDUCTIONIST approaches are more concerned
with relations among meaningS than with the nature of meaning itself.
The non-reductionist approaches are the more familiar ones (eg.,
Montague, the model-theoretic aspect of situation semantics,
Davidson, Katz). The reductionist approaches come in 4 major
categories:
1. Theories that reduce meaning to the mental. (This is what is
common to Grice and Searle.)
2. Causal semantics--theories that see semantic values as derived
from causal chains leading from the world to our words.
3. Indicator semantics--theories that see natural and non-natural
meaning as importantly similar. The paradigm of meaning is the way
the rings on the tree stump represent the age of the tree when cut
down. (Dretske/Stampe, and, in my view, though not in Barwise and
Perry's, Situations and Attitudes)
4. Functional role semantics--theories that see meaning in terms of
the functional role of linguistic expressions in thought, reasoning,
and planning, and in general in the way they mediate between sensory
inputs and behavioral outputs.
After sketching the difference between the reductionist and non-
reductionist approaches, I will focus on functional role semantics, a
view that has independently arisen in philosophy (where its sources
are Wittgenstein's idea of meaning as use, and pragmatism) and
cognitive science (where it is known as procedural semantics).
I will concentrate on what theories in this framework can DO, e.g.,
illuminate acquisition of and knowledge of meaning, principles of
charity, how meaning is relevant to explanation of behavior, the
intrinsic/observer-relative distinction, the relation between meaning
and the brain, and the relativity of meaning to representational
system. The point is to give a sense of the fertility and power of
the view, and so to provide a rationale for working on solutions to
its problems. Finally, I will sketch some reasons to prefer
functional role semantics to the other reductionist theories.
A copy of a paper which the talk draws on will be in the Ventura
reading room. --Ned Block
------------------------------
Date: 29 March 1985 1352-EST
From: Theona Stefanis@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - NL Understanding and Generation (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Name: NL Seminar
Date: 3 April
Time: 11:00-12:00
Place: WeH 7220
The Janus System: Coordinating Understanding and Generation
Norman K. Sondheimer
USC/Information Science Institute
Technology for natural language understanding and generation differs
significantly. In cases where they have both been employed in the same
system, the results have been an impression of a system that could not
understand what it could say. As part of ARPA's Strategic Computing
Initiative, researchers at USC/Information Sciences Institute and Bolt
Beranek and Newman have begun the design of a system that may be able to avoid
these problem. The system employs the ATN parsing, KL-ONE based semantic
interpretation, and the NIGEL systemic grammar generator. Much of the
integration of understanding and generation will come from a large domain
knowledge base developed in the NIKL (New Implementation of KL-One) knowledge
representation language.
This talk will be a short, informal look at the goals of the effort
and the system's initial design.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Apr-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #44
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 85 01:01:03 PST
Date: Mon 1 Apr 1985 22:47-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #44
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 2 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 44
Today's Topics:
Linguistics - Sexism in English,
Opinion - Sexism in AIList,
Psychology - Imprinting & Humor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 Mar 1985 1952-PST (Sunday)
From: nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Hofstadter on sexism in the English language
[Forwarded from net.women by Miriam Blatt <blatt@Glacier>.]
[Excerpted from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The most interesting work of writing I have seen on sexism in the
English language is by Douglas Hofstadter (writing under the name
William Satire) and is called "A Person Paper on Purity in Language".
It can be found in his wonderful book "Metamagical Themas: Questing for
the Essence of Mind and Pattern". Hofstadter is strongly in favor of
removing sexism from our language and writes about it in this paper
using biting sarcasm. Included at the end of this message is an excerpt
from the paper (included without permission -- I don't think Hofstadter
would object).
Doug Alan
mit-eddie!nessus
Nessus@MIT-MC
[I presume that this message is socially acceptable and of some
relevance to an AIList issue on the psychology of sexism. It has to
do with AI only in that it touches on linguistics and psychology and
was written by Doug Hofstadter, so I have reduced the extract to a
single representative paragraph. Anyone thinking of replying to this
message should bear in mind that sexist language was discussed for
many months in Human-Nets a couple of years ago; I am unaware of any
single issue resolved by the debate. -- KIL]
Most of the clamor, as you certainly know by now, revolves around the
age-old usage of the noun "white" and words built from it, such as
"chairwhite", "mailwhite", "repairwhite", "clergywhite", "middlewhite",
"Frenchwhite", "forwhite", "whitepower", "whiteslaughter",
"oneupswhiteship", "straw white", "whitehandle", and so on. The
negrists claim that using the word "white", either in on its own or as a
component, to talk about *all* the members of the human species is
somehow degrading to blacks and reinforces racism. Therefore the
libbers propose that we substitute "person" everywhere where "white" now
occurs. Sensitive speakers of our secretary tongue of course find this
preposterous. There is great beauty to a phrase such as "All whites are
created equal." Our forebosses who framed the Declaration of
Indepedence well understood the poetry of our language. Think how ugly
it would be to say "All persons are created equal.", or "All whites and
blacks are created equal." Besides, as any schoolwhitey can tell you,
such phrases are redundant. In most contexts, it is self-evident when
"white" is being used in an inclusive sense, in which case it subsumes
members of the darker race just as much as fairskins. [...]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 85 21:54:10 est
From: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Sexism, censorship and degrees of reaction
I have resisted thus far but now I give in to an opinion on the Sexist
Joke issue:
I for one am offended by such public displays of locker-room humour. On
the other hand, I am offended by censorship. The obvious solution to
such a situation like this comes from the realization that one cannot
utilize as powerful and hard to apply instrument as the 'law' for
obnoxious and 'potentially' dangerous behavior (the law is always very
cautious when words like potentially have to be used.) The 'law' I
equate here with the moderator being asked to filter such jokes.
The error comes from the desire for authoritative revenge, either from
the police or a moderator. In a situatiion like this you are quite
powerful enough as human beings to correct this situation.
I simply suggest that it be left at the level of:
1. If something offends you tell the offender and,
if appropriate, the net audience.
2. Remember the individual involved. Next time
something comes up about that person you will
know their character is probably suspect, or at
the very least, their sense of judgement.
I for one would feel severely punished if someone so seriously
suspected my character. An entire audience like this would be
crushing.
Never doubt your power as a human being, nor that the power of your
words and opinions are at least as powerful as the ones that offended
you. Don't look so quickly to others for solutions. [Before the flames
start I am not advocating this for something like a violent act like
rape...call the cops and have the beast caged, they're paid to do that.]
-Barry Shein, Boston University
I ain't afraid o' no paradox
------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 85 12:18:15 PST (Thu)
From: Jeff Peck <peck@sri-spam>
Subject: linguistics, humor, the subconsicious, pathogenic 'memes'
The meta-message of pollynomials...
The humor (if any) in this story is based on the differences between
the syntactic level (mathematical language) and the semantic level (a story
about rape). This story allows one to write, publish, and read this story
and always say, in the back of the mind (at the other level) "this only
a play on mathematical terms", and therefore one can talk about, think about,
accept and even enjoy this story about violent rape without having to
expose oneself as a sexist psychopath; it is (was) socially acceptable.
Now, there are some people who don't yet understand why this story
is objectionable, they see it as just a harmless little play with words.
And perhaps those people really are not tuned into hearing it at its
true semantic level. That is no excuse, because the semantic message of
the story can still be learned subconsciously. [There is a second
level of meaning which says "it is ok to write, publish, and read this
type of material without comment, under the guise of 'humor'."]
The objectionable elements of this story center around the rape myths
which are expressed quite blatently. These myths are: "She wanted to get
raped", "She deserved to get raped", "She had no choice but to allow the
rape", "She enjoyed getting raped", "The rapist is not to be blamed",
"The rapist is to be admired". And the moral of the story states quite
clearly that rape and fear of rape should be used to control freedom.
For those who contend that stories such as these are really
harmless, please consider this: The story was written to be harmless
mathematical/linguistic humor, and yet, all these myths are expressed in
the story, without even trying; obviously THE AUTHORS KNEW ALL THESE
MYTHS, AT LEAST AT A SUBCONSCIOUS LEVEL. And I suspect that they did
not pick them up in a textbook or a course on rape myths; THEY WERE
LEARNED BY READING OR HEARING STORIES JUST LIKE THIS!
And now, a few words about humor and censorship. As I mentioned
above, the humor (socio-linguistic survival value) of this story is
based on the switching between levels of meaning. The masquerade of
mathematical/linguistic wordplay allows this story to easily enter the
social--literary--cognitive system. (and it is a masquerade, just try
publishing this under the subject line: "rape humor"). A vivid
analogy comes to mind; this story (and others like it) interact with the
system much as a virus interacts with biological systems. [This analogy
is similar to the "memes" presented in Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene"]
The story is wrapped in a double protective cover of humor and
mathematics so it can slip past the usual antibodies of sensitivity or
sensability. But underneath this coating is a cognitive "DNA sequence"
(meme) which when injected into and nutured by the host, produces
attitudes and behaviours which protect and perpetuate both the pathogen
(the story) and the disease (rape and fear). Those who are surpised by
the flaming about the publication of this story, perhaps don't realize
that over the past twenty years, parts of our societal organism have
developed antibodies for this particular virus.
So, should it be published? Maybe, but not as humor; it should be
quoted (mention vs use) as an example of vicious pseudo-humor. If must
always be presented in the context of its reality, its disguise must be
removed. The alternative is to publish it naively, and as in the case
of the AIList, it may become a relatively innocuous "vaccine". The flurry
of commentary is, in fact, nothing more or less than the swarming of
antibodies to this virus, to engulf it, and label it as the pathogen
that it is. And now, maybe a larger segment of the population will be
able to detect the antigens of rape myths. There are those who will
fight for the rights of viruses to reproduce and otherwise express
themselves, but in this case, I think it can be shown that the organism
as a whole will be healthier if this infection can be eradicated.
Jeff Peck
(peck@sri-spam)
PostScript:
For those who still claim that Polly Nomial is not a story about rape,
please reread the first paragraph: "our heroine is accosted by
villain..." Even without this statement of the plot, anyone who refuses
to accept that this is a story about rape is simply failing to
acknowledge the distinction between syntax and semantics, the use of
allegory and metaphor. This story was not generated just by conjoining
mathematical phrases, it was clearly written to use all those phases to
describe a rape. That is an important point, this story did not spring
from the pen (or keyboard) of "anonymous", it was written by a person,
or more likely, a team of persons, who thought that it would be funny.
This story reflects the attitudes and enlightenment of those people at
that time, in that society; and they clearly believed that rape was
humorous, justifiable [!!! -- KIL], etc. In today's society such attitudes
must be exposed and identified as sick.
[Very cleverly put, but under the syntactic sugar is a questionable
premise: that anyone who enjoyed reading the story (even if female?)
is a "sexist psychopath". I found humor in the word play and novel
semantic mappings in spite of the subject matter; perhaps I am just
more sensitive to linguistic patterns than to social concerns, at
least in the intellectual context of AIList peer discussion -- that
doesn't mean I'm "sick" (I hope). I think there is general agreement
that the plot of the item (as opposed to its "message" or "intention",
perhaps) concerned rape, that rape is abhorrent and a serious social
problem and not a joking matter, that any message with intent to
denigrate, subjugate, or offend is offensive, that the piece had
little to do with AI, that it would have been more palatable if run
with a commentary discussing its linguistic merits and decrying its
subject matter, and finally that it would have been better for all
concerned if I had kept it out of AIList. A reasonable amount of
protest, or "sensitization", was in order. That having been done,
let's get back to the theme of this list. AIList is a forum for
discussion of AI and information science; it has little capacity
for social subversion or reform. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1985 03:11 EST
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Imprinting and Humor
I don't think rape-jokes are a good idea, either. In fact this is
discussed tangentially in Chapter 294 (seriously -- the chapters are
only 1 page long) of my almost-finished Society of Mind book.
*****************************************************
TIME-SPANS of MEMORIES
Contemplate the plight of a mother with a new infant! The baby will
demand her time and attention for many years -- and sometimes she may
wonder why. ["Why must I do all this?" "How could this baby justify
such sacrifice."] Then various answers might come to mind: ["Because
it will repay you some day,"] or ["This is to carry on our race"]. But
these are not the arguments that end the questioning; all cultures
recognize that mother-love is far from rational. Instead, an
instinctive attachment-bond is formed, which then protects itself from
change. The final reason to keep nurturing that child is simply,
["Because I love it."]
The problem is still a real one, and there are frequent, secret,
tragedies in which a mother's frustration and strain overwhelms those
attachment bonds and all the other personal pleasures and social
compulsions that come with rearing a child. But rather than stray off
to talk about those other matters; let's focus on the nature of the
mother-child bond itself. I'll argue that it's based upon a special
kind of memory.
We often think of all our memories as much the same in character, and
all stored in the same huge container. But certain kinds of memories
[ought] to be less changeable than other kinds. For example, because
human infants are so utterly dependent on their parent's sustenance,
our species had to evolve attachment-bonds which last at least for
several years. This is seen in many other animals as well, in the form
of what psychologists call "imprinting" -- the kind of learning in
which an infant animal learns to recognize its parent. These special
memories are very swiftly formed -- and then they're very slow to
change. It can be very difficult to get those babies to transfer their
attachment to foster-parents. On the other side, there are similarly
rigid constraints of parents' attachment to their babies. Many adult
mammals will eject alien babies from their nests, if they have not
been involved in the normal process of attachment shortly after birth.
The parent-child bondage, too, forms rapidly and decays slowly.
These are not our only long-persisting person-bonds. There are many
animal species in which an individual will choose a mate and then
remain with it for all the rest of life. Many people do that, too.
And of the ones who don't do that, something rather similar instead:
they keep on changing person-mates but choose from those of similar
appearance or character -- as though they cannot change some
underlying stereotype. And on a shorter scale of time, many persons
find themselves enslaved by unwanted infatuations and one-way bonds
that can't be made to go away -- because the parts of the mind which
do not desire those attachments are unable to control the parts of
minds which made them. It's little use to complain about this; the
slowness of those memory-systems evolved to suit our ancestors'
requirements, not our own.
We all know, too, the seemingly inexorable time-span of mourning. It
often takes a year or more to manage and accept the separation or loss
of those we love. This, too, could be a product of the slowness of
attachment-change. Perhaps this, too, explains the prolonged,
mourning-like depression that follows sexual or other forms of
personal assault. No matter that the unwelcome intimacy of violence
may be brief; it nonetheless affects one's attachment machinery,
however much against one's wish. And then, because those agencies are
do inherently slow, recovery involves a profound and prolonged
disturbance to ordinary social relations. And since that happens
inside agencies we can't control, it does not help very much for the
victim to view the incident "rationally" -- since that can only slowly
bring those sluggish mechanisms back to their normal states. It is
the worst of injuries, to lose the use of precious sections of one's
mind.
------- Then a chapter on Freud's theory of jokes and censors concludes:
Why does humor seems so humorous when it is actually concerned with
unpleasant, painful, and disgusting subjects? There's nothing very
"funny" at all about most jokes - except, perhaps, in the skill and
subtlety with which their dreadful content is disguised; the joke
itself is often little more than ["look at what happened to somebody
else; now, aren't you glad that that wasn't you"?] The censor theory
not only explains this, but also why jokes are usually not so funny
when heard again. That is because, each time, those censors learn a
little more, and become harder to fool.
Then why do certain kinds of jokes, particularly those about
forbidden sexual subjects, seem to remain persistently funny to so
many people? Our theory suggests that the censors in that area area
must be peculiarly inept at continuous learning: the peculiar
robustness of sexual humor means that the censors of sexuality are
among the "slow learners" of the mind, like retarded children. In
fact, we could argue that they literally [are] retarded children --
that is, frozen remnants of our earlier selves. But why should these
particular censors stay unchanged so long? We saw, in [S257B] one
reason why it could be good to stop some agency from learning more,
and we'll see more such arguments in [S295]. There are good reasons
why our sexual censors should be slow to change their ways.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Apr-85 0100 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #45
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 85 00:59:52 PST
Date: Tue 2 Apr 1985 22:22-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #45
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 3 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 45
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Short Vacation,
Query - PRIME Installations,
Games - GO,
Expert Systems - Process Control & Database Systems,
Opinion - Living Programs,
Humor (if any) - Subjective C & Machine Forgetting,
Seminars - Adaptive Algorithms (SU) &
Generation of Expert Systems from Examples (Northeastern)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 30 Mar 85 20:00:43-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Administrivia - Short Vacation
Expect about a ten-day interval between this digest and the next.
I'll be attending an SPIE conference, among other activities, and
I haven't yet trained my computer to issue the digest automatically.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: TUE 2 APR 85 1240 MEZ
From: U02F%CBEBDA3T.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (Franklin A. Davis)
Subject: Any PRIME installations doing AI research?
We are interested in exchanging tools, compilers, & hints with any
PRIME users who see this note. Our research includes computer
vision using a CAD model, robotics & collision detection, and
expert systems.
Please contact me directly. Thanks.
-- FAD <U02F@CBEBDA3T.BITNET>
Institute for Informatics and Applied Mathematics
University of Bern, Switzerland
------------------------------
Date: 2 Apr 85 09:25:08 PST (Tuesday)
From: LLi.ES@XEROX.ARPA
Reply-to: LLi.ES@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: game of GO
Steve,
Lester Buck at shell!buck@ut-sally.arpa sent out a fairly extensive
bibliography on computer Go to Usenet net.games.go. I only have a
hardcopy of that message dated 1/14/85. If you can't get in touch with
him and can't get someone to retrieve that file from Usenet, I can make
a copy for you.
Leonard Li.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 2 Apr 85 15:30:17-CST
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Small Expert Sys & Process Control
I just returned from the AIChE conference & Petroleum Exposition in
Houston. I saw a single-loop process controller from Foxboro there. It's
advertised as the first AI technology to come out as a commercial process
control product. It's a hardwired expert system for dynamically resetting the
loop control parameters. It has seven rules.
Now I'm currently taking an Expert System course in which the term project
involves building an ES with ~100 rules, and a 7 rules system doesn't seem
that impressive. However, the competition at the show was not pooh-poohing
it, at it did seem to do some pretty good level control on the demo system
they'd rigged up.
Research has focused on systems between 100 and 3000 rules. But I remember
that working in a engineering office, people often wrote 30 line FORTRAN
programs for one shot calculations, throwing the code away after we'd
generated our one-time-use output.
As we develop robust Expert System tools with ties to good editors and
explanation facilities we may find that there are many areas where the
control and decision process is best expressed (and developed) in an ES, even
though the knowledge in the program fits in less than a dozen rules. These
will include systems where the "expert" knowledge is not expert at all, but
just well expressed in the production rule form.
There was not much AI activity shown there. The process industries are
very interested in the AI technology (the oil companies showed up in force at
AAAI 84) but almost nothing has been published, or come out as a product
package. The most obvious areas of development are AI in process design
(engineering databases etc) and in process control. What seems to be holding
things back? The ES packages out there don't seem to be talking to any of
the engineering database formats already in place. And there are some very
tough representational & computational problems to work on for process
control. Expert systems would have a tough time matching the well developed
supervisory programs already in place out there.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 2 Apr 85 11:49:46-PST
From: MARCEL@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Living Programs
It's no secret that what a body does for its living is sometimes obvious even
when the body is not working at its living. After an operating systems course
I was once caught behaving like a scheduler, starting longer jobs (a coffee pot)
earlier and at low priority, then time-sharing my CPU between my homework, my
TV and my brother. Obviously, that's a simplistic example; the effect can be
much more subtle. Programming brings with it:
1. an assumption that all problems are solvable (all bugs can be "fixed");
2. sharper programming "techniques" yield better programs sooner;
3. reason is adequate for all aspects of the task;
4. issues are polarized (the program works or it doesn't, this algorithm is
or is not faster than that);
5. every functional goal can be achieved by correct analysis of conditionals
in branches and loops.
In short, software gives us a world which may be very complex, but in which
we can still feel a sense of control denied us in day-to-day life. After all,
we created the machinery in the first place. I contend that a good many of us
(eg myself until a while ago) take the assumption of control away with us from
our programs. This applies especially to "hackers", meaning people who spend
much of their time programming as opposed to doing conceptual design first. It
might apply less to AIers faced with the problem of human intelligence, though
we tend to believe that machines will be intelligent someday (read: the problem
is solvable, we have better languages now, and sufficient analysis will tell
us what intelligence is).
Question: am I right about the false sense of power; have I misdiagnosed the
cause; and how much is AI the projection par excellence of this illusion?
Marcel@SRI-AI (M.Schoppers)
------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 1985 09:22-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Expert Database Systems
From the 1985 SIGMOD Conference Program, May 28 to May 31, 1985 Austin
Texas
May 30, 1985 4-5:30 3DP1 Panel: Expert Database Systems (Workshop
Review) Chairperson Larry Herschberg
May 31, 1985 9:30 - 11:00
P. M. D. Gray "Efficient Prolog Access to CODASYL and FDM
Databases"
J. D. Ullman "Implementation of Logical Query Languages for Databases"
------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 1985 16:05:34 EST (Monday)
From: PSN Development <psn@bbn-noc3.arpa>
Subject: subjective C
[Forwarded by Susan Bernstein <slb@BBNCCP.ARPA>.]
Subjective C, a new programming language.
Recently researchers in the computer language field have shown much
interest in subject oriented languages. Subjective programming
languages draw upon concepts developed in the fields of subjective
probability and philosophical subjectivism to enrich the field of
programming semantics. `Subjective C' is such a language based on the
programming language C.
Subjective C grew out of the AI concept of DWIM, or "do what I mean".
The subjective C compiler infers the mood of the author of the input
program based on clues contained in the comments in the program. If no
comments (or verbose identifiers) are present, the programmer is judged
to have insufficiently thought out his problem, i.e. to have
insufficiently specified the computation to be performed. In this case
a subjective diagnostic is issued, depending on the compiler's own mood.
Assuming comments or other mood indicators are present, an amalgam of
inference techniques drawn from various reputed-to-be-successful expert
systems are used to infer the author's mood.
A trivial example of a mood revealing comment with accompanying program
text is the following:
a = a - 1; /* add one to a */
A too simple analysis of the dichotomy between apparent meaning of the
statement and accompanying comment is that one of them is in error. A
more insightful analysis is that this program should not be allowed to
work, even if no syntax errors occur in it. Accordingly, subjective
compiler should hang the system, thus inducing the programmer to quit
for the night.
More interesting cases occur when there is no conflict between program
text and commentary. It is these cases where Subjective C is shown to
be a significantly richer language than normalcy.
Some examples of mood-implying comments found in actual programs are the
following:
; Here we do something perverse to the packet. Beats me.
In this case, the comment reveals that the programmer does not care what
the code does, except that he wants it to be something that subsequent
programmers will be shocked by. The compiler uses a variation of its
mood-inference techniques to generate code that is suitably perverse by
systematically generating actions and evaluating them against the
criteria it has synthesized.
blt ; hold the mayo
The Subjective C compiler evaluates the indicatory content of this
comment to discern that the programmer is undoubtedly hungry. Code will
be generated that will crash inexplicably, thus inducing the programmer
to go to the candy machine and pig out, which is what he wanted in the
first place.
Subjective C is neither a superset nor a subset of "normal" (if one can
apply the term) C, known in subjective parlance as normalcy. However,
there is an extensive intersection, if meanings of programs are ignored.
The central thesis of research in the field of subjective languages is
that the meanings of programs are far more subtle than first appears to
the reader (or author).
Some examples of mood revealing comments in well known C programs
include the following:
/* I've been powercoding much too much lately. */ and,
/* WARNING: modify the following at your own risk. */
Students of program complexity will be interested to note that the
algorithms used for mood inference are of greater complexity than NP
complete, which is of one of the first known practical applications of
this class of computations. The exact characterization of this class of
problems is not yet fully explored, but some initial theoretical results
will be published by certain graduate students, real soon now, and no
later than next August when their fellowships run out.
The subjective C compiler, called "see", will be available (relatively)
shortly on all bbn unix systems. Comments can be directed directly
to the compiler itself, in the usual fashion.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 85 13:42:23 EST
From: CHOMICKI@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Machine Forgetting (Rutgers)
Jan Chomicki, a Ph.D. student in our department, agreed to give a talk
about MACHINE FORGETTING. His research interests in AI are pretty recent,
in fact they date from today morning. The talk starts at 2:50 pm and ends
at 1:30 pm. The place is Hill-402: if too many people arrive, we will move
into a smaller room. Considering many things, the topic of the talk among
others, you should not expect the speaker to be there. The abstract follows:
Machine Forgetting
We argue that there is no learning without forgetting.
At least, by learning a man forgets how stupid he used to be.
Current research in Machine Learning, cf.(...), doesn't take
this phenomenon fully into account.
We develop a Theory of Forgetting Functor(TFF).
For a class of systems, called Sclerotic, forgetting is monotonic.
However, as our everyday experience indicates,
there also exist non-monotonic forgetting systems.
TFF is one of the variants of a more general Theory of Limited Resources (TLR).
Others include: Theory of Incompetence, Theory of Not Understanding etc.
We implemented a general program, the Forgetting Daemon, that makes any
other program forget about its original purpose, e.g. sorting numbers.
We conjecture that this program may provide a high degree of domain
independence in AI systems.
Take the expert system for diagnosing soybean diseases,
run it through the Forgetting Daemon and the expert system will totally
forget about soybeans.
However, it will also forget about everything else.
We plan to remove this problem in the second version of our system.
A facility of Selective Forgetting will be provided.
The user will define what to forget by means of production rules and/or
menus.
Methodologically, we see several avenues for further research:
1.Example- and Pattern-driven Forgetting.
2.Forgetting Without an Explanation and its relationship with Random
Forgetting.
3.Forgetting Without a Trace vs.Reversible Forgetting.
4.Meta-forgetting: I forgot what I forgot what...
We would have formalized our concepts, but we are pretty certain that
some graduate student at MIT or Stanford has been working on it for a few
years already.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 1 Apr 85 14:17:46-PST
From: Carol Wright <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Adaptive Algorithms (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, April 5, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Lawrence J. (Dave) Davis, Ph.D.
Texas Instruments Computer Science Laboratory.
Knowledge Based Systems Branch. Dallas, Texas.
TITLE: Applying Adaptive Algorithms to Epistatic Domains
Abstract: In his 1975 book ADAPTATION IN NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL
SYSTEMS, John Holland proposed a technique for carrying out search in
large solution spaces that is based on the process of natural
evolution. Among the important points in the book is Holland's proof
that the search process can be greatly accelerated if certain sorts of
mutations (CROSSOVER mutations) are used. Interest in probabilistic
search techniques, and the Holland techniques in particular, has grown
quite strong in the last two years. The talk will begin by describing
procedures Holland and his students used in their early work, and then
will move to the topic of recent innovations.
Holland has shown that when adaptive algorithms are used to search
certain kinds of extremely large spaces, they will converge on a
"good" solution fairly quickly. Such problem spaces are characterized
by a low degree of interaction between components of solutions. A
host of classical search problems, however, are oriented toward
solutions that are highly interactive. The talk will describe some
new techniques for applying adaptive algorithms to epistatic domains,
while retaining some of the strength of Holland's convergence proof.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 85 13:54 EST
From: Ramesh Astik <rampan%northeastern.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Generation of Expert Systems from Examples
(Northeastern)
AUTOMATIC GENERATION OF EXPERT SYSTEMS FROM EXAMPLES
Steve Gallant
Wednesday, April 10, 4 p.m. Botolph Bldg, First Floor
A process for generating an Expert System from Training
Examples (and/or Rules) will be described. The Knowledge
Base for such a system principally consists of a Matrix of
integers called a Learning Matrix.
Given a set of Training Examples, a Learning Matrix may
be generated by various means including the Pocket
Algorithm (a modification of Perceptron Learning). The
resulting Learning Matrix is then combined with a Matrix
Controlled Inference Engine (MACIE) to produce a true Expert
System.
This talk will focus on how MACIE interprets the
Learning Matrix in order to perform forward chaining,
backward chaining, and likelihood estimates.
Presented by: The College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
Boston, Ma. 02115
Information: 437-2462
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Apr-85 0126 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #46
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Apr 85 01:25:54 PST
Date: Mon 15 Apr 1985 23:02-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #46
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 16 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 46
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - AIList is Back,
Requests - Hopfield's Neuron Modeling & La Jolla Machine Translation &
IBM PC LISPs & Distributed Problem Solving & Models of Negotiation &
Knowledge Exploration & Exert Legal Systems,
Seminars - Linguistic Plans (BBNG) &
Representing Objects (UPenn) &
The Bodily Basis of Meaning (UCB) &
Scientific Problem Solving (Rutgers) &
The Model Theory of Shared Information (CSLI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 15 Apr 85 22:54:35-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: AIList is Back
Did you hear the one about the bum on the park bench? He was a top man
in the computer field, but he took a two-week vacation and fell behind.
Twenty new readers have signed up for direct distribution of the list
since April 2, including several at new sites. There were about 80
messages in the AIList mailbox (after I read the bboards and forwarded
a few items), as well as 40 messages each in the AIList-Request
mailbox and my own mailbox. [My accumulated physical mail consisted of
only a dozen items, nearly all junk.] Could someone unplug the
network while I catch up?
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Mon 8 Apr 85 19:58:10-EST
From: MCCOWN@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA
Subject: Query on Hopfield's work
Does anyone know of any TR's (or any info at all!) on John Hopfield's
work at CIT on neuron modelling and memory? Please send any pointers to
MCCOWN@RADC-TOPS20. Thanks.
Michael McCown
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 85 08:10:13 pst
From: Curtis L. Goodhart <goodhart%cod@Nosc>
Subject: Computer Translation of Natural Languages
Does anyone know of a company or R&D group in La Jolla, California that
is working on computer translation of natural languages?
Curt Goodhart (goodhart@nosc on the arpanet)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 85 08:17 CDT
From: Eric←Tannenbaum <erict@ti-eg>
Subject: How about them Lisp compilers....?
To Anyone out there...
I was wondering if anyone knows of a Lisp compiler for the IBM PC and
how I could get one (including the price) as I am interested in some
home AI projects. Also, could you tell me how good and/or bad they are.
If there aren't any Lisp compilers out there in AI land, how about letting
me know about what popular Lisp interpreters there are for the IBM PC
(and price, too?). Since I'm new to the Lisp PC market place, I'll appreciate
any and all comments. Thanks!
Please reply to:
CSNET address: erict @ ti-eg
ARPANET address: erict % ti-eg@csnet.relay
Again, thanks for the info.
Eric Tannenbaum
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 1985 14:50-EST
From: gasser%usc-cse.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: DPS at Clarkson U
A notice in March COMPUTER (pg 139) about an 8 university AI
consortium funded by the Air Force mentions research in
"distributed problem solving at Clarkson University." Can
anyone (at Clarkson or elsewhere) tell me what's going on
there in the realm of DPS?
-- Les Gasser
Asst. Professor
Computer Science Dept. SAL-200
USC
Los Angeles, CA. 90089-0782
ARPANET: gasser%usc-cse@csnet-relay
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 3 Apr 1985 07:54:01-PST
From: cashman%how.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
Subject: Formal models of negotiation
I would appreciate pointers to any work which has been done on formal models
of negotiation between people. I am familiar with David Lowe's work on the
representation of debate, Reid's and Davis' contract net protocol, and
Flores' and Ludlow's paper "Doing and Speaking in the Office." Anything
else?
-- Paul Cashman
Cashman%what.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 4 Apr 1985 1030-EST
From: Amsel-Sdsc@CECOM-1.ARPA
Subject: Knowledge Exploration
KNOWLEDGE EXPLORATION
DOD Computer Scientist conducting a study of information flow
which will culminate in an analysis of the Knowledge - Information
processing involved in a large hi-tech research and development
environment. Request assistance and dicussion on any of the
following topics:
1. Definition of knowledge.
2. What constitutes knowledge? (How to identify it)
3. Relationship of data, information and knowledge.
4. How does one collect or engineer knowledge? (Collection
mechanism)
5. Mathematical representation of knowledge. (Formula with
rationale)
6. Software and Hardware relationships to knowledge.
7. How to represent knowledge? (ex: What form or which
computer language)
8. Difference between knowledge engineer and knowledge
scientist.
9. Methods of controlling knowledge.
10. Who should have access to knowledge within an
organization?
11. Relationship of networking to knowledge.
12. Fifth generation concept of knowledge.
13. General comments on knowledge.
Charles E. Woodall
(SNAIL MAIL)
BOQ Box 122
Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703
Office: (201)544-3294
Home: (201)389-3598
(ARPA/MILNet)
[woodall]:AMSEL-SDSC at CECOM-1.ARP
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 85 16:53:47 EST
From: John Kastner <kastner.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Expert Legal Systems
Does anyone know of a CS Department in which there is current work on,
or a serious interest in, expert systems applied to the practice of
law? An acquaintance of mine, currently at the University of East
Asia, Macau, would like to do his Doctorate in this field. He is an
Associate Professor of Management Science with a strong background in
law.
Maurice Karnaugh
ARPAnet: KARNO.YKTVMZ.IBM-SJ@CSnet-Relay
------------------------------
Date: 5 Apr 1985 13:30-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Linguistic Plans (BBNG)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Laboratories
Artificial Intelligence Seminar Series
Speaker: Diane Litman
University of Rochester
Title: "Discourse and Plan Recognition - A Model of
Subdialogues in Conversation"
Date: Tuesday, April 16, 1985
10:30 a.m.
Location: 3rd Floor Large Conference Room
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA
One promising approach to analyzing dialogues has involved
modelling the goals of the speakers. In other words, participants
in a conversation are viewed as accomplishing goals via plans
containing the utterances of the conversation as actions in the plan.
In general, these models work well as long as the topic follows
the plan structure closely, but they have difficulty accounting for
such interrupting subdialogues as clarifications and corrections.
To address this problem, a plan-based natural language system
incorporating both task and discourse knowledge has been developed. In
particular, a new model of plan recognition is used to construct a
hierarchy of task plans and meta-plans via the process of constraint
satisfaction. The plan recognition model has also been extended using
results from work in discourse analysis. Such an approach accounts for
interrupting subdialogues and various surface linguistic phenomena while
maintaining the advantages of the plan-based methodology.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 85 11:01 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Representing Objects (UPenn)
REPRESENTING, REASONING ABOUT AND MANIPULATING OBJECTS BY A COMPUTER
John E. Hopcroft (Cornell)
Thursday, April 16; 216 Moore School, University of Pennsylvania
The areas of CAD/CAM and robotics require computer representations of
physical objects. These representations must support automatic design
tools, analysis packages, high level reasoning and object manipulation.
This talk will discuss potential applications, problems that must be
overcome and important directions in developing the engineering science
base needed to support the design, simulation, testing and debugging of
sophisticated objects. An example of a major problem is that the actual
construction of a computer representation of a physical object such as
a crankshaft is a major undertaking. Thus interactive physical object
editors will play an important role. The use of automatic surface
generation in constructing solid models will be illustrated.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 85 16:31:59 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - The Bodily Basis of Meaning (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, April 16, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Mark Johnson, Philosophy Department, Southern
Illinois University
TITLE: ``The Bodily Basis of Meaning and Imagination''
The idea that human rationality is an abstract, disembodied,
formal structure is deeply rooted in the Western Philosophical
tradition and is manifested most recently in model-theoretic and
Davidsonian semantics. According to this view, meaning is an
abstract relation between symbolic representations (either words
or mental representations) and objective (mind-independent) real-
ity. Meaning is thus a matter of objective senses and has nothing
to do with how human beings understand their experience. And
rationality is a rule-governed manipulation of the symbols that
express meaning. In this whole picture nothing is said about the
role of bodily experience, either in the emergence of meaning or
in our reasoning about our world.
But it is a fact that we humans do have bodies, and it would
be rather strange if this fact didn't have some important bearing
on what we experience as meaningful and how we make sense of our
world in a rational fashion. I suggest that there are recurrent
preconceptual structures in our bodily interactions with our
environment that are the basis for human meaning. These are
structures of our perceptual activity and bodily movements that
are metaphorically extended to structure more abstract, non-
physical domains. So I am claiming that our more `abstract' rea-
soning is grounded in a concrete reasoning via metaphorical con-
nections. My argument is based on an analysis of the experience
and meaning of balance.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 85 14:44:13 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Scientific Problem Solving (Rutgers)
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
III Seminar
Title: Problem Solving in a Qualitative Scientific Domain
Speaker: Don Ploger
Time: Tuesday, April 16, 1985, 11:00am - 12:00pm
Place: Hill Center, room 423
Don Ploger is a Ph.D. candidate in the psychology department.
He will describe his ongoing dissertation research. An abstract
follows:
A research scientist is typically able to solve problems and
explain phenomenon in his area of expertise. The primary purpose of
this study is to develop a methodology for studying this performance
in a qualitative scientific domain. The domain chosen is intermediary
metabolism, an important area of biochemistry. Reasoning in this
domain involves large amounts of knowledge which is richly structured,
but is not mathematical. It therefore differs sharply from the
scientific domains that have been previously studied in cognitive
psychology.
In the study, expert biochemists and first-year medical
students thought aloud as they solved a problem, and then gave an
explanation for the phenomenon. Analysis of the resulting verbal
protocols employed representations of the domain knowledge that are
consistent with textbooks in the field. Two particular
representations are considered in detail: biochemical mechanisms,
which are explicitly represented in texts, and level of knowledge,
which are usually implicit.
Examples of the analysis will be presented for three subjects:
an expert, a successful novice, and an unsuccessful novice.
Particular attention will be given to the difference between problem
solving and explanation among subjects.
The purpose of the study is to make explicit important
features of human performance, and it differs in many respects from
work in AI. However, the general approach is compatible with certain
recent trends in the development of expert systems. The study
provides a view of how humans use a "first principles" approach.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 10 Apr 85 17:26:31-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Model Theory of Shared Information (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
LOGIC SEMINAR
``On the Model Theory of Shared Information''
Jon Barwise, CSLI
April 16, at 4:15, Room 381 T (Math Corner)
The traditional model-theoretic approach to the problem of shared
understanding (public information, common knowledge, mutual belief)
has been through an iterated hierarchy of attitude reports (c knows
that b knows ... that c knows that P), mirroring the iterated
hierarchy in set theory and higher-order model theory. In this talk I
want to show that Aczel's work on non-wellfounded sets gives us a new
tool for a ``direct'' model-theoretic approach through situations. I
will go on to state some approximation theorems that show to what
extent the hierarchy approach does and does not add up, in the limit,
to the direct approach. The results raise a number of interesting
model-theoretic questions that only arise in the context of
non-wellfounded sets.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Apr-85 2235 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #47
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Apr 85 22:34:17 PST
Date: Tue 16 Apr 1985 20:26-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #47
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 17 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 47
Today's Topics:
Bindings - Walter Reitman,
Request - Advanced AI Programming Topics,
AI Tools - RuleMaster & Lisp for IBM PC & GCLISP Review,
Expert Systems - Articles & Comparative Report,
Publications - Flores' & Lisp Conferences Proceedings,
Conference - IJCAI-85 Registration & Housing,
Seminars - A Relational Database with Logic Programming (SRI) &
Phrase Structure and Parsing (BBN) &
Expert Systems at Lockheed (SU) &
The Japanese Lisp Machine (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 85 15:43:54 EST
From: David←West%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Bindings - Walter Reitman
Walter Reitman, whose address was given as here in AIlist v3 #42,
in fact moved east a few years ago. We are currently forwarding
his mail to 25 Oak St., Rumson NJ <no zip available>
I am not sure whether he continued to work on Go after leaving here.
David West (David←West%umich-mts.mailnet@mit-multics.arpa)
MHRI, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Apr 85 16:31:38 EST (Tue)
From: Carlo J. Rodriguez <rodrigue@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: Advanced AI Programming Topics
Hello! I was wondering if I could stir up some interest on the part of
some of the more experienced programmers and designers that follow the
AIList to share some of their knowledge of programming techniques and
structures, data structure implementations and favorites tricks, shortcuts
and other similar tidbits with those among us less experienced in this
magic. Topics such as information hiding, graph structure applications,
parsing techniques and other similar methods typically employed in AI
programming are the types of things I'd like to see discussed. It would
be nice to see some real hard-core, nitty-gritty technical information
exchange.
Let us all know what you think about this topic.
--- Carlo J. Rodriguez
aka: carlor@mitre
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 85 15:37:28 EST
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: RuleMaster
I recently attended a training session for RuleMaster at Radian
Corporation. RuleMaster is an expert system development tool that allows
the programmer to put the knowledge in the form of examples and RuleMaster
will induce the rules. RuleMaster essentially accepts rules in the form
of decision tables and induces an efficient IF THEN representation.
The decision tables form a hierarchy of modules and allow variable
declaration and access to external programs or databases. RuleMaster
was developed with consultation problems in mind and may possibly be
used for robotic control. I found a few limitations that would make it
difficult to use RuleMaster for design problems (one of which is the
requirement that you have to declare all your variables before execution).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 85 10:22:42 BST
From: Fitch@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Lisp for IBM PC
The number is growing, but I reckon the best is UOLISP from Jed Marti
(Marti@Rand-unix on arpa net). It has a compiler, screen editor and other
goodies. I have seen it run a large part of the REDUCE algebra system, which
for a PC is good going.
Alternatives are Golden Common Lisp and MuLisp (Stoutemyer in Hawaii)
------------------------------
Date: Tue 16 Apr 85 12:53:10-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: GCLISP & Expert Systems Articles
For information on GCLISP, see Jonathon Amsterdam's review in the May
issue of Popular Computing. The same issue also features overview
articles about AI and expert systems, and a review of four AI books.
(Mike Nicita and Ron Petrusha liked Expert Systems by Paul Harmon
and David King, didn't like The AI Business by Winston and Prendergast,
and had mixed comments about Into the Heart of the Mind by Frank Rose
and The Cognitive Computer by Schank and Childers.)
For a business view of expert systems, see Exploring Expert Systems,
by Elisabeth Horwitt, in Business Computer Systems, March 1985, pp. 48-57.
The article concludes with a list of vendors of expert-system hardware,
software, and services.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Fri 12 Apr 85 14:55:27-PST
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: report on ES tools
I have written a report (for a class) on five software tools for building
knowledge-based systems: ART, DUCK, KEE, S1, and SRL. The report is based
on written information I have collected and demos I have seen of KEE and S1.
(Unfortunately no hands-on experience). Nevertheless, several people have
found the paper imformative so I am offering it to others. Send me your
US mail address if you are interested. I will wait a little while and if
there aren't too many requests I'll mail you a copy. Otherwise, I'll make
arrangements to post somewhere on the net where you can ftp it. (Actually
it was written with Macintosh word, and another alternative is to send me
a floppy with a self-addressed mailer).
mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 85 09:30:57 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Flores Publications (AIList Digest V3 #46)
Reply to Paul Cashman: More by Flores that you might not have seen:
"Management and Communication in the Office of the Future" (dissertation)
'Understanding Computers and Cognition' with Winograd
You can get these through Hermenet Inc. in the SF Bay area (415) 474-3400.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 85 1225 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp conferences proceedings
[from SIGACT News]
ACM SIGPLAN has republished the conference proceeding of
previous Lisp conferences.
Price
Order No. Members Others
1980 Lisp Conf. 552800 $15 $21
1982 Lisp Conf. 552820 $18 $26
1984 Lisp Conf. 552840 $20 $27
Ordering address (prepaid)
ACM Order Dept.
P.O.Box 64145
Baltimore, MD 21264
------------------------------
Date: 09 Apr 85 09:38:31 PST (Tue)
From: Phil Klahr <klahr@rand-unix>
Subject: IJCAI-85 Registration -- Please post
The International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence will be
meeting in Los Angeles (at UCLA) August 18-23, 1985. Conference
brochures (including registration information) have already been mailed
out. If you have not received one, or would like extras, contact
IJCAI-85
c/o AAAI
445 Burgess Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025
415-328-3123 or 415-321-1118
Registration will be limited to 5,000 people. Based on early projections,
up to 7,000 people may wish to attend, so early registration is highly
encouraged (if not necessary).
As a bonus, early registrants will receive a substantial reduction in
registration costs. Through June 28, registration fees are $175 ($80 for
students); for registrations received after June 28 but prior to July 26,
fees will be $225 ($100 for students); and for on-site registration (if
available), fees will be $275 ($125 for students). Substantial reductions
for early tutorial registrations are also in effect.
Further information on the technical conference, the tutorials, the
exhibition, and housing can be found in the conference brochure.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 85 14:01:06 PST
From: Phyllis O'Neil <oneil@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: IJCAI-85 housing
The UCLA Guest House is booked up for IJCAI-85.
Many residential suites and residence hall rooms are available, as well
as hotel rooms. Mail your IJCAI Housing Bureau Reservation Form with
the deposit as soon as you can, to be assured a room for IJCAI-85.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 1985 1524-PST
From: GOGUEN@SRI-CSL.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - A Relational Database with Logic Programming (SRI)
[Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSL SEMINAR SERIES: 17 April 1985 at 2pm in EL381
EXTENDING A RELATIONAL DATABASE WITH LOGIC PROGRAMMING FACILITIES
H. van Emde Boas - Lubsen, IBM INSDC, Uithoorn Netherlands
P. van Emde Boas, IBM San Jose, on leave from IIW/FVI, Univ.
Amsterdam
C.F.J. Doedens, Univ. of Amsterdam, while at IBM-INSDC Uithoorn
Netherlands
The observation that there exists a strong connection
between the Relational Database Model on the one side, and a
convincing interpretation of Logic Programs on the other
hand has been made frequently. The real issue is how to
exploit this connection in order to let Logic Programming
share the fruits of years of research and development in
Database technology.
Various groups have worked on the problem of interfacing
Logic Programming and Relational Databases by giving the
logic programming system access to an existing Database
system, or by incorporating Database facilities into the
Logic Programming System. Our approach is radically
different: we incorporate Logic Programming Facilities into
an existing Database system by extending the functionality
of the latter.
In the presentation we illustrate this strategy by defining
a simple subset of PROLOG. Our prototype system translates
programs from this subset into high level code for the
Database System Business System 12, a commercially
available relational Database system for time sharing use
developed at IBM-INSDC, Uithoorn, the Netherlands. Facts
are translated into rows which are inserted in Database
tables. Clauses are compiled into View definitions and goals
are represented by Database queries. The existing BS12-API
language provides a powerful view mechanism, allowing us to
design this translation. The query generated by compiling
the goal statement is processed by the BS12 system, and all
answers generated are returned to the Prolog system without
further need for interfacing.
The subset of PROLOG presently covered by our system
excludes several important facilities. They will be
discussed together with the required enhancements both to
our interface and the existing BS12 system needed for
incorporating these features. We also compare our work with
projects performed by others.
Disclaimer
This presentation contains reference to, or information
about, possible future enhancements to IBM products
(Business System 12). Such reference or information must
not be construed to mean that IBM intends to implement these
enhancements. The contents are entirely the responsibility
of the authors and reflect their personal opinion.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 1985 12:17-EST
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Phrase Structure and Parsing (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN's next AI seminar is at 10:30 on Thursday, April 18, in the 3rd
floor large conference room at 10 Moulton Street. Craig Thiersch, of
the University of Connecticutt and the University of Koeln, will speak
on "Scrambling, the "VP node" and the nature of projections". His
abstract:
This talk consists of two parts: the first deals with several
linguistic problems, illustrated by a specific example from the
structure of German; the second discusses the effect which the
resolution of these problems has on (1) the nature of phrase-
structure, and (2) applications to parsing.
In the past, parsers have quite generally assumed that one needed
separate "packets" for different constituent types, NP, VP, S, etc.
which had rather different structures from one another, in spite of
attempts to reduce them to a common structure.
If my arguments are correct, there is only one constituent type,
XP, and its structure is uniform; the "satellites" of the Head are
licensed by it and given interpretations which vary little from
constituent to constituent. This isolates and minimizes the
difference between constituents, and locates the few differences where
they belong, namely in the lexicon.
The parser itself, on the other hand, is the same for all
constituents, and "expects" the same structure for all. This means
that given a particular place in the parse tree, the parser has a more
complete set of expectations. This presumably would be particularly
useful in processing fragmentary or garbled utterances, as in speech
rather than text processing.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 12 Apr 85 09:00:51-PST
From: Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Expert Systems at Lockheed (SU)
[Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The next seminar will take place Wednesday, April l7, in Terman 2l7
from 2:l5 - 3:30.
Speaker: J.R. Zumsteg
Advanced Software Laboratory
Topic: "An Overview of Engineering Expert Systems Research
at Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratory
Expert system technology has progressed to the point where it can
be used to assist engineers and designers during the design and
analysis of aerospace structures. Because structural design and
analysis relies heavily on computer-based modelling, an engineering
expert system must be able to utilize existing application programs.
The software interface required to provide this capability must set
up the input for the program, run the program, and extract the
needed results from the output of the program, in much the same
manner as a human expert would use the progeram. In addition,
the knowledge base of the expert system must include facts and
rules to decide when and how to use an application program during
the course of a design or analysis.
Two engineering expert systems have been under development at the
Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratory for over a year. The
Composites Design Assistant (CDA) uses a PROLOG-based expert
system framework, which has been interfaced to the RIM relational
database manager and the ADVLAM laminate analysis code, to assist
an engineer in the design of sandwich panels. The Buckling Expert
uses the Lockheed Expert System (LES), an expert system framework,
written in analysis code and the PANDA shell design code during
the analysis of a cylindrical shell. The design and operation
of these engineering expert systems, along with the software and
logic issues encountered during their development, will be
described. An example of each system in use will also be presented.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 15 Apr 85 16:03:46-PST
From: Carol Wright <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Japanese Lisp Machine (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: Friday, April 19, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Shigeki Goto
Musashino Electrical Communication Laboratory,
NTT, Japan
Visitor SU Computer Science Department
TITLE: Japanese Lisp Machine ELIS and it's Language TAO
NTT is a Japanese telephone company. Electrical Communication
Laboratories are often called "Japanese Bell Labs". At the Feburary
15 Siglunch, Professor Feigenbaum spoke about NTT's new Lisp machine
being ten times faster than Symbolics 3600. This talk is a follow
up on his talk, and will cover the following points:
1) A brief overview of NTT, and Research activities at Electrical
Communication Laboratories.
2) Lisp Machine ELIS: It is safe to say that ELIS is at least six times
faster than Symbolics 3600. Because the interpreter is implemented
fully by microcode, interpreted code runs faster than most dedicated
machines.
3) A dialect of Lisp: TAO
Although TAO looks like Zetalisp, it takes in features of Prolog and
Smalltalk. Users can program by selecting and mixing the programming
paradigms.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Apr-85 0037 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #48
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Apr 85 00:37:36 PST
Date: Fri 19 Apr 1985 22:59-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #48
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 20 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 48
Today's Topics:
Requests - AI in Agriculture & GCLisp on a TI,
Reports - ES Tools Paper,
Bindings - Walter Reitman,
Program - Expert Legal Systems,
Discussion - Knowledge and Information,
Linguistics - Hangul and Cherokee,
Opinion - Policy & Humor & Emotions & Duplicating Humans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Apr 85 11:57:58-PST
From: Peter Friedland <FRIEDLAND@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AI in agriculture
I have a friend who has just been hired by the US Dept. of Agriculture to
explore advance computer applications, including AI, to problems in
agriculture. If anybody has any information about existing systems or research
in this area, please send it to FRIEDLAND@SUMEX (or publish on the AILIST).
Thanks,
Peter
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 85 9 32 CST
From: Douglas young <young@uofm-uts.cdn>
Subject: GCLisp
Please can anyone tell me if there is a way of being able to use
Golden Common Lisp on a TI Professional ( equipped with 512k )?
Thanks.
Douglas Young ( University of Manitoba )
young%uofm-uts.cdn%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri 19 Apr 85 15:53:14-PST
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: es tools paper
I have gotten an incredible number of responses for the ES paper I have
offered. I didn't realize that that many people even read AIList. As a
result I will have it made into a Stanford Knowledge Systems Lab
(KSL) paper. I am saving all the addresses and will have copies
mailed out asap. If you are in a rush to get this information let me
know ... if the 'emergency' cases are small in number I can send out
a photocopy of the Macintosh output right away. I will also try to
make an announcement about the mass mailing so you should have to worry
about whether you got missed.
mark
------------------------------
Date: 17 Apr 1985 14:22-EST
From: BATES@BBNG.ARPA
Subject: address for Walter Reitman
In the latest issue of the AIList newsletter, someone mentioned that
Walter Reitman's address was unknown. Here it is, in case you'd like
to publish it:
Dr. Walter Reitman
Palladian Software Inc.
41 Munroe Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 85 08:14 EST
From: Carole D Hafner <hafner%northeastern.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Expert Legal Systems
Responding to John Kastner's request in AILIST V3 #46:
Northeastern University in Boston is in the process of developing a new
program in Law and Computer Science. Although we are not ruling out work
on traditional "computer law" issues (software protection, liability of
computer system vendors, privacy, etc.), our primary interest is the use
of computers to model and/or enhance the process of "legal reasoning" -
whatever that is!! Thus, legal expert systems, natural language processing
and intelligent legal retrieval systems are the areas we want to develop.
We are very interested in hearing from potential graduate students
who want to work on AI and Law - and also potential faculty!
Don Berman Carole Hafner
School of Law College of Computer Science
berman%northeastern@csnet-relay hafner%northeastern@csnet-relay
Northeastern University
Boston MA 02115
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 85 10:12:47 PST (Thu)
From: Jeff Peck <peck@sri-spam>
Subject: RE: Knowledge Exploration (some suggestions)
A good overview of the problem of defining "information" is in "Theories
of Information" [edited] by Machlup and Mansfield (John Wiley 1984).
Its a thick volume, with articles by a large number researchers in
information science/computer science/cognitive science, but reading just
the prologue and epilogue will give you a good overview of the current
thinking about Information and Knowledge. In particular, it will warn
you about trying to extend from the Shannon definition of the word,
which generally tends to confuse the user, (and the English language).
Machlup is biased toward the position is that Information is
what is told from one human to another; all other uses are derived
metaphorically from that usage.
Personally, I would suggest that Information and Knowledge are related
just as Communication and Memory; Information is Knowledge in transit,
or conversely, Knowledge is stored Information. Knowledge is what you
"Know", Information is what you don't know; it's what you want to get
so that you may Know something. In this case, we can agree in principle
with Shannon, that the amount (or value) of information in a signal/symbol
is related to the amount of NEW knowledge we recieve.
"Datum", as Machlup points out, is latin for "given";
So, in any context in which a particular object is not the result of
immediate inference or derivation, that information or knowledge may
be considered as data. Inference and analysis may then proceed from
data to derive new knowledge, new "knowns" from the "givens".
These "knowns", when transmitted to a new process, then become the
"givens" for the next round of analysis. So, data is analysed to
create knowledge, which is transmitted as information, and may then again
become data and knowledge.
This explains the relationships, based on function, context and point-of-view,
but leaves open the question of the type or kind of object information is,
or the means of representation for these objects.
The bottom line, I think, is that all of these (info, knowledge, data)
must be seen in the context of their use: the purpose of intelligence is
to make (good) decisions. The memories, beliefs, inferences,
predictions, expectations, etc., that are used to make an "intelligent"
choice, or an "informed decision", are knowledge. Whether something is
knowledge can only be judged by its relationship to decisions that must
be made. I suggest that any theory of knowledge must include a theory
of decisions and utility.
* for those philosphers who still beleive in "true, justified belief"
as the definition of knowledge, I submit that "true, justified belief"
is just a special case of "things that are useful in making good decisions".
I suggest that the latter is the more fundamental and more useful concept.
peck@sri-spam
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 85 8:58:13 EST
From: Bruce Nevin <bnevin@bbncch>
Subject: Hangul and Cherokee
Sorry, Jan Steinman, at least one elegant writing system is more recent
than that of Hangul: in the early 1800s, Sequoya (aka George Guess)
invented a very sophisticated syllabary for the Cherokee language.
Each of its 85 characters represents one of the possible syllables of
the language.
This writing system enabled the Cherokees to write down their elaborate
system of laws and to publish newspapers in their language. They still
do publish Cherokee newspapers, though they disbanded as a tribe in 1906.
Their legal tomes still await scholarly study, many in possession of the
American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia.
A bit of history: the Cherokees were quite successful farmers and
businesspeople, a nation with a republican form of government (not to be
confused with the present GOP!) under a written constitution. Then
gold was discovered in their territory. A treaty obtained from a small
group in the tribe was claimed to be binding on the whole tribe. Their
autonomy as a nation was upheld by the US Supreme Court, and the tribe
overwhelmingly repudiated the treaty, but the State of Georgia used
military force and President Andrew Jackson refused to intervene, hence
the `Trail of Tears' from the Carolinas, Georgia, and Alabama to
Oklahoma. (Occurs to me that `Improper Mathematics' could well be
rewritten to this tune!)
Devanagari, used to write Sanskrit and its descendants, and many other
languages influenced by the spread of Buddhism, is also a syllable-
oriented script, but does have distinct marks for vowels. I should be
surprised if it did not influence King Sejong's scholars.
Bruce Nevin
bbncch.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 85 23:57 EST
From: Paul Fishwick <Fishwick%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: A final note on humor...
In response to the "Special Issue on Humor" of the AI bboard, I would
like to make some comments concerning the somewhat involved treastises
presented therein:
> I simply suggest that it be left at the level of:
>
> 1. If something offends you tell the offender and, if
> appropriate, the net audience. [Ok, agreed -pf]
> 2. Remember the individual involved. Next time something
> comes up about that person you will know their
> character is probably suspect, or at the very least
> their sense of judgement.
>
> I for one would feel severely punished if someone so seriously
> suspected my character. An entire audience like this would be
> crushing.
This sounds like something from a CIA primer. Can we not voice
our opinions freely without mass condemnation? I for one would
feel "severely punished" if I could not voice what I felt without
constantly being concerned about being "crushed."
> So, should it be published? Maybe, but not as humor; it should be
> quoted (mention vs use) as an example of vicious pseudo-humor. If
> it must always be presented in the context of its reality, its
> disguise must be removed.
Then the author presents metaphors relating to viruses,
pathogens, antigens and DNA sequences which I find quite
entertaining but highly romantic.
The part about removing disguises reminds me of one of the earlier
comments made by someone: namely, that we should remove disguises
associated with cartoons since they often contain violent acts.
And, heaven forbid that we should watch slap-stick.
I found "Freud's Theory of Jokes and Censors" interesting. It might
suggest an inquiry into the meaning of 'funny'. What exactly does
'funny' mean? I would be interested in someone would give me a
definition of 'funny' (no Webster's interpretations, please).
Amazingly enough, these heated discussions about humor might
have some relevance to AI after all...A computational model which
would relate to humor: I can see it now - If only I could attach
a voice box to my PC and come up with an algorithm (I would stick
it in the corner of my living room with a microphone so that it could
listen-in at parties....)
[I believe that both McCarthy and Minsky have published
papers on humor. -- KIL]
The point is that many people found Polly Nomial hilarious and many
people found it disgusting. The question is: can we look across
the fence and appreciate someone else's point of view (not necessarily
changing our own view)? There is nothing wrong with either view. Now,
lets get back to some AI, shall we?
-paul
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1985 09:47 EST
From: BATALI%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Midnight Theorizer
From: MINSKY
Perhaps this, too, explains the prolonged, mourning-like
depression that follows sexual or other forms of personal
assault. No matter that the unwelcome intimacy of violence
may be brief; it nonetheless affects one's attachment
machinery, however much against one's wish.
So the suggestion is that the rape-victim feels bad because she has
formed an attachment-bond to her attacker? The same "mechanism" is
involved as in the formation of her attachment-bonds to other people?
So she feels bad not because she has been raped, but because her
rapist has then left her? Is there a shred of evidence that any rape
victim has ever felt this way? Is this theory somehow suggesting that
there really isn't much of a difference between rape and seduction and
falling in love? Is it being assumed that fear, pain and loss of
self-esteem is not enough to "explain the prolonged depression" that
follows sexual assault?
[Surely the phrase "affects one's attachment machinery" should be
interpreted as "damaging" or "adversely affecting" the mechanism.
-- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 15-Apr-85 16:50:04-BST
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Street Speak
The current debate over censorship and jokes in the AI Digest leads me
to think that there is something fundamentally wrong. If your are trying
to mimic the human mind, you have do both sides of the brain. But if you
are using a computer, you can only duplicate the logical thought process
and not the emotional thought process.
Gordon Joly
aka
The Joka.
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 16-Apr-85 10:06:40-BST
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Man as Machine
Hardware = Brain
Firmware = Instinct
Software = Intelligence.
"If man is any sort of a machine he is a learning machine"
Jacob Bronowski on The Ascent of Man.
Gordon Joly
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Apr-85 1842 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #49
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Apr 85 18:41:42 PST
Date: Sat 20 Apr 1985 16:59-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #49
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 20 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 49
Today's Topics:
Bindings - HPP now Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory,
Recent Articles - AI Report & Survey,
Robotics - Occupational Fatality,
AI Literature - AI Journals & Mathematical People,
Request - NCARAI Seminar Series,
Workshop - AI and Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Apr 85 15:43:54-PST
From: Bruce Buchanan <BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: STANFORD KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS LABORATORY
*** NOTICE OF NAME CHANGE ***
HEURISTIC PROGRAMMING PROJECT --> KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS LABORATORY
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
Upon entering our third decade of AI research, the group formerly known as the
DENDRAL Project (1965-1972) and the Heuristic Programming Project (1972-1984)
announces the creation of the Knowledge Systems Laboratory (KSL). The overall
research directions will remain the same but scientific direction and
administration will be distributed among the five collaborating, but distinct,
subgroups listed below.
A central KSL administration will coordinate activities among the
subgroups and between the KSL and outside agencies, corporations, and the
university. Thomas Rindfleisch will serve as Director of the KSL.
1. The Heuristic Programming Project group, Prof. Edward A. Feigenbaum,
principal investigator. The current foci of the HPP include:
studies of blackboard systems, machine and system architectures
for concurrent symbolic processing, and models for knowledge
discovery. Executive Director: Robert Engelmore. Research
scientists: Harold Brown, Bruce Delagi, Peter Friedland, H.Penny
Nii, and Byron Davies. Consulting Professor: Richard Gabriel.
2. The HELIX Group, Prof. Bruce G. Buchanan, principal investigator.
The main foci of this group are machine learning, transfer of
expertise, and problem solving. Other faculty and research
scientists are Paul Rosenbloom, James Brinkley, William Clancey,
and Barbara Hayes-Roth.
3. The Medical Computer Science Group, Prof. Edward H. Shortliffe,
principal investigator. Research on and application of AI to
medical problems. Research scientist: Larry Fagan.
4. The Logic Group, Prof. Michael R. Gensereth, principal investigator.
Research on formal reasoning and introspectivie systems.
Research scientist: Matt Ginsberg.
5. The Symbolic Systems Resources Group, Thomas C. Rindfleisch, director.
Research on and operation of computing resources for AI research,
including the SUMEX facility. Asst. Director: William J. Yeager.
Address correspondence to:
Knowledge Systems Laboratory
Computer Science Dept.
Stanford University
701 Welch Rd., Bldg. C
Palo Alto, CA 94304
------------------------------
Date: 5 Apr 1985 10:28-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Contents, AI Report
The Artificial Intelligence Report, April 1985, Volume 2 no. 4
"FDA Looks at Medical Software" describes a move within the FDA to
classify medical software (including medical expert systems) as medical
devices subject to improvement
"The NSF Supercomputer Centers"
"Sun Microsystems" announced the availability of the following AI
products for their workstations: Quintus Prolog, Lucid Common Lisp,
Software Architecture and Engineering Inc.s' Knowledge Engineering
System, Smart System Technology's Duck. Also includes information on
Sun's philosophy with respect to AI and some prices for some of their
products and general corporate aims.
"Teknowledge joins FMC" describes investments by FMC and others in
Teknowledge.
"A $50 Million Give Away" describes HP's planned donations to
Universities for AI work.
"A Commerical AI Forum" describes a forum being sponsored by the
Gartner Group.
"The Japanese AI Market" describes work by Nichiman Co in importing
Symbolics 3600 machines and other AI software to Japan.
"Expo 85: Tsukuba Japan" States that the American pavillion in Japan
(whose theme is AI) has good technical information but lacks the flash
and glitz of Japanese exhibits.
Announcements of AI products for the IBM PC
Logicware announced availability of PC/MProlog which is execution
compatible with unspecified DEC and IBM mainframe computers.
Artelligence of Dallas, Texas is selling a PC version of OPS5 called
OPS5+($3,000)
California Intelligence announces XSYS, an expert system shell,
for $1000. (It is similar to the SeRIES-PC system developed at
Stanford)
KDS Corporation announced KDS AUTOLOGIC
Review of the NATO Advanced Study Institute workshop. These are
available in Robotics and Artificial Intelligence, volume 11 of NATO
ASI Series, series F- Computer and Systems Sciences published by
Springer VErlag
Review of IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence Conference, Dec
5-7 1985. They are available from IEEE Computer Society (order no 624)
Review of Artificial Intelligence in Maintenance, sponsored by the
Department of Defense October 4-6 1983.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Apr 1985 09:37-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
Datamation, April 1, 1985 Volume 31 no 7
Reader's Forum - Hacker meets Star War's.
This was written by John M. Morris of Illinois Institute of Technology
Research Institute in Rome New York. He claims that IIT has developed
a "set of software metrics -- measurements of such things as the
complexity of programs -- for use with LISP programs." They also found
that "AI programs can meet commercial software standards without
neglecting the hackers' creative artistic spirit." and that the usual
software development cycle can be modified for AI development.
No documentation or references for these claims were provided in the
article.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Infoworld, January 28, 1985 Volume 7, Issue 4
Review of Exsys, an expert system based on a taxonomic approach
Rating: two out of a possible four diskettes.
Performance: good
Documentation: fair
Ease of Use: Fair
Error Handling: Excellent
Support: Good Pages 43-44
Review of Expert Ease: This is superseded by a review of a newer
release of their product which I summarized earlier
Review of Expert Choice: page 45-50
This is a decision support system based on Professor Saaty's "Analytic
Hierarchy Process"
Rating: two out of four possible diskettes
performance: good
documentation: good
ease of use: fair
error handling: Excellent
support: four
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Electronics Week, February 11, 1985, page 45
"Upstart Vendor Makes Waves in Japn's Robot Market"
Talks about Dainichi Kiko Co. which is a small company that is growing
very fast by using novel control circuits to compensate for the weight
of the robot arm when moving it, and by selling turnkey systems.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Computer World, April 1, 1985 page 45
Article describing Arthur D. Little's efforts in Artificial
Intelligence applications, particularly to data processing.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Electronics Week December 17, 1984 page 17-18
"AI Transforms CAD/CAM to CIM"
describes efforts by CAM-I to integrate engineering work-stations and
automated factories using expert systems. Also describes work by
Westinghouse Electric Corp to apply expert systems to hybrid circuits,
magnetic dervices, printed circuits, array products. Computervision
has a system which refers to past experiences and classifies parts into
categories. They did not call the system AI based at the time but it
can now be considered an AI system.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Computer Products March 1985
Intellimac announces the following systems for its IN/7000 series ADA
development super-minis: Common Lisp, Lisp-To-ADA Translater, an
expert system shell, a CAI system for LISP
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Computer Products Page 34 March 1985
Frey Associates Inc. announces Themis V1.1 that provides a natural
language in.terface to ORACLE Relational Database and VAX DATATRIEVE.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 85 10:35:51 cst
From: Richard Smith <smith%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Occupational Fatality Associated with a Robot
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
Center for Disease Control, Atlanta
Vol. 34, No. 11, March 22, 1985.
"On July 21, 1984, a 34-year-old male worker in Michigan was operating
an automated die-casting system that included an industrial robot. At
approximately 1:15 p.m., he was found pinned between the back end of the
robot and a 4-inch-diameter steel safety pole used to restrict undesired
arm movement by the robot. The robot stalled, applying sustained pressure
to the chest of the operator, who experienced cardiopulmonary arrest...
the worker was admitted comatose to a local hospital, where he died 5 days
later."
The report provides additional details. Apparently the operator
climbed around the safety bars and was trying to clean up metal scrap
on the floor when he got pinned by the robot. The operator was thought to
be fairly competent, but had a practice of sneaking into the robot's
work envelope every so often. He evidently didn't anticipate the motions
of the back of the robot as well as he anticipated the gripper motion.
The company has since installed a chain link fence around the work cell.
According to the CDC this is the first robot-caused fatality in the U.S.
The report also mentions that 2 fatalities have occured in Japan. Robot
related injuries occur most often while a robot is being programmed or
repaired, unlike this case.
Back issues of M&M Weekly Report are availible from the publisher,
Massachusetts Medical Society, Waltham, MA.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 3 Apr 85 12:08:37-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New Journals In The Math/CS Library
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is a list of some of [Stanford Library's] more recent
subscription purchases:
Abacus
Computers and Artificial Intelligence (Czechoslovakia)
Expert Systems: the international journal of knowledge engineering
ICOT Journal Digest: Fifth Generation Computer Systems
Integration: the VLSI Journal
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Journal of Logic Programming
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing
Journal of Pascal, Ada & Modula-2
Macworld
Tech Journal; for IBM Personal Computer Users
Technology and Sciences of Information; cover to cover translation of
Technique et Science Informatiques
HL
------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Apr 85 12:04:19-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Mathematical People--New Book in the Math/CS Library
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Mathematical People by Albers and Alexanderson (QA28.M37 1985) has arrived
in the Math/CS Library and is on the new books shelf for sign-ups. This
is the book that includes interviews with Don Knuth, Persi Diaconis, and
George Polya all of Stanford. Interviews of the following people are
also included:
Garrett Birkhoff, David Blackwell, Shing-shen Chern, John Horton Conway,
H. S. M. Coxeter, Paul Erdos, Martin Gardner, Ronald L. Graham, Paul R.Halmos,
Peter J. Hilton, John Kemeny, Morris Kline, Benoit Mandelbrot, Henry O.
Pollak, Mina Rees, Constance Reid, Herbert Robbins, Raymond Smullyan,
Olga Taussky-Todd, Albert W. Tucker, Stanislaw M. Ulam, and Reminiscences
of Solomon Lefschetz by Albert W. Tucker.
Harry Llull
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 85 09:08:24 est
From: Dennis Perzanowski <dennisp@nrl-aic>
Subject: NCARAI Seminar Series
CALL FOR PAPERS
The Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelli-
gence (NCARAI), a branch of the Naval Research Laboratory
located in Washington, D.C., sponsors a bimonthly seminar
series. Seminars are held on alternate Mondays throughout
the year (except summers). The seminars are intended to pro-
mote interaction among individuals from the military,
governmental, industrial and academic communities.
Topics span the various research areas and issues in Artifi-
cial Intelligence with special interests in:
*Expert Systems
*Knowledge Representation
*Learning
*Logic programs and automated reasoning
*Natural Language processing
*New generation architectures
Presentations last for approximately one hour, followed by a
fifteen-minute question-and-answer session. Speakers in-
vited from the academic community are provided with a per
diem and an honorarium.
Please send 3 copies of a 200-250 word abstract to:
Dennis Perzanowski
Navy Center for Applied Research
in Artificial Intelligence
Naval Research Laboratory -- Code 7510
Washington, DC 20375-5000
ARPANET address: DENNISP@NRL-AIC.ARPA
Telephone: (202) 767-2686 (AV) 297-2686
The committee will consider new and interesting work, as
well as promising work in progress.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 85 17:15:24 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Workshop - AI and Statistics
WORKSHOP ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND STATISTICS
April 10-12, 1985
AT&T Conference Center, Princeton, NJ
General Chair: William Gale
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Murray Hill, NJ
Annie G. Brooking The Analysis Phase in the Development of Knowledge-
Based Systems
Keith A. Butler Use of Psychometric Tools for Knowledge Acquisition:
James E. Corter A Case Study
Thomas Ellman Representation of Statistical Computation: Toward Expert
Systems with a Deeper Understanding of Statistics
Douglas Fisher Methods of Conceptual Clustering and their Relation to
Pat Langley Numerical Taxonomy
John Fox Decision Making and Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems
William B. Gale STUDENT Phase I - A report on Work in Progress
David J. Hand Patterns in Statistical Strategy
Stephen C. Hora Learning Rates in Supervised and Unsupervised Intelligent
Systems
Laveen N. Kanal Problem Solving Methods for Pattern Recognition
G. R. Dattratreya
R. Wayne Oldford Implementation and Study of Statistical Strategy
Stephen C. Peters
Robert I. Phelps Artificial Intelligence Approaches in Statistics
P. B. Musgrove
Darryl Pregibon A Do-It-Yourself Guide to Statistical Strategy
Steven Salzberg Pinpointing Good Hypotheses with Heuristics
D.J. Spiegelhalter A Statistical View of Uncertainty in Expert Systems
Ronald A. Thisted Representing Statistical Knowledge and Search Strategies
for Expert Data Analysis Systems
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Apr-85 0023 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #50
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Apr 85 00:23:29 PST
Date: Mon 22 Apr 1985 22:02-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #50
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 23 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 50
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Lost Messages,
Machine Translation - La Jolla,
Application - AI in Agriculture,
Seminars - Transformation of Functional Equations (MIT) &
Programming with Recurrent Equations (Penn) &
Representation, Aesthetics, Learnability (SU) &
The MIT Mobile Robot Project (Penn) &
ARLO: Representing Representation Language (MIT),
Humor - Representation Lunches & The Traveling President Problem
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 22 Apr 85 20:44:07-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Lost Messages
SRI-AI had a bad system crash Sunday morning; mail sent to AIList
or AIList-Request that morning may not have gotten through.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 19 APR 85 14:16-N
From: PETITP%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Machine translation at La Jolla
[In answer to request from goodhart@nosc AIList Digest v3 #46]
Hi!
The people you are looking for in La Jolla are probably working on
SYSTRAN, a commercial machine translation system. Here is their address:
P. Toma
WTC Inc
7854 Ivanohe Avenue
PO Box 907
La Jolla, Ca 92037
Tel: 619/459-3471
Other commercial systems I know of in the States are the Weidner System
and the ALPS system, both companies are located in Provo, Utah. (I could get
more for you if you are interested).
But none of those are proper research projects, and are based on
linguistically and computationnally "old" ideas. A more advanced project
is METAL, developed at the Linguistic Research Center, University of Texas,
in Austin. You can contact Rebecca Root (LRC.ROOT@UTEXAS.ARPA) to get more
information about it.
In Europe there are the SUSY project (Saarbruecken,Germany), and the GETA
project (Grenoble, France), and the EUROTRA project of the European Economic
Communities, to which many european universities collaborate. Here at ISSCO
in Geneva we are working on EUROTRA.
And of course there is many Japanese projects but I don't know much about
them.
A good introduction to machine translation is a paper by Jonathan Slocum,
presented at COLING-84 in Stanford: "Machine Translation: its History, Current
Status an Future Prospects". If you can't get a copy of the proceedings,
I think it was also published as a report by the LRC in Austin.
Last year ISSCO organised a tutorial on machine translation and a book will
be published by Edinburgh University Press.
Dominique Petitpierre (PETITP@CGEUGE51.BITNET)
ISSCO
54 route des acacias
CH-1227 GENEVA (Switzerland)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 08:23 EST
From: kyle.wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Friedland's request about AI in agriculture
Some years ago, Control Data Corp in Minneapolis had a New Business
Ventures Unit that included various software systems for the farmer and
Agribusiness industry. You might check with them to see what is going on
in that area with them now. Also at about that same time frame they got
on board a former SRI type who had background with SRI's early AI
efforts. I don't know if there was any connection between that person
and the farm stuff though.
Earle Kyle.
------------------------------
Date: Tue,16 Apr 85 16:16:24 EST
From: Robyn D. Spencer <TOOTSE@MIT-MC>
Subject: Seminar - Transformation of Functional Equations (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DATE: April 22, 1985
TIME: Lecture 3:30 p.m.
PLACE: NE43-3rd floor conference room
TRANSFORMATIONS of HIGHER-TYPE FUNCTIONAL EQUATIONS
VIA THE COMPUTATION OF RETRACTS
Richard Statman
Carnegie-Mellon University
Functional equations occur in diverse branches of logic and computer
science. In type theory with the axiom of choice, every formula is equivalent
to one which asserts that a functional equation has a solution with the given
parameters. In theorem proving, unification problems are simply functional
equations which one wants to solve in all models. In programming language
semantics, programming constructs, such as fixed point operators, are
represented as solutions to functional equations.
The general functional equation
Fx=Gx
where operators F,G have type A -> B can be transformed one with
operators of type C -> D while preserving all solutions, when there is a
surjective H of type C -> A and an injective J of type B -> D. The transformed
equation is
J(F(Hy))=J(G(Hy))
We shall show that this transformation can be carried out in every model if and
only if A is a retract of C and B is a retract of D in every model. There is a
retract from C onto A if and only if the equation
lambda z. y(xz) = I
is solvable for some y in C -> A and x in A -> C. This equation is solvable in
every model if and only if it is solvable in the term model of beta-eta
conversion. Thus transformations of the above type can always be carried out by
lambda terms. We shall give some further information about when this type of
transformation can be carried out including bounds on the size of A as a
function of the size of C. The decision problem (unification problem) is open.
HOST: Albert Meyer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 85 21:06 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Programming with Recurrent Equations (Penn)
PROGRAMMING WITH RECURRENT EQUATIONS
Boleslaw Szymanski (University Pennsylvania)
3:00pm April 23, 1985, 216 Moore School, Univ. of Pennsylvania
Software development tools proposed for new generation of computers are
based on assertive programming, where a program is expressed as a set of
assertions. There are two basic notations used in assertive programming:
Horn clauses of logic programming (e.g. PROLOG) and conditional equations
used in so called definitional or equational languages. Equational
languages are natural and convenient complements of PROLOG-like languages
for such applications as programming dataflow machines and modelling complex
systems.
This talk focuses on languages based on recurrent equations. Finite-
difference approximations to systems of partial difference equations lead to
such recurrence equations. Our experience indicates that such languages are
general purpose. Description of many algorithms is greatly simplified when
presented in such a form.
The talk presents new results of the MODEL project. Three MODEL language
processor components: Compiler, Configurator, and Timing System will be
discussed. The emphasis will be on the following problems: 1) optimization
of programs generated by the MODEL compiler, 2) programming parallel and/or
distributed computations with Configurator 3) use of temporal relations for
scheduling parallel components 4) distributed termination of a solution to
simultaneous equations, 5) real-time software development using Timing
System. Future research will also be outlined.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Apr 85 17:11:18-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Representation, Aesthetics, Learnability (SU)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, April 25, 1985
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall ``The Representational Basis for Everyday Aesthetic
Room G-19 Experience -- A Motivational Constraint on Learnable
Systems of Knowledge''
Tom Bever, Columbia University and CASBS
``The Representational Basis for Everyday Aesthetic Experience --
A Motivational Constraint on Learnable Systems of Knowledge''
The structure of everyday aesthetic judgements depends on computations
of mental representations and relations between representations.
Examination of objects of everyday aesthetic preference (e.g., simple
rhythms, shapes, and songs) affords a definition of the aesthetically
satisfying experience: such experiences involve the formation of
incompatible representations and their resolution within the framework
of an overarching representational system. The enjoyment of such
experiences follows from the extent to which they are like solving a
problem during normal cognitive development. Indigenous systems like
language must have formal properties that stimulate aesthetically
satisfying experiences as an immediate motivation for the acquisition of
abstract structures. That is, we learn a multi-levelled representational
structure for language because it is fun. --Tom Bever
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 85 14:59 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - The MIT Mobile Robot Project (Penn)
THE MIT AI LAB MOBILE ROBOT PROJECT - Rodney A. Brooks (MIT)
3pm April 25, 23 Moore School, Univ. of Pennsylvania
We are interested in a number of questions relating to intelligent
mobile robots. These include the following. (a) How to combine a
number of early vision modules into a robust vision system which can
operate under a wide range of conditions and a wide range of scenes
through redundancy of perceptions. (b) How to make reliable maps given
that all sensors produce error laden readings, and control of the robot
is also a source of error. (c) How to apply model-based vision
techniques to the landmark selection and recognition problems. (d) How
to make a robot control and planning system which is competent and
robust enough to allow an autonomous vehicle to operate for long
periods with absolutely no assistance from a human. In support of
these goals we are building a mobile robot which will operate
autonomously for a number of hours at a time within the Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory office area. Our approach to building the
robot and its controlling software differs from that used in many other
projects in a number of ways. (1) We model the world as three
dimensional rather than two. (2) We build no special environment for
our robot and insist that it must operate in the same real world that
we inhabit. (3) In order to adequatley deal with uncertainty of
perception and control we build relational maps rather than maps
embedded in a coordinate system, and we maintain explicit models of all
uncertainties. (4) We explicitly monitor the computational performance
of the components of the control system, in order to refine the design
of a real time control system for mobile robots based on a special
purpose distributed computation engine. (5) We use vision as our
primary sense and relegate acoustic senors to local obstacle detection.
(6) We use a new architecture for an intelligent system designed to
provide integration of many early vision processes, and robust
real-time performance even in cases of sensory overload, failure of
certain early vision processes to deliver much information in
particular situations, and computation module failure.
------------------------------
Date: 19 Apr 1985 15:57 EST (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - ARLO: Representing Representation Language (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
AI Revolving Seminar Ken Haase
ARLO: Representing Representation Languages
Tuesday, April 23; 4:00pm; 8th Floor Playroom
ARLO is a language for describing the implementation and functionality
of frame based representation languages. A given representation
language is specified in ARLO by a collection of structures describing
how its descriptions are interpreted, defaulted, and verified. This
high level description is compiled into lisp code and ARLO structures
whose interpretation fulfills the langauge's abstract specification.
The dependencies of this compilation process (from description to
implementation) are recorded by ARLO, so that changes in the
high-level description will propogate to the generated implementation.
In addition, ARLO itself --- as a representation language for
expressing and compiling partial and complete language specifications
--- is described and interpreted in the same manner as the languages
it describes and implements.
This talk will address general issues in the definition and
implementation of representation language languages, as well as the
technical problems in implementing self-descriptive systems. Finally,
I will discuss the use of ARLO-like languages as a basis for learning
and concept formation programs like Lenat's Eurisko.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 1985 13:18 EST (Thu)
From: Mike Gennert@MIT-OZ <MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Representation Lunches
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
COMPUTER AIDED CONCEPTUAL ART (CACA)
REVOLTING SEMINAR SERIES
presents
TACO: REPRESENTING REPRESENTATION LUNCHES
Mike Gennert
Mike Gerstenberger
TACO is a lunch for describing the implementation and functionality of
frame based representation lunches. A given representation lunch is
specified in TACO by a collection of fillings describing how its
descriptions are interpreted, defaulted, verified, and eaten. This
high level description is compiled into TACO shell code and TACO
fillings whose interpretation fulfills the langauge's nutritional
specification. The dependencies of this compilation process (from
description to implementation) are recorded by TACO, so that changes
in the high-level description will propogate to the generated
implementation. In addition, TACO itself --- as a representation
lunch for expressing and compiling partial and complete lunch
specifications --- is devoured and interpreted in the same manner as
the lunches it devoured and implements, i.e., with one's fingers.
This talk will address general issues in the definition and
implementation of representation lunch lunches, as well as the
technical problems in implementing self-devouring systems. Finally,
We will discuss the use of TACO-like lunches as a basis for learning
and concept formation programs like Automatic Hairstyle Generation:
The Further Adventures of Eurisko.
Friday, April 12, 12:00, 3rd Floor Lounge
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 85 17:26:10 est
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher at mit-htvax>
Subject: The Traveling President Problem
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
COMPUTER AIDED CONCEPTUAL ART (CACA)
REVOLTING SEMINAR SERIES
:-) (-:
THE TRAVELING PRESIDENT PROBLEM
Tod Malmedy
We present a new variation of the traveling salesman problem.
There are two differences. First, the links are free but the
nodes, representing memorials, have either small positive or
large negative weights, and the goal is to maximize this
weight. Second, unlike most problems, in which a solver is
allowed to exaustively search the space of combinations for an
optimal solution, in this variation the value of the final
solution is penalized by the number of combinations tested
before finding it. Under these conditions the L/D (Leave it
to Deaver) strategy can be proven to be the worst possible.
TIME: 12 Noon Friday
PLACE: 3rd Floor Theory Playroom
HOSTS: Bhaskar Ghudaroy and Mike Beckerle
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Apr-85 1159 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #51
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Apr 85 11:58:56 PST
Date: Mon 22 Apr 1985 22:36-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #51
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 23 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 51
Today's Topics:
Conferences - Theoretical Approaches to Natural Language Understanding &
Expert Systems In Engineering Applications &
Toronto Day at Wesleyan & SCCGL Linguistics &
Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge &
Animal Cognition & Approximate Reasoning & Joint AI Conference at GWU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 85 15:30 EST
From: Dave.Touretzky@CMU-CS-A.ARPA
Subject: Workshop - Theoretical Approaches to Natural Language Understanding
Theoretical Approaches to Natural Language Understanding
A workshop sponsored by the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of
Intelligence (CSCSI) / Societe canadienne pour l'etude de l'intelligence par
ordinateur (SCEIO), in conjunction with Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, and Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.
To be held: 28-30 May, 1985, in Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Abstract: Theoretical Approaches to Natural Language Understanding is
intended to bring together active researchers in Computational Linguistics,
Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science to
dsicuss/hear invited talks, papers, and positions relating to some of the
``hot'' issues regarding the current state of natural language
understanding. Three topics will form the focus for discussion; the topics
include aspects of GRAMMARS, aspects of SEMANTICS/PRAGMATICS, and KNOWLEDGE
REPRESENTATION. Each of these topics will consider current methodologies:
for grammars - theoretical devlopments, especially generalized phrase
structure grammars and logic-based meta-grammars; for semantics - situation
semantics and Montague semantics; for knowledge representation - logical
systems (temporal logics, etc.) and special purpose inference systems.
Invited speakers: Harvey Abrahamson (UBC), Robin Cooper (U.Wisc), Dan
Flickinger (HP), Pat Hayes (U.Rochester), Don Hindle (Bell Labs), Lynette
Hirshman (SDC), Ron Kaplan (Xerox PARC), Mitch Marcus (Bell Labs), Bill
Mark (Savoir), Eric Mays (IBM), Fernando Pereira (SRI), Stan Peters (CSLI),
Stan Rosenschein (SRI), Paul Sabatier (Rue des Mariniers, Paris), Patrick
Saint Dizier (IRISA), Candy Sidner (BBN), Norm Sondheimer (UCS-ISI), David
Scott Warren (SUNY Stony Brook), Dave Touretzky (CMU), and William Woods
(Applied Expert Systems).
General Chairperson: Richard Rosenberg, Dalhousie University
Program Chairperson: Nick Cercone, Simon Fraser University
Local Arrangements: Jan Mulder, Dalhousie University
Schedule:
Grammar Day: Tuesday, 28 May; organized by Len Schubert and Veronica Dahl
Semantics Day: Wednesday, 29 May; organized by Graeme Hirst and David Israel
Knowledge Representation Day: Thursday, 30 May; organized by Ralph
Weischedel and James Allen
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 85 15:30:09 EST
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Conference - Expert Systems In Engineering Applications
We are actively seeking quality papers for the Expert Systems in
Government Conference in Washington DC this fall. I am head
of the session on engineering applications and having a difficult time
finding many applications. If you are doing work in this area and would
like to meet others doing similar work, submit a paper to:
Dr. Kamal Karna, Mitre Corporation
1820 Dolley Madison Boulevard
McLean VA 22102
The deadline is May 1 - if you need any further information you can
contact me at maher@cmu-ri-cive
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 85 16:38:23 EST
From: Neil Immerman <Immerman@YALE.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Toronto Day at Wesleyan
announcing . . . . . TORONTO DAY AT WESLEYAN
Saturday May 4
Talks and discussions led by a contingent of computer scientists
from the University of Toronto.
9:30 am Steve Cook
A Taxonomy of Problems with Fast Parallel Algorihms
11:00am Mike Luby
A Simple Parallel Algorithm for the Maximal Independent Set Problem
2:00 pm Allan Borodin
Parallel Algebraic Complexity
3:30 pm Charles Rackoff
Some Definitions and Issues in the Theory of Cryptography
On Friday, May 3, Steve Cook will give a talk at 4 P.M. in
150 Science Center intended for a general audience: Can Computers
Routinely Discover Mathematical Proofs? [...]
Toronto Day is hosted by Alan Cobham, Dan Dougherty, Sorin Istrail,
Susan Landau, and Carol Wood, and is funded in part by The Sloan
Foundation, Proctor and Gamble Co., and the Wesleyan University Department
of Mathematics.
For further information contact the Wesleyan Mathematics
Department at (203)347-9411 Ext.2398 or Carol Wood at Ext.2648
(Bitnet address WOODatWESLYN).
------------------------------
Date: 13 April 1985 1527-PST (Saturday)
From: li51x%sdcc3@SDCSVAX.ARPA
Subject: Conference - SCCGL Linguistics
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE ON GENERAL LINGUISTICS (SCCGL)
University of California, San Diego
SCHEDULE
We have scheduled all papers to be presented in
the Third College Lecture Halls, Room 104 (TLH 104).
Saturday, 20 April, morning:
9:30 Nora Gonzalez, UCSD, "Starter 2s and Object to Subject Raising in
Spanish"
10:00 Ik-Hwan Lee, Yonsei U/Harvard U, "Multiple WH questions in GPSG"
10:30 Geraldine Legendre, UCSD, "Multiattachment Constraints on OSR in French"
11:00 Robert Chametzky and John Richardson, UChicago, "Taking Strings
Seriously: Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Lasnik &
Kupin (1977)"
11:30 Yoshihisa Kitagawa, UMass, "Small But Clausal"
Saturday, 20 April, afternoon:
1:30 J. Albert Bickford, UCSD and SIL, "Another Look at Tone in Pen~oles
Mixtec"
2:00 Monica Macaulay, UCBerkeley, "Cliticization and the Morphosyntax of
Mixtec"
2:30 Robert Vago, Queens College & the Graduate Center, CUNY, "Finnish Word
Games: Implications for the Autosegmental Treatment of Vowel Harmony."
3:00 William Davies, Cornell, "Nominative Nonsubjects in Choctaw"
4:00 Gerald P. Delahunty, SDSU, "On an Apparent Violation of the Discourse
Conditions for Using English It-Clefts"
4:30 Gary Gilligan and Chris Hall, USC, "Processing Constraints on
Morphological Structure"
5:00 David Corina, Salk Institute, "Linguistic Mapping Strategies of Deaf
Signers"
5:30 German Westphal, UMaryland, Baltimore County, "On Some Consequences
of the Verb-Initial Hypothesis in Spanish"
Saturday evening-BUFFET SUPPER AND PARTY!
Fifth floor patio in the Psychology and Linguistics Building (P&L).
Sunday, 21 April, morning:
9:30 Robert Chametzky, UChicago, "Anaphoric Dependencies and Coordinate
Structures"
10:00 Sungshim Hong, UConn, "A Constraint on Pronominal Binding in
Null-Subject Languages"
10:30 Donna Gerdts, SUNY-Buffalo, "Korean Passive Causatives and Their
Implications"
11:00 Peter Sells, CSLI, Stanford, "The Interpretation of Non Restrictive
Relative Clauses"
11:30 David Dowty, CASBS, Stanford, and William Ladusaw, UCSC, "Toward a
Formal Semantic Account of Thematic Roles"
==============================================================
Further information: (619) 452-2523 or SCCGL UCSD Linguistics
or sdcsvax!sdcc6!ix212 C-008
La Jolla, CA 92093
Registration is $5 for students and $7 for non-students.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 85 19:24:07 PST
From: Joe Halpern <halpern%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
CONFERENCE ON THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF REASONING ABOUT KNOWLEDGE:
FIRST CALL FOR PAPERS
A conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
will be held Mar. 19-22, 1986, at the Asilomar Conference Center in
Monterey. While traditionally research in this area was mainly done by
philosophers, recently it has been shown to be of great
relevance to computer science, especially in such areas as artificial
intelligence, distributed systems, database systems,
and cryptography. There has also been interest in the area among
linguists and economists. The aim
of this conference is to bring together
researchers from these various disciplines
with the intent of furthering our theoretical understanding of
reasoning about knowledge.
Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
* Semantic models for knowledge and belief
* Resource-bounded knowledge (appropriate for modelling reasoners with
limited reasoning power and reasoning about cryptographic protocols)
* Using knowledge to specify and reason about distributed systems
* Semantic models of knowledge acquisition and learning
* Nonmonotonic reasoning
Please send 8 copies of a detailed abstract
not exceeding 10 double-spaced typewritten pages in length
(not a full paper),
by September 15, 1985, to the program chair:
Dr. J. Halpern
IBM Research, K51/281
5600 Cottle Rd.
San Jose, CA 95193
The abstract should include a clear description of the problem being
addressed, comparisons with extant work, and a section on major
original contributions of this work. The abstract must provide
sufficient detail for the program committee to make a decision.
Papers will be chosen on the basis of scientific merit, originality,
and appropriateness for this conference.
Authors will be notified of acceptance by Nov. 1, 1985. Accepted
papers typed on special pages will be due at the above address
by Dec. 15, 1985.
The program committee members are:
M. Fischer, Yale
J. Halpern, IBM San Jose
H. Levesque, University of Toronto
R. Moore, SRI
R. Parikh, CUNY/Brooklyn College
R. Stalnaker, Cornell
R. Thomason, Pittsburg
M. Vardi, Stanford/CSLI
We hope to allow enough time between the talks during the conference
for private discussions and small group meetings. In order to
ensure that the conference remains relatively small, attendance will
be limited to invited participants and
authors of accepted papers.
Support for the conference has been received from IBM and AAAI;
an application for further support is pending at ONR.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 85 07:32:48 EST
From: Michael Sims <MSIMS@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Symposium - Animal Cognition [and AI?]
Symposium
The Question of Animal Cognition
May 1-2, 1985
Wednesday, May 1:
9:00 am Dr. Donald Griffin "Animal Consciousness"
Rochefeller University
10:30 am Dr. Robert Epstein "Animal Cognition as the
Harvard University Praxis Views it"
1:30 pm Dr. E. Sue Savage-Rumbaugh "Language Acquisition and
Emory University Cognition in the Chimpanzee"
3:30 pm Dr. Louis Herman "Episodic Memory for Semantic
University of Hawaii Information by Dolphins"
Thursday, May 2:
9:00 am Dr. Gordon Gallup "Do Minds Exists in Species
SUNY at Albany Other Than our Own?"
10:30 am Dr. Herbert Terrace "Towards an Evolutionary
Columbia University Perspective on Thinking"
1:30 pm Round Table Discussion Chaired
by Dr. Michael D'Amato
For further information and registration contact Ms. Mary Wilk,
Dept. of Psychology, Psychology Building, Busch Campus, Rutgers Univ.
New Brunswick, NJ 08903 (201) 932-2553.
[The three speakers that I'm familiar with, Griffin, Savage-Rumbaugh,
and Terrace, are outstanding researchers in their field and represent
a diversity of opinions on animal cognition. Let me briefly say why I
think this work is important for AI. In AI we are trying to model the
processes of 'thinking', and it seems foolish to ignore the examples
of thinking which are available to us. Although AI has gotten a good
bit of feedback from investigations into human cognition (Cognitive
Science), we have been little influenced by the animal cognition
research of ethologists or animal behaviorist. Our Species-ism would
tell us that human cognition is too complicated or mystical to be
useful to AI (Dreyfus et al), and that animal cognition is too
primitive to be useful. But is that true? -MHS]
------------------------------
Date: 12 Apr 85 14:39:05 EST
From: Ruth.Davis@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Conference - Approximate Reasoning
1985 North American Fuzzy Information processing Society
WORKSHOP ON APPROXIMATE REASONING THEORY & APPLICATIONS
Atlanta, Georgia
October 24 - 25
Workshop Coordinators: THOMAS WHALEN & BRIAN SCHOTT
Papers are invited in all areas of fuzzy expert systems & decision support
including but not limited to:
- Fuzzy knowledge acquisition, representation & refining
- Applied fuzzy logic & Fuzzy inference processes
- Approximate & common sense reasoning
- Linguistic processing & the human-system interface
- Management of imprecision & uncertainty
- Implementation issues & case studies
Send abstract or session proposal by AUGUST 1 '85 to:
Thomas Whalen/Brian Schott, NAFIPS '85
Decision Sciences Department
Georgia State University
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 - 3083
(404) 658-4000
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 15:37:44 EST
From: Bill Dean <dean@seismo.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Joint AI Conference at GWU
Call for Papers
MAJOR CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
An INTERSOCIETY CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELIGENCE
APPLICATIONS will be held at the George Washington
University on October 21-23, 1985. The conference is
jointly sponsored by:
* IEEE's Engineering Management Society (EMS)
* IEEE's Systems, Man and Cybernetics Society (SMC)
* GWU's Institute for Artificial Intelligence
* TIMS' College on Artificial Intelligence
* ORSA's Military Applications Section (MAS)
* The Washington Area Working Group on Artificial
Intelligence.
Sessions at the symposium will cover: AI in research and
development; AI in design and development; AI in test and
evaluation; AI in project management; AI in production
management; AI in military systems; and AI in technology
insertion. Plenary addresses will present views of the
status and significance of AI research from industrial and
government perspectives.
Special issues of the IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management and the IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics are planned as products of the symposium.
To submit a paper for presentation at the symposium, send a
500 word abstract, by June 30, 1985 to:
Dr. Barry G. Silverman
Institute for Artificial Intelligence
Gelman Library - Room 636A
George Washington University
Washington, D. C. 20052
phone: 202-676-6443
Complete papers will be due by September 15, 1985.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Apr-85 0259 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #52
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Apr 85 02:50:44 PST
Date: Mon 22 Apr 1985 22:46-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #52
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 23 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 52
Today's Topics:
Conferences - AI at the North Texas CS Conference &
Program, Society for Philosophy and Psychology &
Abstracts, Society for Philosophy and Psychology
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Apr 1985 09:59-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI at the North Texas CS Conference
The Federation of North Texas Area Universities Ninth Annual
Computer Science Conference, Friday April 26 1985 North Texas State
University Denton, Texas
3:25 K. N. Cooper T. M. Sparr
Knowledge Base Systems Architecture Reviewed
3:50 Susan Rulon
An Introduction to PROgramming LOGic
------------------------------
From: Graeme Hirst <gh@utai>
Subject: Conference - Program, Soc for Phil and Psych AI Sessions
PROGRAM FOR THE
MEETING OF SOCIETY FOR PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY
University of Toronto
Wednesday May 15 - Saturday May 18, 1985
For information about the program [note that there may still be
room for some discussants or speakers], the usenet address for
the Program Chairman, Stevan Harnad, is:
bellcore!princeton!mind!srh
or write to: Stevan Harnad, Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 20 Nas-
sau Street, Suite 240, Princeton NJ 08540
For information about local arrangements, write to: David Olson,
McLuhan Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA, M5S 1A1
For information about the Society and attendance, write to: Owen
Flanagan, Secretary/Treasurer, Society for Philosophy & Psycholo-
gy, Philosophy Department, Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA 02181
Program follows [participant lists are in several cases only par-
tial; other contributors will also be on the program]:
Workshop (2 full sessions):
Ia & Ib. Artificial Intelligence Versus Neural Modeling in
Psychological Theory: D. Ballard, P. Churchland, P.C. Dodwell,
J. Feldman, A. Goldman, S. Grossberg, S.J. Hanson, A. Newell, R.
Schank.
Symposia (11):
II. Category Formation: S. Harnad, M. Lipton, R. Jackendoff, N.
Macmillan, R. Millikan, R. Schank.
III. Unconscious Processing: T. Carr, P. Kolers, A. Marcel, P. Merikle,
W. Savage, A. Treisman.
IV. Memory and Consciousness: K. Bowers, M. Moscovitch, D. Schacter, A.
Marcel, R. Lockhart, E. Tulving.
V. New Directions in Evolutionary Theory: E. Balon, O. Flanagan,
A. Rosenberg, M. Ruse, E. Sober, W. Shields.
VI. Paradoxical Neurological Syndromes: M. Gazzaniga, A. Kertesz, A. Marcel,
O.Sacks.
VII. The Empirical Status of Psychoanalytic Theory: M. Eagle, E. Erwin,
A. Grunbaum, J. Masling, B. von Eckardt, R. Woolfolk.
VIII. The Scientific Status of Parapsychological Research: J. Alcock,
K. Emmett, R. Hyman, C. Honorton, R.L. Morris, M. Truzzi.
IX. The Reality of the "G" (General) Factor in the Measurement
and Modeling of Intelligence: D. Detterman, P. Hertzberg, A. Jensen, W.
Rozeboom.
X. The Ascription of Knowledge States to Children: Seeing,
Believing and Knowing: D. Olson & J. Astington, J. Perner & H.
Wimmer, M. Taylor & J. Flavell, F. Dretske, S. Kuczaj.
XI. Psychology, Pictures and Drawing: J. Caron-Prague, S. Dennis,
J. Kennedy, D. Pariser, S. Wilcox, J. Willats, S. Brison
XII. Interpretation Versus Explanation in Cognitive and Social
Theory: R. DeSousa, A. Grunbaum, S. Harnad, R. Nicholoson,
A. Rosenberg, E. Sullivan, R. Woolfolk.
Contributed Paper Sessions (4):
XIII. Perception and Cognition
To What Extent Do Beliefs Affect Apparent Motion (M. Dawson, R.
Wright) (discussant: P. Kolers)
Images, Pictures and Percepts (D. Reisberg, D. Chambers) (discus-
sant: W. Savage)
What the First Words Tell Us About Meaning and Cognition (A. Gop-
nik)
XIV. Induction and Information
Beyond Holism: Induction in the Context of Problem-Solving (P.
Thagard, K. Holyoak) (discussant: C.F. Schmidt)
The Semantic of Pragmatics (M.A. Gluck, J.E. Corter) (discussant:
D. H. Helman)
About Promises (J. Astington)
XV. Evolution of Cognitive and Social Structures
Is Decision Theory Reducible to Evolutionary Biology? (W.E. Coop-
er)
Human Nature, Love and Morality: The Possibility of Altruism (L.
Thomas)
On How to Get Rid of the Craftsman (B. Dahlbom)
XVI. Inferences About the Mind (chairman: J. Poland)
The Puzzle of Split-Brain Phenomena (S.C. Bringsjord) (discus-
sant: R. Puccetti)
The Mark of the Mental (R. Puccetti) discussant: L. Alanen
Natural Teleology (S. Silvers)
PROVISIONAL TIMETABLE
Wed am: VII vs. XIII (parallel sessions)
Wed pm: III vs. XIV
Wed eve: VI
Thurs am: II
Thurs pm: Ia
Thurs eve: Ib
Fri am: IV vs. XVI
Fri pm: II vs XV
Fri eve: (presidential address and business meeting)
Sat am: V vs. XI
Sat pm: VIII vs X
Sat eve: XII
------------------------------
From: Graeme Hirst <gh@utai>
Subject: Conference - Abstracts, Soc for Phil and Psych AI Sessions
SYMPOSIUM ABSTRACTS FOR THE
MEETING OF SOCIETY FOR PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY
University of Toronto
Wednesday May 15 - Saturday May 18, 1985
I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE VERSUS NEURAL MODELING IN PSYCHOLOGI-
CAL THEORY
The issues will be discussed at two levels, a practical one (P)
and a foundational one (F). At the practical level the following
two questions will be considered: (P1) Is psychological theory-
building more successful with or without constraints from neuros-
cientific evidence and neuroscientific considerations? (P2) Are
the current differences between models that are neurally motivat-
ed (which tend to be statistical, connectionistic, and lately,
parallel) and models that are not neurally motivated (which tend
to be symbol/sentence manipulative) fundamental differences, and
is one approach more promising than the other?
At the foundational level the questions will be: (F1) What are
the data that psychological theory should account for (behavioral
performance? cognitive competence? real-time topography and exe-
cution? neural activity?)? (F2) Is a successful functional theory
of higher cognitive performance and competence necessarily
"implementation-independent" (i.e., independent of the architec-
ture of the mechanism that embodies it)? The issues will be dis-
cussed in the context of actual current work in modeling.
II. CATEGORY FORMATION
Categorization is a fundamental human activity. It is involved in
everything from operant discrimination to perceptual recognition
to naming to describing. Five different approaches to categori-
zation now exist more or less in parallel: (1) The nativist ap-
proach, which holds that there are few, if any, nontrivial induc-
tive categories, and hence that most categories are preformed
[see Symposium V]; (2) the statistical pattern recognition and
multidimensional scaling approach, which computer-models category
formation probabilistically; (3) the artificial intelligence ap-
proach, which models categorization with symbol-manipulation
rules; (4) the natural category approach, which investigates
categorization through reaction time studies and typicality judg-
ments and developmentally; (5) the categorical perception ap-
proach, which investigates categorization through discrimination
and identification studies. These approaches will be presented
and the interaction will aim at a synthesis.
III. UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSING
It is undeniable that most cerebral information processing is un-
conscious. Not only are vegetative functions such as posture and
respiration (as well as automatized, overlearned skills) uncons-
ciously controlled by the brain, but even the basic processes
underlying higher cognitive activity are unavailable to conscious
introspection: No one knows "how" he actually adds two and two,
retrieves a name, recognizes a face. This is what makes cognitive
modeling a nontrivial enterprise. But apart from these basic cog-
nitive processes (about which our ignorance is sufficient to
demonstrate that that they are not conscious), there are some
kinds of processes that are at least normally accompanied by some
awareness of their occurrence. These include the detection,
discrimination and identification of verbal and perceptual in-
puts. New data indicate that even these activities may sometimes
occur without introspective awareness of their occurrence. This
new look at "subliminal perception" and related phenomena in a
contemporary psychophysical, information processing framework
will examine the evidence, methodological criteria and theoreti-
cal interpretations of the newer findings. [See also Symposium
VI.)
IV. MEMORY AND CONSCIOUSNESS
The symposium will examine the distinction between memory (the
consequence of some experience) and remembering (the awareness of
past events), which involves consciousness of a past experience.
The distinction involves the relation between mental processes
that reasonably decribe the performance of intelligent systems
(whether animals, people or machines), that is, "subpersonal"
cognitive psychology, and the intentional mental activities and
states of conscious human adults: "intentional psychology."
V. NEW DIRECTIONS IN EVOLUTIONARY THEORY
Among the current developments in evolutionary theory and their
implications for psychology that will be discussed are: (1) The
"new preformationism," arising chiefly from develomental biology,
according to which there are substantial structural constraints
on the variation on which selection can operate; this implies
that there are structures and functions that cannot be regarded
as having been shaped by random variation and selection by conse-
quences but rather as having arisen from boundary conditions on
biological structures. The issue is particularlly relevant to
questions about the origins of cognitive and linguistic struc-
tures [Symposium II]. (2) Current sociobiological theory has be-
come concerned with cognitive questions, in particular, the ex-
istence of "cognitive primitives" on which selection would
operate in a way that is analogous to its effects on traits coded
by genes: Is this "gene-culture co-evolution" and its new unit,
the "culturgen" just overinclusive curve-fitting or is there a
real empirical phenomenon here? (3) In general, are the kinds of
assumptions and inclusive-fitness calculations that characterize
sociobiological theorizing (and that have been critically re-
ferred to as "just-so stories") a reasonable explanatory handicap
or signs of taking the wrong theoretical direction? In particu-
lar, when is a conscious, cognitive explanation of a behavior
[Symposium III] preferable to an unconscious, fitness-related
one?
VI. PARADOXICAL NEUROLOLOGICAL STATES
This symposium will consider neurological states that (based on
their symptoms and inferences from their symptoms) are very hard
to imagine "being in." These include: (1) "blindsight," i.e., the
loss of all conscious visual experience, but with the retention
of "visual" information (e.g., object location); (2) the anosag-
nosias and attentional disorders, i.e., the apparent unawareness
and denial of dramatic neurological deficits such as loss of
large portions of the visual field or of body sensation; (3)
deconnection phenomena such as alexia without agraphia (intact
vision with the loss of all ability to read but the retention of
the ability to write) or the split-brain patient's ability to
match but inability to name out-of-sight objects grasped with the
left hand; (4) various memory disorders such as the ability to
acquire cognitive information and skills with complete inability
to remember the episodes in which they were acquired [cf. Sympo-
sium IV]; (5) confabulations arising from these paradoxical
states (i.e., the unusual way patients rationalize having these
deficits). The clinical phenomenology of these paradoxical states
will be decsribed and then they will be discussed in terms of
current philosophical, psychological and neurological theories of
cognition and consciousness.
VII. THE EMPIRICAL STATUS OF PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY
The empirical status of psychoanalytic theory will be considered
in terms of the following questions: (1) Is psychoanalytic theory
testable? (2) If so, how much of it is testable, and, in particu-
lar, what parts? (3) How is it testable (clinically? experimen-
tally? epidemiologically?)? (4) How much of psychoanalytic theory
has actually been tested in these ways, and was the theory sup-
ported by the evidence? (5) Are future tests of psychoanalytic
theory likely to yield outcomes that support the theory, and is
this theory the best one to use to guide future research? (6) Is
the proportion of psychoanalytic theory that is testable compar-
able to the proportions of other scientific theories that are te-
stable, or is evidence disproportionately remote from or ir-
relevant to psychoanalytic theory? (7) Is testability irrelevant
to some kinds of theoretical understanding? (8) Is psychoanalytic
theory based on adequate views of conscious and unconscious
processes and explanation? These questions will be discussed by
clinicians, experimentalists and methodologists of science.
VIII. THE SCIENTIFIC STATUS OF PARAPSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH
In parapsychology there appears to be a chronic polarization of
rival views in a way that only occurs occasionally and briefly at
the frontiers of other kinds of scientific research. The polari-
zation consists of those who accept the validity of the reported
phenomena and of the theoretical framework accounting for them
and those who do not. The following questions will be considered:
(1) Is the polarization merely a prejudice, or are there objec-
tive characteristics that set this field of research apart? (2)
Are there special problems with furnishing replicable positive
evidence in this area? (3) Are there logical problems with the
theoretical framework in which the research is undertaken? (4)
Are there statistical problems with the data-analysis and the
underlying assumptions? (5) Is there any possibility of resolu-
tion, or will the field always continue to split among believers
and nonbelievers, and if the latter, (6) what does that imply
about the scientific validity of this domain of inquiry? These
questions will be discussed, in the context of representative
current experimental work in parapsychological research, by
parapsychologists, skeptics and (as yet) uncommitted methodolo-
gists.
IX. THE REALITY OF THE "G" (GENERAL) FACTOR IN THE MEASUREMENT
AND MODELING OF INTELLIGENCE
When intelligence tests are factor-analyzed (i.e., the structure
of their correlations with one another is reduced to a small
number of underlying variables), one general, overall factor al-
ways emerges, along with a number of special factors peculiar to
some groups of tests and not others. The general ("g") factor has
been interpreted as a unitary measure of general intelligence.
Some have challenged the reality of "g" on the grounds that indi-
vidual test items (and indeed entire tests) are so constructed as
to correlate with one another, and hence the overall positive
correlation factor is built in; moreover, it is argued that it is
fallacious to think in terms of an underlying, one-dimensional
unitary intelligence. Others have argued that "g" is an empirical
finding after all, because even tests constructed and validated
to measure the special abilities (e.g., verbal versus spatial
skills) have high "g" loadings, and indeed the more discriminat-
ing tests (the ones that are more sensitive to and predictive of
individual differences) tend to have the higher "g" loadings. The
technical and conceptual problems of measuring, validating and
modeling human cognitive capacities will be discussed in the con-
text of the interpretation of "g."
X. THE ASCRIPTION OF KNOWLEDGE STATES TO CHILDREN: SEEING,
BELIEVING AND KNOWING
Considerable discussion in cognitive science surrounds the issue
of the ascription of beliefs to animals, machines and young chil-
dren. Opinions range from that of Davidson, who argues that one
cannot have beliefs unless one has a concept of belief, to that
of Searle, who argues that "only someone in the grip of a philo-
sophical theory would deny that dogs and children have beliefs."
Recent research on children's ascription of beliefs to others and
to themselves in the interpretation of visual events may cast
some light on this question.
XI. PSYCHOLOGY, PICTURES AND DRAWING
The past decade has seen considerable interest in theory of dep-
iction and allied theories of drawing. Current theories are
technically well constructed, significant in themselves and, in
addition, have important implications for neighboring areas of
psychology. Yet they are often distinct in the assumptions they
make about perception, communication and the environment. The
present symposium draws together philosophers, educators and
psychologists who have developed theories about pictures, percep-
tion and drawing. Assumptions will be reviewed and implications
will be discussed.
XII. INTERPRETATION VERSUS EXPLANATION IN COGNITIVE AND SOCIAL
THEORY
The following questions will be considered: (1) What is an expla-
nation, and is "scientific" explanation an atypical case or a
paradigmatic one? (2) What is the role of testability and falsi-
fiability in explanation? (3) What is the role of considerations
of satisfyingness, coherence, elegance and other subjective cri-
teria in explanation? (4) Are there different explanatory metho-
dologies in the natural sciences and ther "human" sciences? (5)
Is there an objective way to choose among rival interpretations?
(Should there be? Is there one in the case of rival scientific
theories?) (6) Is there anything objective to replace the outmod-
ed "positivistic" stereotype? Pro and antihermeneuticists will
participate and the discussion will focus on the role of in-
terpretation in psychological and social scientific theory.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂25-Apr-85 0236 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #53
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Apr 85 02:36:29 PST
Date: Thu 25 Apr 1985 00:33-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #53
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 25 Apr 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 53
Today's Topics:
Request - MRS Information,
Applications - Architecture & Agricultural AI,
Psychology - Emotional Attachment & Semantics of Humor,
Philosophy - Knowledge, Information, and Belief &
Knowledge as an Obstacle to Learning,
Application & Humor - BBoard Contest,
Seminars - Bertrand Constraint Language (SRI) &
Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Apr 85 15:52:40 PST (Tue)
From: whiting@sri-spam
Subject: Request for additional information on MRS
I am looking at making some extensions/improvements to MRS.
The following are being investigated:
- Adding a better user-interface
- Improving efficiency
- Adding debugging aids
- Extending the system to deal with uncertainty elegantly
I have all the HPP reports on MRS, I am looking for additional information.
If you have worked with the system or know of articles which might be
useful to me, I would very much appreciate hearing from you.
Thanx in Advance,
Kevin Whiting
(415) 859-4099
------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 1985 1119-EST
From: Benoit Flamant <FLAMANT@CMU-CS-PS2.ARPA>
Reply-to: FLAMANT@CMU-CS-PS2.ARPA
Subject: Expert Systems in Architecture
I am looking for information about experts systems in the domain of
architecture.
Does anyone know of good articles or books published recently, understandable
by people without deep knowledge in AI ?
Please reply to flamant@cmu-cs-ps2. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 20 Apr 85 17:42:22-PST
From: LOUROBINSON@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Agricultural AI
In response to Peter Friedland's inquiry regarding agricultural
AI systems:
The Imperial Chemical Industries of Great Britain recently
entered into an agreement with a British expert systems company,
ISIS Systems, to develop tools that will assist farmers. One of
these tools is a system called Counselor intended to help farmers
analyze crop diseases. The advisory service calculates the probable
incidence of disease based on data provided by the user. "Wheat
Counselor" can be used to determine probable wheat infestations and
appropriate (chemical) treatment.
Lou Robinson
The AI Report
------------------------------
Date: 20 Apr 85 17:16 EST (Sat)
From: ←Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Midnight Theorizer
From: BATALI%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
From: MINSKY
Perhaps this, too, explains the prolonged, mourning-like
depression that follows sexual or other forms of personal
assault. No matter that the unwelcome intimacy of violence
may be brief; it nonetheless affects one's attachment
machinery, however much against one's wish.
So the suggestion is that the rape-victim feels bad because she has
formed an attachment-bond to her attacker? The same "mechanism" is
involved as in the formation of her attachment-bonds to other people?
That is precisely the suggestion.
So she feels bad not because she has been raped, but because her
rapist has then left her? Is there a shred of evidence that any rape
victim has ever felt this way?
No, perhaps the victim feels bad because of
a. The terrible invasion of the sexual assault itself,
b. The cognitive dissonance when the attachment machinery begins
to operate in these terribly inappropriate circumstances.
I suspect that many people would agree there is more than a shred of
evidence for similar emotive patterns. The syndrome in which
hostages identify with their captors, despite violence (and in the
case of Patty Hearst, rape) comes to mind.
Is this theory somehow suggesting that
there really isn't much of a difference between rape and seduction and
falling in love?
Perhaps not, in some ways.
Is it being assumed that fear, pain and loss of
self-esteem is not enough to "explain the prolonged depression" that
follows sexual assault?
No, rather it seems to be examining the internal dynamics of "loss of
self-esteem."
I have some doubts about that part of AI which asserts the validity
of scientific inquiry that gathers "data" by introspection. But I
have even greater doubts about moral indignation as a criterion for
rejection of hypotheses (or of humor, for that matter).
←B
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 85 11:51 EST
From: Brant Cheikes <Brant%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Book on semantics of humor
Since there was some recent mention on studies of humor, I thought
I'd mention a book I just started reading on that very topic:
"Semantic Mechanisms of Humor"
Raskin, Victor
D. Reidel Publishing Company
Dordrecht, Holland, 1985.
Raskin attempts to develop a semantic theory that captures the
necessary and sufficient conditions for a text to be considered
funny by the "native speaker." The book is full of examples,
however, in the preface, Raskin insists that the book is not a
joke book, rather, that all joke examples were chosen purely for
their illustrative value. So if you want to know what's funny
and what's not and why, then read this book.
Brant
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 11:04:49 EST
From: Morton A Hirschberg <mort@BRL-BMD.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Jeff Peck
Jeff's got a good start on the data, information, knowledge hierarchy (you see
it here as you read from left to right, think from bottom to top). Data is all
around us and can exist without context. Information is derived from data in a
particular context with or without the aid of data, information, and knowledge
from other contexts. From information we can derive secondary data. Think of
the two triplets of numbers representing the coordinates of two points in three
space. Each by itself is meaningless however, assuming that the triplets are
not identical, one can derive the equation of a line in space. From that
equation, one can then derive as many new triplets as one desires (some may
actually be useful). Knowledge can be derived from information, that is it is
the synthesis of information (usually thought of in particular contexts).
Thinking about the hierarchy in this way has been quite useful in dealing
with and teaching data basing. We also see that data which can not be
manipulated to form information remains data. The listing of names, street
numbers and telephone numbers in a telephone book is really data and those
books should be called data books and not information books. There are ways
of manipulating those data (I don't work for Ma Bell) to derive information
(Ma Bell sells those books to businesses) but that is another story.
Mort
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 10:36:39 EST
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: definition of knowledge/information/data
Alright, my philosophical feathers have been ruffled...
"True justified belief" is *not* a special case of "things that are
useful in making good decisions".
1. While it probably is true as a matter of empirical fact that true
beliefs are likely to be more useful for making decisions than
are false ones (in most cases), this is certainly not true by
definition.
2. One quick counter-example: Suppose you were in a prisoner-of-war
camp. You might have a false, unjustified belief that you would
soon be rescued. This irrational hope might in fact have greater
survival value (= lead to better decisions on how to act) than a
more realistic outlook - but the utility of the belief hardly
makes it true, in the any normal English sense of the word.
3. Anyway, the emphasis of the "true justified belief" concept is on
"justified" - ie defining knowledge as a true belief rationally
arrived at, rather than as a lucky guess. There are problems with
this defintion, to be sure, in particular, distinguishing between
subjective justification (I believe X, based on the evidence given
to me so far), vs objective (but in fact part of that evidence consists
of lies, undetected by you).
A typical case discussed is: suppose Mr. X wrongly believes that P,
and, wanting to deceive you, tells you that not-P is the case (which
in fact it is). You then, believing him, have a true belief that
not-P is so. But is it justified? Subjectively, yes, because you
are acting rationally - but in fact you're relying on a method
(Mr. X) which is unreliable - if P really were the case, this method
would not lead you to believe P - so your source of belief is not
related to its object in such a way that it would reliably track that
object in other "nearby" possible worlds.
Robert Nozick in "Philosophical Questions" has a very
well-written insightful discussion on all this.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 85 11:24:58 pst
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@Navajo>
Subject: Knowledge as an obstacle
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
This morning I overhead "I just don't understand Karl Marx" as I biked
past two students. My first reaction was "Gee, if they think Marx is
tough they must go bananas with Kant." Then on further reflection
I thought "Now if Marx is really that inaccessible, where did he
get such a large following?" Which train of thought led me to:
There are two very different reasons for being unable to grasp an
idea. The "obvious" one is that it takes time to assimilate new
ideas. The less obvious one is that you may already know too much! If
the new idea is inconsistent with what you know, something has to
give.
Now consider the following scenario. A teacher of Marx spends say forty
years expounding Marx's ideas. In his youth he has no trouble getting
the message across. Later he finds it much harder. He agonizes: "Are
students really getting dumber, or am I just losing my touch?"
The truth of the matter may be neither. He and his students may simply
have diverging theories of the world. His stays put while theirs
(collectively!) continue to accumulate the latest ideas. The more
divergent those theories become, the harder he finds it to get his
ideas across.
What really ices all this is that neither he nor his students diagnose
the problem. They all think that there is an idea here which the
students are just having trouble absorbing. If the teacher were to say
"Marx's ideas are contradicted by X,Y,Z that you take as economic
gospel" then the students would know what knowledge had to be laid
aside to appreciate Marx. This is surely better than laying aside
either nothing, everything, or a guessed-at selection.
Whether teaching Marx, or any other subject, actually works this way I
haven't a clue. Educational theorists have a batting average about that
of economic theorists, whether you look at the professional leagues or
the amateur.
-v
------------------------------
Date: 21 Apr 85 08:32:45 EST
From: Robert.Thibadeau@CMU-RI-VI
Subject: BB Contest
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Bulletin boards certainly have had their ups and downs. I have always
objected to a plethora of boards and to a plethora of posts, a quandary
perhaps. But let us invite an "expert system" contest in the world
community (for heavens sake!) which provides us with "the intelligent
bulletin board". I can indicate my own predilections, and, when I write a
message, the system will interpret it with respect to the world of
everybody's predilections. Anyone can enter: protocols are at your finger
tips. Imagine a system which, after you post your message says, "System
won't bother on that post, no one wants to read it." You might even ask
why, and find out. Then imagine the thrill, one day, of seeing "System
has decided everybody in the world wants that message today -- automatic
phoning system engaged." Frabjous joy. This contest is serious: when you
have a system design, describe it: consider performance, compatibility,
and extensibility along with representational and procedural intelligence.
Deadline is December 1, 1985 (mid-term assignments anyone?). Mail
description only to prism@cmu-ri-vi. I will put my IRS gift of $100 into a
winner and invite other sufferers longing for the good old days to do the
same (send commitments not cash). All suggestions will be publicly
available, the results published (SIGART Newsletter).
------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 1985 0959-PST
From: GOGUEN@SRI-CSL.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Bertrand Constraint Language (SRI)
CSL SEMINAR, 10:30am THURSDAY, 25 APRIL 1985, ROOM EL381
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bertrand, a General Purpose Constraint Language
Wm Leler
Computer Research Laboratory
Tektronix, Inc.
Constraint languages and constraint satisfaction techniques are
making the problem solving abilities of the computer available
to a wider audience. For example, simple spread-sheet languages
such as VisiCalc allow many different financial modeling
problems to be solved without resorting to programming. In a
conventional language the programmer must specify a step-by-step
procedure for the language interpreter to follow. In a
constraint language, programming is a descriptive task. The
user specifies a set of relationships, called constraints, and
it is up to the constraint satisfaction system to satisfy these
constraints. Unfortunately, constraint satisfaction systems
have been very difficult to build.
Bertrand is a general purpose language designed for building
constraint satisfaction systems. Constraints are solved using
rewrite rules, which are invoked by pattern matching. Bertrand
is similar in expressive power to relational languages such as
Prolog, but without any procedural semantics. Its lack of
procedural semantics makes Bertrand especially attractive for
execution on parallel processors.
This talk will review several example constraint satisfaction
systems built using Bertrand with applications in graphics,
design, and modeling. There will also be some discussion of the
language issues involved in the design of Bertrand.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 23 Apr 85 13:19:28-PST
From: Carol Wright/Susie Barnes <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance (SU)
SIGLUNCH
DATE: Friday, April 26, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical &
Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Johan Dekleer
Member of Research Staff in Qualitative
Physics at Xerox Park
TITLE: An Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance System
This talk presents a new view of problem solving motivated by a
new kind of truth maintenance system. Unlike previous truth maintenance
systems which were based on manipulating justifications, this truth
maintenance system is, in addition, based on manipulating assumption
sets. As a consequence it is possible to work effectively and
efficiently with inconsistent information, context switching is free,
and most backtracking (and all retraction) is avoided. These
capabilities motivate a different kind of problem-solving architecture
in which multiple potential solutions are explored simultaneously. This
architecture is particularly well-suited for tasks where a reasonable
fraction of the potential solutions must be explored.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-May-85 0045 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #54
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 May 85 00:45:48 PDT
Date: Thu 2 May 1985 23:28-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #54
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 3 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 54
Today's Topics:
Queries - Nim & Archeology & AI Curriculum & Pearl & Bindings &
SIGART Speakers & ES on Multiprocessors & Unification Hardware &
Simulation of Human Understanding & Machine Translation &
Vision On Apollo Or Sun & Image Processing in LISP
Seminar - BB1: A Blackboard Architecture (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 April 1985 1003-EST
From: Peter Pirolli@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Nim refs sought
I'm posting this for Malcom Cook (mcook@cmu-psy-a):
For an exercise in human problem solving and learning to
solve problems, I'm looking for references to nim (a.k.a. the
Marienbad game) as an example. I would like to know of
analysis of best or winning play in this game, and also
of computer programs that play the game. Any data much
appreciated. Please direct replies to Cook@ari-hq1
(that is my father Donald A. Cook, not me).
thanks
------------------------------
Date: 25 Apr 1985 0906-EST
From: Benoit Flamant <FLAMANT@CMU-CS-PS2.ARPA>
Reply-to: FLAMANT@CMU-CS-PS2.ARPA
Subject: AI list post correction
My apologies for my last message, I meant archeology instead of architecture,
so the right message is:
I am looking for information about expert systems in the domain of
archeology. Does anyone know of good articles or books published recently,
understandable by people without deep backkgrond in AI ?
Please reply to flamant@cmu-cs-ps2.arpa. Thanks.
Maybe Freud would certainly have found an appropriate explanation for my
making this slip.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 85 04:21:09 est
From: kevin%gvax@Cornell.ARPA (Kevin Karplus)
Subject: what's the best preparation for AI study?
One of my CS advisees has expressed a serious interest in AI, but
Cornell has no AI courses or researchers. He is now a second semester
sophmore, and plans to go to graduate school to do AI work. What
courses should I recommend for him?
I recommended the following electives:
Intro to Cognitive Psychology (1 semester)
Introductory Linguistics (2 semesters)
Mathematical Logic (1 semester)
as taught by Math, not Philosophy
Programming Languages (1 semester)
(our only course that does anything with Lisp)
He could take other courses (instead of the computer architecture
sequence) in his current schedule. What do the AI researchers and
students recommend as the "best" background for an undergrad?
Thanks for the help,
Kevin Karplus
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 85 08:48 CDT
From: Warren←Moseley <moseley%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Request for Help in Tools for AI course
Can any one out there tell me where I can get a copy of Pearl? I have seen
a write up of the capabilities and I interested in the possibility of using
it in a graduate course in Software Engineering in which I want to try some
Ai techniques. I teach at North Texas State University. We run VMS and Franz
Lisp, and have IBM and TI PC'S. If anyone can help I would appreciate a reply.
I would also be open to any other suggestions for tools to support
instruction in AI. I also need an implementation of a relation data base
simulator written Franz Lisp. Any suggestions for tools, techniques,
text books and ideas would be appreciated.
I can be reached at MOSELEY@TI-EG. 214-952-2157
Warren Moseley
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 26-Apr-85 18:11:00-GMT
From: STEVE HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <sowen%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Bindings
Can anyone give the current bindings for either or both of
Sharon Sickel
James Munyer ?
Thanks,
Steve Owen
Edinburgh University
------------------------------
Date: 29 Apr 85 09:07 PDT
From: Bill D'Camp <bill@LOGICON.ARPA>
Subject: Speakers wanted
The newly formed San Diego SIGART group is interested in contacting
potential speakers. If you are planning to be in Southern California
for IJCAI and would like to give a presentation on any topic related
to artificial intelligence, please contact me.
We are also interested in contacting potential speakers for
presentations at other times.
Thank You,
Bill D'Camp
arpa address: bill@logicon.arpa
USnail : Bill D'Camp
Logicon Inc.
P.O. Box 5158
San Diego, Ca. 92138
phone : (619)455-1330
------------------------------
Date: Fri 26 Apr 85 12:19:27-MST
From: Pete Tinker <tinker@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Rule-Based Systems on Multiprocessors
I'd like to hear of any attempts to put either new or existing rule-based
systems on multiprocessors. I'm already aware of the DADO project, and
should appreciate hearing of other efforts.
- Pete Tinker
------------------------------
Date: 27 Apr 1985 11:26-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Hardware for Unification
We need information on VLSI/hardware processors for unification and
transitive closures. References, contacts, etc. would be greatly
appreciated:
We have heard about a transitive closure chip at XEROX, a unification
processor built at AT&T and work in this area at Stanford. However,
right now we do not have specific references.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 85 10:49:56 pdt
From: Cindy Mason <clm@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: Simulation of Human Understanding
I came across this question on a take-home final exam I had in my
cognitive psychology class, and I would be interested to see what
some of you have to say on the matter, especially some of the readers
who have been studying AI for a while.
"Which of the following topics covered in the course
do you feel must be built into an adequate computer
simulation of human understanding? Why?
Attention
Memory
Categorization
Language
Judgement Heuristics
Decision Framing
Causal Perceptions
Emotion (in light of causation)
Event Structure
Problem Solving
Scripts, Plans and Goals
Please send responses to the AILIST rather than to me personally since
I believe many people will be interested in this question.
Cindy Mason
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 1 May 1985 16:17:48-PDT
From: bstafford%nermal.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
Subject: Query to Dominique Petitpierre on Machine Translation
From: NERMAL::SCLARK 1-MAY-1985 07:52
To: BSTAFFORD
Subj: DOMINIQUE
Dominique,
In response to your notice in the AIList Digest (V3 #50) my
colleague, Sharon Clark, and I are very interested in obtaining
additional information on the machine translation systems, ALPS
and Weidner.
We are preparing a workshop to help writers eliminate
ambiguity from their work in anticipation of having their work
translated by machine. The topics we intend to cover are words
with multiple meanings, conversions, simplifying syntax,
eliminating idioms, eliminating logical ambiguities, and dealing
with cultural issues. The workshop's objective is to teach writers
to prepare documentation that can go straight into being translated
by a computer without the benefit of a pre-editor.
We are also interested in obtaining a copy of the tutorial organised
by ISSCO which you also mentioned in the AIdigest Entry.
In addition, can you tell us the best way to get a hold of Rebecca
Root? Do you have a phone number for the LRC?
Any additional information you can provide us will be greatly
appreciated. We are working on a tight deadline as we will be presenting
the workshop at a Conference which begins May 19.
Regards,
Barbara Stafford
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 85 00:08 EST
From: Josef Skrzypek <skrzypek%northeastern.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: VISION ON APOLLO OR SUN ?
I am looking for information about Vision
(imaging) systems based on Apollo or SUN
workstations.
Please reply directly to:
SKRZYPEK.NORTHEASTERN@CSNET-RELAY
thank you -- josef
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 85 13:55:25 -0200
From: prlb2!ronse@seismo.ARPA (Ronse)
Subject: Image Processing in LISP?
Some time ago I posted to net.ai a request for information on image processing
in LISP (including binary or grey level images, quadtrees, efficiency, etc.).
I have so far received only one answer (from msp@ukc.UUCP). Has really noone
used LISP for image processing? I repeat thus my request: can anyone give me
pointers to any work done in this subject?
Christian RONSE maldoror@prlb2.UUCP {philabs|mcvax}!maldoror
Philips Research Laboratory Brussels
Av. E. Van Becelaere 2, box 8
B-1170 Brussels, Belgium
[SRI has been doing considerable image processing on Symbolics lisp
machines, and is offering an image manipulation and processing package
called ImageCalc; contact Quam@SRI-AI for details. John Gilmore of
Georgia Tech is associated with a somewhat similar image windowing
system called Dalek. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue 30 Apr 85 14:07:24-PDT
From: Carol Wright/Susie Barnes <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - BB1: A Blackboard Architecture (SU)
SIGLUNCH
DATE: Friday, May 3, 1985
LOCATION: Braun Auditorium in Mudd/Chemistry Building
TIME: 12:05-1:05
SPEAKER: Barbara Hayes-Roth
Helix Group, Knowledge Systems Laboratory
TITLE: BB1: An Architecture for Blackboard Systems
BB1 is a domain-independent blackboard architecture. The prototypical
blackboard system includes: functionally independent knowledge sources to
generate solution elements; a structured blackboard to record solution
elements and mediate knowledge source interactions; and a control mechanism
to trigger, schedule, and execute knowledge sources. Building upon this basic
functionality, BB1 also provides capabilities for dynamic control planning,
strategic explanation, and automatic learning of control heuristics. BB1 will
be illustrated with examples from PROTEAN, a system that integrates multiple
constraints to determine the 3-D structures of proteins in solution.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 0206 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #56
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 02:06:10 PDT
Date: Sat 4 May 1985 22:52-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #56
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 5 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 56
Today's Topics:
Emotions and Memory
Emotional Attachment
Emotional Attachment
Cognitive dissonance
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2-May-85
From: l12%dhdurz2.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Emotions and Memory
Hello,
My name is Wolf-Dieter Batz. I'm a Psychologist working at a
software advisory board at the University of Heidelberg. This
is my request to be put on the AIList.
My special interest, which is also the basis for this request,
lies in the metatheoretical aspects of memory research. In my
thesis "About Model Construction in Memory Research", I investigated
several theories about memory for their essential characteristics;
theories were selected from Cognitive Science, Artificial Intelligence,
and Neuroscience. Results indicated a number of questionable
fundamentals in memory research. If anybody is interested in them
I would like to get feedback.
A very newborn idea in this context is to establish a new theory
of emotions that is structurally related to a still-to-formulate
theory of memory. I would be very glad for responses to this idea. -
Everybody's invited!
Kind regards - mit freundlichen Gruessen ***
Wolf-Dieter Batz
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 85 09:28:33 pst
From: ed298-aa%ucbjade.CC@Berkeley
Subject: Emotional Attachment
[I'll permit this message, not as another "rape" piece, but
as it relates to the Minsky/Batali/Carter discussion of human
emotional mechanisms. -- KIL]
Having finally become quite weary reading abstract theorizing about rape (b
(brought on by the posting of a dumb story I remember first hearing in
high school), I'll add some down-to-earth comments. I won't try to link
this to AI issues; I don't think it works that way, and I feel somewhat
strange addressing this on this bb, but it seems appropriate to offer some
first-hand information and "introspection.'
I've been raped, and I've worked on a rape crisis line, counseling rape
survivors. I've never run across anyone agonizing because of an instant
"attachment" of some kind to the rapist. Many women are raped by men they
know; in this situation indeed there can be very complicated feelings. But
the strongest feeling I remember, and one which I've heard expressed by
other women, is the world-altering loss of trust and security after any
kind of rape. Rape is a act of violence and a robber of power; one who
previously feels ok about something as mundane as walking down the street
may no longer be able to leave the house, or only with the greatest fear
and mistrust. The attitude, which is changing but still strong, that a woman
who is raped has somehow brought it on herself is enough to add feelings of
shame and self-hate to the complex of fear.
I don't find anything funny about jokes on rape, or any other form of
humiliation or violence. There is a great deal of work to be done to
transform our communities, and society, into a place where rape is not
tolerated, indeed, is viewed as something as incredible as cannibalism
or any other barbarism of the past. Calling people on rape "jokes" is one
thing which can be done, perhaps you all can think of other more stronger
steps to take.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1985 16:22 EST
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Emotional Attachment
Bob Carter has answered Batali's objections
to my "assault" theory better than I would have. Thanks.
-- minsky
------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 May 85 17:58:22-PDT
From: JMYERS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Cognitive dissonance
I am offended by Mr. Carter's views on the subject of rape, that the anxiety
of the victim is caused by her "cognitive dissonance when the attachment
machinery begins to operate...". Although this might in some sense be true,
it is not the whole truth, and I cannot remain indifferent to what is to me
such a dangerous statement.
Anxiety is indeed caused by cognitive dissonance, but the conflict is between
our opinion of the world, and our perception of reality. We must have a valid
model of our world in order to survive--there is an incredibly basic drive in
human nature to make sense of it all. And, given a conflict between our
concepts and our perceptions, it is usually the concepts that win out. our
perceptions, our evaluations of what is occurring, are twisted to align with
our model of the world, so that we do not have to bear fully the psychic shock
of having our basic assumptions undermined. This accounts for the human
reactions of denial, repression, regression, rationalization, and other
defense mechanisms, when confronted with the occurrence of a crisis.
The most basic assumptions have to do with the meaning of life, the question
of evil, the assumption of causality, and the myth of invulnerability. These
are the foundations on which general behavior is based. After defining and
discussing these concepts, I will come back to how they apply in the case of
a rape.
Each person has his own meaning of life. A great many people have not
formulated it explicitly, but everyone has a vague sense of purpose, a reason
for living; everyone has a sense that it means something to be alive, and that
it does all make sense somehow, even if we don't understand it. (Note that
knowledge of the existence of purpose does not require knowledge of the
purpose.) This is one of the great things theology gives us, that we do have
a reason for being here. If there were no reason, if there were no sense of,
"I should stay alive because someday something might happen", then there would
be no reason to get out of bed in the morning, to eat, to love. Starving to
death takes too long; aspirin is relatively quick and soft, although some
people prefer more violent ways of ending their existence. The fact that we
are saddened and outraged when a person commits suicide indicates that we
believe that he had a purpose.
The reality of evil is a problem that most people cope with by ignoring it
or denying that it exists. We like to think that the world is basically a nice
place, that people are generally decent and reasonable, and that you can
generally count on them not to do evil acts. Although this must be the basis
for social interaction and trust, we get into the habit of believing, because
we are fortunate enough no to encounter evil in the world, that there is no
evil in the world(1).
People in general, and especially computer scientists, like to believe in
causality. Things happen for reasons. If you can know the reasons, then you
can understand the event, and predict it or modify it. This implies that you
have the power to determine your own life, and that you are therefore
responsible for what happens, which is a pernicious lie(2). Remorseful people
feel, "If only I'd have done things differently, this wouldn't have
happened...". The fact is that they acted in the best way they knew how at
the time, and they cannot be held responsible for something they didn't know
how to do; furthermore, things may *not* have happened differently if their
actions had changed. Finally, there might not BE a reason for an occurrence,
in a fundamental sense it "just happened".
The myth of invulnerability says that I have always been alive as long as I
can remember, and therefore, at a very deep level, I always will be alive.
Bruce Lee never dies in the movies. Sure, other people die of cancer, other
people get divorced, other people go through the windshield when they drive
after drinking or don't fasten their seatbelts, other people get raped,
but it's not REALLY going to happen to ME. The myth of invulnerability allows
us to continue to live and function in a modern world while threatened with
everything from nuclear annihilation down to robberies next door, without
becoming completely paranoid and dysfunctional.
Given this framework of beliefs held by people in general, let us now examine
the rape victim. She is directly and violently confronted with a reality that
goes against her deepest assumptions; there is no place to hide (successfully)
from her perceptions by repression or denial. A rape is a violent act of
violation that has no inherent meaning; if such senseless things occur as
*reality*, then maybe life has no meaning after all. Rape is one of the
ultimate evils. The rape victim is directly confronted with an experience of
undeniable evil; she must completely revise her opinions of the basic nature
of mankind and men, what she now believes will happen in the future from a
given situation, and how far she can trust people. The rape victim is
confronted with a random act that does not make sense, that she realistically
could not change or stop from happening. Yet, she still feels that maybe it
happened because of something she did, maybe if she somehow had done something
different that it wouldn't have happened. Not only must she deal with these
feelings, but she must accept the horrifying concept that causality does not
apply at some times. Finally, the rape victim has something terrible happen
directly to her, something that she cannot ignore, that shatters her illusion
of invulnerability. She must directly confront the fact of her own mortality
at a gut level, something that most of us are unable to do completely.
Again, it is not these emotions or concepts per se that are so difficult to
deal with; it is the fact that they are completely opposed to the current
belief structure of the victim, which is the basis for survivability. She is
forced to somehow integrate these new values into her beliefs. She cannot
survive with her old beliefs; she has no way of knowing whether
she will survive with her new beliefs, and so her survivability is seriously
within question. I argue that the cognitive dissonance created in the victim
by attempting to integrate any one of these four areas into her belief
structure is a stronger and more probable explanation for anxiety than a
theoretical "attachment bond" to the attacker. I also feel that the
"attachment bond" theory is open to distortion, and could promote
significantly unhealthy attitudes in the population at large (e.g., "she really
loves it", "it's not the rapist's fault", etc.)
Finally, I would like to again call attention to the concept of homosexual
rape. This is a reality that people do not like to think or talk about. Male
computer scientists are not immune to being raped, and I strongly believe that
considering the concept of it happening to YOU puts things in a much different
perspective than the abstract idea of it happening to some woman. In such a
situation, you would be given the same choice: submit or die. I hope you
find such an idea extremely offensive and revolting. RAPE, IN GENERAL, IS.
Notes:
(1) Proving the existence of evil raises disturbing fundamental questions
about the existence or direction of purpose in life.
(2) Paradoxically, the concept that you do not have the power to determine
your own life, and that you are not responsible for what happens to you,
is also a pernicious lie. The Theater of the Absurd is based on this concept.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 0249 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #55
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 02:49:16 PDT
Date: Sat 4 May 1985 22:43-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #55
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 5 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 55
Today's Topics:
Query - Expert Systems Tools for IBMPC,
Report - ES Tools Paper,
Interest Group - Evolution,
Games - Nim,
Image Processing - ImageCalc,
Recent Articles - Survey
Linguistics - Notes from La Jolla,
Review - The Logical Basis for Computer Programming,
Call for Papers - Knowledge-Based Systems for Engineering,
Course - ARO-Sponsored Summer Courses for Army
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 May 85 11:12:12 pdt
From: (Marvin Erickson [pnl]) erickson@lbl-csam
Subject: Info request: IBMPC & Expert Systems
I am gathering information on IBM PC-compatible expert
system development packages. I am also reviewing packages
that require/allow development on a different machine for
e.s. application delivery on IBM PCs.
So far, I have information on the T.I. Personal Consultant,
ExpertEase, TIMM, INSIGHT, M.1, and K-Base. I would be
very interested in hearing about packages I have missed
(or getting appropriate pointers).
Thanks in advance and please send responses to
erickson@lbl-csam.
Mark A. Whiting
Battelle Northwest Laboratories
[SRI has a SeRIes-PC expert-system shell. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 1 May 85 19:17:09-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ES Tools Paper
The paper I offered to readers about 5 tools for building KB systems is ready
to go. I am mailing out copies tomorrow to those people who needed a copy
right away. After we get more copies back from the photocopy center the
other copies will be sent out (probably next week).
A few people insisted on electronic copies ... I will try to
accomodate you tomorrow. You are also welcome to ftp it from
{sumex}<richer>es.mss if you wish. This is a scribe file. Don't ask me about
ftping however .. if someone succeeds perhaps they can explain how they did
it. In fact, I will be gone from Fri. 5/2 through 5/20. (what is a scribe
file ... SCRIBE is a text formatting program. My file is a normal ascii text
file, but it has scribe commands in it like @b[this prints in bold
when scribed] There is a chance I may be able to produce a text file
... check for es.txt or es.tty if you don't have access to scribe.
As I said in my original note, this paper is a modest review of the 5 systems.
Without hands-on testing I was unable to make the kind of evaluations I
wanted to make. For many people, my paper will be a valuable introduction and
overview to this market of products. More experienced readers may or may not
be disappointed. However, from some of the msgs. that I received it seems
likely I will get responses back from people who have had experience with
one or more of the programs I describe. I don't know which idea is better
(and perhaps Ken Laws can decide):
I get all the responses and then post a summary on the net at some
point (when I get time, which is uncertain) or
A dialogue about the products and comments I have made can start on
the AILIST bboard?
I myself would like to learn more about these products as well as the
broader issues I have raised in the paper; perhaps, some of you can contribute.
mark
[A dialog in AIList is fine, but try to keep messages self-contained
for the benefit of those who haven't read the paper. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1985 09:32-PDT
From: king@Kestrel.ARPA
Subject: New interest group -- evolution
There has been a lot of interest in what I will call mathematical
evolution theory. This includes some game theory (for example the
result that equal numbers of males and females should exist in any
species in which each birth is the result of a mating) and some
computer simulation work (for example the result that cooperation can
evolve if and only if members of the species can recognize each other
as individuals).
I am sending this message to guage interest in the establishment of an
interest group in this area.
If anyone has an address that accesses a large number of csnet bboards,
please tell me.
Dick
------------------------------
Date: 3 May 1985 06:20:21 EDT (Fri)
From: Dan Hoey <hoey@nrl-aic.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Nim refs sought
I told Cook@ARI-HQ1, but I guess I'd better let you folks know, or I'll
be reading this query on ARPANET-BBoards next.
Perfect strategy for Nim is known. For an analysis of Nim, and open
questions associated with many related games, see *On Numbers and
Games* by J. H. Conway (Academic Press, 1976).
Dan Hoey
[Another good source is Mathematical Recreations by Bell. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 May 85 09:25:32 EDT
From: connolly@GE-CRD
Subject: Image Processing in Lisp
In praise of Image-Calc:
In response to the query about Image Processing in Lisp - We at
GE CRD have been using Image-Calc for about a year now, and are pleased
as punch with the environment it provides. Image-Calc runs on a
Symbolics 3600, and for a really comfortable environment, you should
have a frame buffer & color monitor. We've mainly been working on
implementing promising image-processing algorithms (e.g., the Canny edge
detector) and model-matching in images (akin to Faugeras' work) and have
found that the Image-Calc environment takes a lot of the drudgery,
boredom, and slowness out of constructing these algorithms.
------------------------------
Date: 23 Apr 1985 19:21-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles - Survey
Journal of Logic Programming 11(1984) no 3
William F. Dowling J. H. Gallier
267-284 Linear time algorithms for testing satisfiability of Horn
Formulae
225-240 J. W. Lloyd R. W. Topez Making Prolog more expressive
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
J. Info Science 34(1984) no 1
1-24: Weichung Lun King Sun Fu 3D-Plex Grammars
47-59: Marco Valtorta "A result on the computation complexity of
heuristic estimates for the A* algorithms"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Vestnik Lening Unive. Mat. Mekh. Astron 1984
111-113 S. P. Lukin V. N. Fomm
An optimal stopping rule for training algorithms with reward
In Russian with English Summary
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Publ. Inst. Math (Beograd( 1983 34(48)
37-47: Dragos Cvetkovik, Irena Pevac
Discussing graph theory with a computer III Man Machine Theorem Proving
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Comm. Cognition 17 (1984) no 1 3-42
Isles, David "Artificial Intelligence as a possible tool for
discovering the laws of logic
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
J. Math. Psych. 24(1984) no 3
231-281 Richard Schweickert, George J. Boggs
Models of central capacity and concurrency
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
STACS 84 2nd Annual Symposium on Theorietical Aspects of Computer
Science
Springer Verlag Lecture Notes in CS 182 $16.00
Tree Automata and Logic Programs G. File page 119
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
International Journal of Bio-Medical Computing
Volume 16 no 1 Jan 84
Computer Vision J. G. Llaurado Page 4
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 85 11:35:39 pdt
From: li51x%sdcc3@SDCSVAX.ARPA
Subject: Linguistic Notes from La Jolla
Working papers in linguistics from the faculty and students of the
Department of Linguistics, University of California at San Diego,
are available from
"Linguistics Notes from La Jolla"
Department of Linguistics, C-008
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
For a list of contents of issue 13 and of back issues send a
self-addressed stamped envelope to LNLJ.
I am posting this for Michael Smith, who is handling orders this year.
He asks that orders (and payment) be received by May 15, 1985.
--Michelle Gross
[I've edited this down; the author can supply more info. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 04 May 85 0038 PDT
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Review - The Logical Basis for Computer Programming
THE LOGICAL BASIS FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
Volume 1: Deductive Reasoning
ZOHAR MANNA and RICHARD WALDINGER
Addison-Wesley, ISBN: 0-201-18620-2
This exceptionally clear text, laced with many examples, provides a most
readable introduction to the logical concepts and techniques underlying
computer programming. Computational notions are explored in a logical
realm independent of any programming language or any machine. The text is
accessible to readers with no background in mathematics or computer
programming, yet it supplies axiomatization for a rich collection of
abstract data types.
This book provides the intellectual tools for studying artificial
intelligence, software engineering, automatic programming, database
theory, logic programming, and the theory of computation. A
forthcoming second volume, DEDUCTIVE SYSTEMS, describes logical
techniques for automated theorem proving and its applications.
Zohar Manna is Professor of Computer Science at Stanford University;
he is the author of the textbook "Mathematical Theory of Computation."
Richard Waldinger is Staff Scientist in the Artificial Intelligence Center
at SRI International.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Part I. Mathematical Logic
Chapter 1: Propositional Logic
Introduction. The Language. The Meaning of a Sentence. Properties of
Sentences. Truth Tables. Semantic Trees. Proof by Falsification.
Valid Sentence Schemata. Substitution. Extended Interpretation.
Equivalence. Problems.
Chapter 2: Predicate Logic: Basic
Introduction. The Language. The Meaning of a Sentence. Semantic Rules.
Validity. Universal and Existential Closure. Problems.
Chapter 3: Predicate Logic: Advanced
Valid Sentence Schemata. Equivalence. Safe Substitution. The Value Property.
Valid Schemata with Substitution. Function Introduction and Elimination.
Problems.
Chapter 4: Special Theories
Definition of a Theory. Augmenting Theories. Relationship between Theories.
Theory of Strict Partial Orderings. Theory of Equivalence Relations.
Problems.
Chapter 5: Theories with Equality
Theory of Equality. Theory of Weak Partial Orderings. Theory of Associated
Relations. Theory of Groups. Theory of Pairs. Relativized Quantifiers.
The Lexicographic Relation. Problems.
Part II. Theories with Induction
Chapter 6: Nonnegative Integers
Basic Properties. The Addition Function. Multiplication and Exponentiation.
Predecessor and Subtraction. Decomposition Induction. The Weak Less-than
Relation. The Strict Less-than Relation. Complete Induction. Quotient and
Remainder. Proof of Complete Induction. The Divides Relation. The
Least-Number Principle. Problems.
Chapter 7: Strings
Basic Properties. The Head and Tail Functions. The Concatenation Function.
The Reverse Function. The Decomposition Induction Principle.
The Substring Relation. The Complete Induction Principle. Nonnegative
Integers and Strings. String Representation of Integers. Problems.
Chapter 8: Trees
Basic Properties. The Left and Right Functions. The Subtree Relation.
Strings and Trees. Problems.
Chapter 9: Lists
Basic Properties. The Head and Tail Functions. Append and Member.
Example: Flatlist. Tree Representation of Lists. Example: Parsing. Problems.
Chapter 10: Sets
Basic Properties. The Equality Proposition. The Choice and Rest Functions.
The Union and Intersection Functions. The Deletion and Difference Functions.
The Subset Relation. The Set Constructor. Cardinality. Singleton Sets.
Problems.
Chapter 11: Bags
Basic Properties. The Equal-Multiplicity Relation. Multiplicity and Equality.
The Count Function. Additional Functions and Relations. Sum, Union,
and Intersection. Problems.
Chapter 12: Tuples
Basic Properties. Nonnegative Integers and Tuples. Mapping Tuples into Sets
and Bags. The Permutation Relation. The Ordered Relation. The Sort Function.
Recursive Definition of Functions. Problems.
Related Textbooks
Index of Symbols
General Index
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 21 April 1985 20:35:49 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: IEEE Software - Knowledge-Based Systems for Engineering
CALL FOR PAPERS
The March 1986 issue of IEEE Software will address software aspects of
knowledge-based systems developed for engineering applications,
focusing on the following issues: (IEEE Software is one of the
prestigious magazines devoted to problems in Software engineering).
- need for building the KBES;
- why a particular representation was chosen;
- why a particular expert-system-building tool or language was
used;
- what advantages and limitations were revealed through the
attempt;
- what kind of software tool would be ideal for doing similar
tasks;
- how knowledge was acquired from experts;
- the software cycle;
- user interfaces; and
- current status.
The deadline for receiving the manuscript, not more than 30
double-spaced typewritten pages, is July 1st and it will be reviewed
as per the IEEE standard review process.
For more information (or a copy of author's guidelines) write to:
D. Sriram/M. Rychener (Guest Editors)
Civil Engg. and Construction Labs.
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
ARPAnet address: sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 85 15:51:21 EDT
From: "Dr. Ron Green" (ARO) <green@BRL.ARPA>
Subject: ARO sponsored summer courses for Army
Two courses will be taught this summer as part of ARO AI education program
for Army. The courses will have limited enrollment because of hands-on
content of course.
Logic Programming
This course will be given at University of Pennsylvania from June 17 till
noon June 21. A familiarity with basic issues and techniques of AI and
the ability to program in higher-level languages is assumed. Familiarity
with logic and LISP is very desirable. The course will cover the use of
logic-based systems as arepresentation language and programming language for
AI systems}i. The course will be approximately one-half lecture and one-
half laboratory work. The hardware will be VAXes and LISP machines. Various
PROLOG implementations and logic programming systems will be available.
MAIN TOPIC AREAS
1. Theoretical foundations
2. Logic as a programming language
3. PROLOG as a programming language
4. Pratical PROLOG
5. Knowledge representation
6. Reasoning
7. Expert systems
8. Natural language processing
9. Evaluating logic programming
LISP Programming
This course will be taught at the University of Texas at Austin from
July 8 to noon on July 12. Lectures will be presented during the
mornings of Monday through Thursday, and the rest of the time will be
devoted to hands-on LISP programming on LISP machines. No knowledge
of LISP is required. Applicants must have general familiarity with AI
problems and techniques, and must have significant programming
experience in standard high-level programming languages. Persons with
moderate LISP experience are welcome, but it is expected that they
will work more independently on advanced problems.
MAIN TOPIC AREAS
1. Basic data structures and functions
2. User-defined functions and recursion
3. Explicit flow of control and iteration
4. More advanc{←ed topics -- LAMBDA expressions, destructive alteration, arrays
5. AI methods -- state-space methods, simple rule-based systems, frames
To enroll or at least apply for enrollment send a letter with the
course desired, brief reason for taking the course, and status of
experience with AI. Deadline for application is June 5. ARO will
select the ones to attend.
Send letter to
US Army Research Office
Electronics Division
Attn: Dr. C. Ronald Green
P.O. Box 12211
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 1556 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #57
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 15:56:20 PDT
Date: Sat 4 May 1985 23:08-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #57
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 5 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 57
Today's Topics:
Seminars - What is Information? (CMU) &
Theorem Proving, Connection Machine (BBN) &
Hypotheticals and Legal Reasoning (LSU) &
Domain-Independent Planning (MIT),
Conference - AI Applications &
Carnegie Symposium, Language Acquisition &
Expert Database Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1985 0749-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - What is Information? (CMU)
Speaker: Heinz Zemanek (Vienna)
Date: Wednesday, May 8
Time: 11:00 am
Place: 5409
Title: What is Information?
Our century has its information technology and its information
industry, but does it know what entity it is dealing with? There is no
standard definition of information, and there is no way to measure it. The
Bit, for example, merely measures the statistical density of symbols, and
it does not measure the flow through a logical network. Perhaps if
computer scientists cannot measure their primary entity, they do not belong
to the natural sciences but at least partially belong to the humanities!
The author will argue that information can be understood from the
context in which it appears: in the naive context (what was information
before the computer appeared?), in the sensory organs, in language, in the
transmission media (that is, in the channel, where information theory
began), in protocols, as merchandise, as "intelligence," as knowledge, and
as an entity controlling real-world processes (of which the computation
processes are a harmless subclass). The conclusion is that the computer
may turn science and technology much more towards the humanities than
scientists and engineers might expect.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Apr 1985 13:49-EDT
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Theorem Proving, Connection Machine (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Something new in ther BBN AI seminar series: a talk on theorem
proving. This area is enjoying a revival - they've even written
some programs that real mathematicians consider useful. Wolfgang
Bibel of Duke University and Technische Universitat, Munich will
speak at 10 AM on Monday May 6 in the 3rd floor conference room.
The connection method and plan generation W. Bibel In
this talk we give a brief overview of the AI projects at the TUM.
These include the development of a logical connection machine, ie
a multi-processor machine for deduction based on the connection
method in ATP. This method is outlined in some detail. As an
example among the various applications of deductive reasoning
plan generation is considered, and a new purely deductive
solution for this well-known problem in AI is presented.
------------------------------
Date: 1 May 1985 11:45-EST
From: "George R. Cross" <cross%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Hypotheticals and Legal Reasoning (LSU)
Hypotheticals and Legal Reasoning
Edwina Rissland
Department of Computer Science
University of Massachusetts
Sponsored by: Louisiana State Law Institute, Center for Civil Law Studies,
and Department of Computer Science, Louisiana State University
Place: Coates 155, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA
Time: Tuesday, May 7, 1:30 P.M.
Abstract: In this talk, I shall discuss the use of hypotheticals in legal
reasoning, in particular, how hypos serve a central role in analyzing issues
and preparing arguments. I'll describe a program, called HYPO, which
generates legal hypotheticals, and an environment, called COUNSELOR, which
provides support for legal reasoning and other strategic tasks, like
resource management. I'll discuss the kinds of modifications one makes to
hypos in the course of argument, offer a preliminary taxonomy of such
"argument moves", and discuss some higher level structures in legal
argument. As background, I'll also present some general issues about
examples such as their generation, structure and importance in reasoning,
especially in the domains of mathematics and the law.
For More Info:
George R. Cross
Computer Science Department
Louisiana State University
Phone: 504-388-1495
cross@lsu.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: 4 May 1985 14:20 EDT (Sat)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Domain-Independent Planning (MIT)
AI Revolving Seminar Tuesday, May 7 4:00pm 8AI Playroom
Reid G. Simmons
Domain Independent Planning:
Putting "Shakey" on Firmer Ground
Current domain independent planners are limited in the range of
real-world problems that they can handle. This limitation is due
largely to the lack of explicit temporal representations and to the
relative inexpressiveness of the STRIPS-like operator representations.
We present a domain independent planner which overcomes some of these
limitations. First, time is explicitly represented and reasoned
about. Second, the operator representation is extended in two
important ways -- an "effect" may consist of a quantified formula and
the "output" value of an effect may depend on its "input" value. We
demonstrate how these changes significantly extend the range of
operator representation without rendering the planning problem intractable.
We also present a technique which can be used to control the
potentially exponential search for a correct plan, so that planning is
manageable even using these extended operator representations. This
technique combines a careful analysis of the effects of each plan step
with dependency directed search. It has proven to be very effective
in solving traditional blocks-world examples and is currently being
applied to more demanding domains.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 May 85 15:50 EST
From: John Roach <roach%vpi.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - AI Applications
===============
CALL FOR PAPERS
===============
IEEE Computer Society
SECOND CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE APPLICATIONS
The Engineering of Knowledge-Based Systems
Fontainebleau Hilton
Miami Beach, Florida
11-13 December 1985
Purpose: to explore the technology, implementation and impact of
emerging application areas and indicate future trends in available
systems and required research. Topic areas include:
Knowledge Acquisition and Representation System Architecture
Planning and Problem Solving Natural Language
Reasoning with Uncertainty Sensor Feedback
Validation Learning and Control
Human-Computer Interface Explanation
The program will consist of submitted and invited paprs. Invited
papers will provide an overview of research in selected areas.
All papers will be reviewed by two members of the program review
committee. Contributed papers may be selected for presentation
and publication, or for publication only. Please limit papers
to five thousand words. Research proposals and minor changes to
old ideas are discouraged. Fours copies of the complete paper
are to be submitted to:
Program Chair
Artificial Intelligence Conference
P. O. Box 639
Silver Spring, MD 20901
Accepted papers will be published in the proceedings of the
conference and will be allocated a maximum of six pages.
CONFERENCE TIMETABLE
Four Copies of Manuscript 1 June 1985
Acceptance Letters 15 July 1985
Camera-Ready Papers 1 September 1985
Tutorials 9, 10 December 1985
Conference 11 - 13 December 1985
A limited amount of exhibit space is available. Please contact
Director of Conferences, IEEE Computer Society, 301-589-8142.
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
General Chair
John Roach
Department of Computer Science
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
Program Chair
Charles Weisbin
Center for Engr. Systems Advanced Research
Oak Ridge National Laboratories
Oak Ridge, TN 37831
Local Arrangements Chair
Harry Hayman
Tutorials Chair
Mabry Tyson
SRI International
Treasurer
Daniel Chester
University of Delaware
Program Committee
Charles Weisbin
J. Barhen
P. Cheeseman
R. Duda
R. Haralick
E. Heer
D. Hertz
A. Kak
H. Pople
E. Rich
J. Roach
L. Shapiro
R. Simmons
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 04 May 85 11:32:04 EDT
From: sokolov (jeff sokolov) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: Conference - Carnegie Symposium, Language Acquisition
**********************************************************************
20th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition
Carnegie-Mellon University
May 16-18
Theme: "Mechanisms of Language Acquisition"
**********************************************************************
The 20th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition will be held on May 16, 17,
and 18 in the Adamson Wing of Baker Hall on the Carnegie-Mellon campus in
Pittsburgh. Presentations will begin at 2:00 on the 16th. Participants
include Martin Braine, Robert Berwick, Jaime Carbonell, Eve Clark, Elizabeth
Bates, Brian MacWhinney, John Anderson, Melissa Bowerman, Michael Maratsos,
Marlys Macken, Pat Langley, Jeff Sokolov, Steven Pinker, Kenneth Wexler,
Thomas Roeper, Jay McClelland, Peter Gordon, and David Rumelhart. Focal
issues will be: the role of universal constraints on the shape of grammar
and the parser, ways of constraining rule overgeneralization, and
competition/parallel models of learning and processing.
Support is being provided by the National Science Foundation and the Sloan
Foundation. For a copy of the program contact Brian MacWhinney or Kathy
Marengo at (412) 578-2656. The public is invited.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 May 85 08:28:36-CDT
From: AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Expert Database Systems [long message]
Call for Papers and Participation
First International Conference on Expert Database Systems
April 1-4, 1986, Charleston, South Carolina
Sponsored by:
The Institute of Information Management, Technology and Policy
College of Business Administration,
University of South Carolina
In Cooperation With:
American Association for Artificial Intelligence
Association for Computing Machinery -- SIGMOD, SIGART and SIGPLAN
IEEE Technical Committee on Data Base Engineering
Agence de l'Informatique, France
Conference Objectives
The goal of this conference is to explore both the theoretical and practi-
cal issues of Expert Database Systems. These systems represent the conflu-
ence of R&D activities in Artificial Intelligence, Logic, and Database
Management.
Expert Database Systems will play an ever-increasing role in scientific,
governmental and business applications by:
o providing intelligent, knowledge-based access to large shared data-
bases through novel user-interfaces and natural-language question-
answering facilities,
o endowing database systems with reasoning, planning, and justification
capabilities,
o creating knowledge base management tools and techniques to support the
creation, manipulation, indexing, and evolution of large knowledge
bases, and
o integrating AI & DB functional requirements into new hardware and
software environments for the specification, prototyping, testing and
debugging of knowledge-based applications.
In order to foster the cross-fertilization of ideas from AI, Logic, and
Databases the Conference will be composed of tutorial sessions, paper ses-
sions, and panel discussions.
Topics of Interest
The Program Committee invites original papers (of approximately 5000 words)
addressing (but not limited to) the following areas:
Theory of Knowledge Bases (including knowledge representation, knowledge
models, recursive data models, object-oriented models, knowledge
indexing and transformation),
Knowledge Engineering (including acquisition, maintenance, learning,
knowledge-directed database specification and design methodologies,
and case studies),
Knowledge Base Management (including architectures and languages, con-
straint and rule management, metadata management, and extensible data
dictionaries),
Reasoning on Large Data/Knowledge Bases (including inexact and fuzzy rea-
soning, non-monotonic reasoning, deductive databases, logic-based
query languages, semantic query optimization, and constraint-directed
reasoning),
Natural Language Access (including question-answering, extended responses,
cooperative behavior, explanation and justification),
Intelligent Database Interfaces (including expert system -- database com-
munication, knowledge gateways, knowledgeable user agents, browsers,
and videotex),
Knowledge-Based Environments (including Decision Support Systems, CAD/CAM,
and VLSI Design),
Organizational Issues (including technology transfer, procurement of expert
database systems, and knowledge certification).
Please send five (5) copies of papers by September 1, 1985 to:
Larry Kerschberg, Program Chairman
College of Business Administration
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC, 29208
Program Committee
Hideo Aiso Sham Navathe
Keio University University of Florida
Antonio Albano Erich Neuhold
University of Pisa Technical University of Vienna
Robert Balzer S. Ohsuga
USC/Information Sciences Institute University of Tokyo
James Bezdek Alain Pirotte
University of South Carolina Philips Research Lab, Brussels
Ron Brachman D. Stott Parker, Jr.
Schlumberger Palo Alto Research UCLA and SILOGIC
Michael Brodie Harry Pople
Computer Corporation of America University of Pittsburgh
Peter Buneman Erik Sandewall
University of Pennsylvania Linkoping University
Mark Fox Edgar H. Sibley
Robotics Institute, Carnegie-Mellon Univ. George Mason University
George Gardarin John Miles Smith
Univ. of Paris 6 and INRIA Computer Corporation of America
Herve Gallaire Reid Smith
ECRC, Munich Schlumberger-Doll Research
Matthias Jarke Michael Stonebraker
New York University UC -- Berkeley
Jonathan King Jeffrey Ullman
Teknowledge Stanford University
Robert Kowalski Bonnie L. Webber
Imperial College University of Pennsylvania
Jack Minker Andrew B. Whinston
University of Maryland Purdue University
Michele Missikoff Gio Wiederhold
IASI-CNR, Rome Stanford University
John Mylopoulos Carlo Zaniolo
University of Toronto MCC Corporation
Important Dates
Submission Deadline: September 1, 1985
Acceptance Notification: November 7, 1985
Final Version Due: December 15, 1985
Conference: April 1-4, 1986
Conference proceedings will be available at the conference, and subse-
quently will appear in book form.
Conference General Chairman Conference Coordinator
Donald A. Marchand Cathie L. Hughes
Institute of Information Management, Technology and Policy
(803) 777-5766
Panel Coordinator Conference Treasurer
Arun Sen Libby Shropshier
Dept. of Management Science Institute of Information Management,
College of Business Administration Technology and Policy
Univ. of South Carolina Univ. of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208 Columbia, SC 29208
Publicity Chairman Tutorial Chairman
John Weitzel Jonathan King
Dept. of Management Science Teknowledge, Inc.
College of Business Administration 525 University Avenue
Univ. of South Carolina Palo Alto, CA 94301
Columbia, SC 29208
International Representatives
Latin America Europe Far East
Claudio M.O. Moura Jean-Claude Rault Masahiro Nakazawa
Independent Consultant Agence de l'InformatiqueNihon Digital Equip. Corp.
Rua R. Eduardo Guinle 60 Tour Fiat-Cedex 16 Sunlight Bldg. 5th Floor
Botafogo Paris-La Defense 5-29-1, Toyotamakita,
22.260 Rio de Janeiro, RJParis Nerima-ku Tokyo, 176
Brazil France Japan
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 1928 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #58
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 19:28:21 PDT
Date: Sun 5 May 1985 16:24-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #58
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 6 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 58
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Request for Help,
Seminars - Database Theory and Equations (MIT) &
Processing Uncertain Knowledge (UToronto) &
Compact LISP Machine (SU) &
How Processes Learn (CMU) &
Space Modeling for Robot Navigation (SU) &
Pictorial Explanations (UPenn) &
Distributed Knowledge-Based Learning (USCarolina) &
DART: An Automated Diagnostician (SU) &
Abstraction and Classification in NIKL (MIT) &
Evidential Reasoning in Semantic Networks (BBN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 5 May 85 16:09:01-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar Abstracts
I fell behind on the seminar notices when I took off for DC early this
month. Rather than just ignore all the talks, I've decided to "read
them into the record" now. It will take three issues to hold all the
post-dated notices -- just ignore them if abstracts aren't your thing.
I find that I'm spending too much time gathering and editing seminar
notices, so I'm going to cut back. I will continue to forward the
Stanford notices, but I'd like to get some volunteers to edit and
forward notices from CMU, CSLI, MIT-MC, Rutgers, and UTexas-20.
Other contributors can help me by providing meaningful Subject lines
for your messages. I have been cleaning up many of the subject lines
as an aid to sorting the messages and to simplify construction of the
Today's Topics header. It takes a fair amount of effort to find a
concise summary of an author's message, and I would appreciate it if
contributors would make an effort to provide the summary.
If anyone would like to split off a linguistics/psychology list, I'll
provide the necessary assistance. I like reading the messages, but
I'm having trouble moderating such discussions and deciding which
seminar notices to include. I think that a separate discussion list
is the best solution, but I'm willing to consider some kind of
joint moderation of the AIList message stream. AIList is a fun hobby,
but I'd like to have a little more free time for other activities.
Thanks to everyone for helping to make AIList such a success.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 5 Apr 1985 1229-EST
From: ALR at MIT-XX.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Database Theory and Equations (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
DATE: TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 1985
PLACE: NE43-512A
Database Theory and Computing with Equations
Paris C. Kanellakis
MIT
Databases and equational theorem proving are well developed and
seemingly unrelated areas of Computer Science research.
We provide two natural links between these fields and demonstrate
how equational theorem proving can provide useful techniques and tools
for a variety of database tasks.
Our first application is a novel way of formulating database constraints
(dependencies) using equations. Dependency implication, a central computational
problem in database theory, is transformed into reasoning about equations.
Mathematical techniques from universal algebra provide new proof procedures and
better lower bounds for database dependency implication.
Our second application demonstrates that the uniform
word problem for lattices is equivalent to
implication of dependencies expressing transitive closure together with
functional dependencies,
(functional dependencies were the first
and most widely studied database constraints).
This natural generalization of functional dependencies, which is
not expressible using conventional database theory formulations, has
an efficient decision procedure and a natural inference system.
This is joint work with Stavros S. Cosmadakis.
HOST: Prof. Guttag
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 85 13:04:45 est
From: Voula Vanneli <voula%toronto.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Processing Uncertain Knowledge (UToronto)
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
(SF = Sandford Fleming Building, 10 King's College Rd.)
ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE SEMINAR - Monday, April 15, 11 a.m.,
SF 1105
Harry Stephanou
Texas
Processing Uncertain Knowledge
The methodology described in this talk is motivated by
the need to design knowledge based systems for applications
that involve: (1) subjective and/or incomplete knowledge
contributed by multiple domain experts, and (ii) inaccurate
and/or incomplete data collected from different measure-
ments. The talk consists of two parts.
In the first part, we present a quantitative criterion
for measuring the effectiveness of the consensus obtained by
pooling evidence from two knowledge sources. After a brief
review of the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence, we intro-
duce a set-theoretic generalization of entropy. We then
prove that the pooling of evidence by Dempster's rule
decreases the total entropy of the sources, and therefore
focuses their knowledge.
In the second part of the talk, we present a fuzzy
classification algorithm that can utilize a limited number
of unreliable training samples, or prototypes. We then pro-
pose the extension of this algorithm to a reasoning by anal-
ogy scheme in which decisions are based on the "similarity"
of the observed evidence to prototypical situations stored
in the knowledge base. The measure of similarity relies on
a set-theoretic generalization of cross-entropy.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 8 Apr 85 14:21:11-PST
From: Susan Gere <M.SUSAN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Compact LISP Machine (SU)
EE380/CS310
Seminar on Computer Systems
Title: Compact LISP Machine
Speaker: Steven D. Krueger
Texas Instruments, Dallas
Time: Wednesday, April 10 at 4:15 p.m.
Place: Terman Auditorium
The Compact LISP Machine (CLM) development program is the first of
several Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) programs
intended to provide embedded symbolic computing capabilities for
government applications. As one of many contracts funded under the
Strategic Computing Program, the CLM will provide a symbolic computer
capability for insertion of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics
technology in a wide range of applications.
The heart of the CLM system is a high speed 32-bit VLSI LISP processor
chip, built using high speed CMOS technology. It is based on the
architecture of the Explorer LISP machine from Texas Instruments, which
is based on the CADR LISP Machine from MIT and and LISP Machines
Incorporated (LMI).
The CLM system consists of four types of modules: Processor,
Cache/Mapper, 4MB Memory, and Bus Interface. The Processor, Memory,
and Bus Interface modules communicate over a high-performance 32-bit
multi-master NuBus(TM) system bus.
Some motivation will be given for adopting a special architecture for
symbolic processing. Then the basic architecture of the CLM processor
and Explorer processor will be reviewed. The NuBus system bus will be
described, and the CLM system modules will be described.
------------------------------
Date: 4 April 1985 1155-EST
From: Theona Stefanis@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - How Processes Learn (CMU)
Name: PS Seminar - J. Misra, The University of Texas/Austin
Date: 10 April (Wed.)
Time: 3:00-4:30
Place: 4605 WeH
Topic: How Processes Learn
A key feature of distributed systems is that each component process
has access to its own state but not to the states of other processes.
Any nontrivial distributed algorithm requires that some processes
learn about the states of others. To study such issues, we introduce
the notion of isomorphism among computations: two computations are
isomorphic with respect to a process if the process can't tell them
apart. We show that isomorphisms can be used to define and study
learning by processes. We give a precise characterization of minimum
information flow for achieving certain desired goals. As an example
we show that there is no algorithm to detect termination of an
underlying computation using a bounded number of overhead messages.
This talk assumes no previous background in distributed systems.
------------------------------
Date: 09 Apr 85 1321 PST
From: Marianne Siroker <MAS@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Space Modeling for Robot Navigation (SU)
SPECIAL ROBOTICS SEMINAR
On Wednesday, April 10, Raja Chatila from France will speak on
Consistent Space Modeling for Mobile Robot Navigation
Time: 4:15 PM Place: Rm 352 MJH
In order to understand its environment, a mobile robot should be able to
model it consistently, and to locate itself correctly. One
major difficulty to be solved is the inaccuracies introduced by the sensors.
The presented approach to cope with this problem relies on
general principles to deal with uncertainties: the use of
multisensory system, favoring of the data collected by the more accurate sensor
in a given situation, averaging of different but consistent measurements of the
same entity weighted with their associated uncertainties, and
a methodology enabling a mobile robot to define its own reference
landmarks while exploring and modeling its environment.
These ideas are presented together with an example of their application on
the mobile robot HILARE.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 85 14:15 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Pictorial Explanations (UPenn)
AUTOMATING THE CREATION OF PICTORIAL EXPLANATIONS
Steve Feiner (Brown Univ)
3pm Monday April 15th, 337 Towne Building
Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania
The APEX [Automated Pictorial EXplanations] project has as its
long-term goal the realtime computer generation of effective pictorial
and textual explanations. Our current research has concentrated on the
automated creation of pictures that depict the performance of physical
actions, such as turning or pushing, on objects.
We are constructing a test-bed system that generates pictures of
actions performed by a problem solver. Our system supports rules for
determining automatically the objects to be shown in a picture, the
style and level of detail with which they should be rendered, the
method by which the action itself should be indicated, and the
picture's viewing specifications. A picture crystallizes about a small
set of objects inferred from the nature of the action being depicted.
Additional objects and detail are added when it is determined that they
help disambiguate an object from others with which it may be confused.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 85 12:48 EST
From: Huhns <huhns%scarolina.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Distributed Knowledge-Based Learning (USCarolina)
CENTER FOR MACHINE INTELLIGENCE
University of South Carolina
A DISTRIBUTED KNOWLEDGE-BASED LEARNING SYSTEM
FOR INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
Speaker: Uttam Mukhopadhyay
Date: 3:00 p.m. Wednesday, April 17, 1985
Location: Room 230, Engineering Building
MINDS (Multiple Intelligent Node Document Servers) is a
distributed system of knowledge-based query engines for
efficiently retrieving multimedia documents in an office
environment of distributed workstations. By learning document
distribution patterns, as well as user interests and preferences
during system usage, it customizes document retrievals for each
user.
In this talk we discuss the implementation of a two-layer
learning testbed for studying plausible heuristics. In the
simulated environment, document distribution patterns
(object-level concepts) used by the query engine are learned at
the lower level with the help of heuristics for assigning credit
and recommending adjustments; these heuristics are incrementally
refined at the upper level with the help of meta-heuristics.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 25 Apr 85 16:35:45-PST
From: Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - DART: An Automated Diagnostician (SU)
Professor Michael Genesereth will be the featured speaker at the
Seminar on May 1st. Time is 2:15, in Terman Room 217.
"DART: An Automated Diagnostician for Equipment Failures"
Michael R. Genesereth
Logic Group
Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford
This talk describes a device-independent diagnostic program called
DART. DART differs from previous approaches to diagnosis taken in
the Artificial Intelligence community in that it works directly
from design descriptions rather than MYCIN-like symptom-fault
rules. DART differs from previous approaches to diagnosis taken in
the design-automation community in that it is more general and in
many cases more efficient. DART uses a device-independent language
for describing devices and a device-independent inference procedure
for diagnosis. The resulting generality allows it to be applied to
a wide class of devices ranging from digital logic to nuclear reactors.
Although this generally engenders some computational overhead on
small problems, it facilitates the use of multiple design descriptions
and thereby makes possible combinatoric savings that more than offsets
this overhead on problems of realistic size.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Apr 1985 16:05 EST (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Abstraction and Classification in NIKL (MIT)
ABSTRACTION AND CLASSIFICATION IN A HYBRID REPRESENTATION SYSTEM
Marc Vilain
BBN Laboratories
Cambridge, MA
Hybrid architectures have been used in several recent knowledge
representation systems. In this talk, I will explore several hybrid
representation architectures, focusing particularly on the architecture
of the KL-TWO system. KL-TWO is built around a propositional reasoner
called PENNI (a descendant of RUP) and a terminological reasoner called
NIKL (a descendant of KL-ONE).
I will show how NIKL can be interfaced to PENNI so as to augment
PENNI's propositional language with a limited form of quantification.
This interface relies crucially on two operations that follow naturally
from the KL-TWO architecture: abstraction and classification. I will
describe these operations, and discuss how their generality might extend
beyond the scope of KL-TWO.
Tuesday, April 30; 4:00pm; 8th Floor Playroom
------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 1985 12:24-EST
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Evidential Reasoning in Semantic Networks (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Another BBN AI Seminar: Lokendra Shastri of U. of Rochester
will talk on Friday April 26 in room 5/143 (near the travel
office).
Evidential Reasoning in Semantic Networks
A Formal Theory and its Parallel Implementation
The talk presents an evidential approach to knowledge
representation and inference wherein the principle of maximum
entropy is applied to deal with uncertainty and incompleteness.
It focuses on a representation language that is an evidential
extension of semantic networks, and develops a formal theory of
inheritance and recognition within this language. The theory
applies to a limited, but interesting, class of inheritance and
recognition problems, including those that involve exceptions,
multiple hierarchies, and conflicting information. The resulting
theory may be implemented as an interpreter-free, massively
parallel network made up of highly interconnected but extremely
simple computing elements. The network can solve inheritance and
recognition problems in time proportional to the depth of the
conceptual hierarchy.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 2121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #59
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 21:21:29 PDT
Date: Sun 5 May 1985 16:35-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #59
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 6 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 59
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Artificial Language Learning (SU) &
Understanding Text with Diagrams (UTexas) &
Semantics and Metaphysics (CSLI) &
Diagram Understanding (SRI) &
Simple Description of the World (CSLI) &
Illocutionary Acts (UCB) &
A Computational Model of Skill Acquisition (SU) &
Marker-Passing during Problem Solving (UToronto)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 85 18:23:01 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Seminar - Artificial Language Learning (SU)
Morphological & prosodic cues in the learning
of a miniature phrase-structure language
RICHARD MEIER
(Stanford University)
I will claim that the input to language learning is a grouped
and structured sequence of words and that learning operates most
successfully on such structures, and not on mere word strings. After
briefly reviewing evidence for such groupings in natural language, this
claim will be supported by three experiements in artificial language
learning. These experiments allow rigorous control of the input to the
learner. Prior work had argued that, in such experiments, adult subjects
can learn complex syntactic rules only with extensive semantic mediation.
In the current experiments, subjects fully learned complex aspects of
syntax if they viewed, or heard, sentences (paired with an uninformative
semantics) containing one of three grouping cues for constituent structure:
prosody, function words, or agreement suffixes on the words within a
constituent. Absent such cues, subjects learned only limited aspects of
syntax. These results suggest that, in natural languages, such grouping
cues may subserve syntax learning.
April 12th 3:15pm Jordan Hall; Rm. 100
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 85 13:24:21 cst
From: briggs@ut-sally.ARPA (Ted Briggs)
Subject: Seminar - Understanding Text with Diagrams (UTexas)
Understanding Text with an Accompanying Diagram
by
Bill Bulko
noon Friday April 12
PAI 5.60
We are investigating the mechanisms by which a physics problem
specified jointly by English text and graphics images can be
understood. The investigation is guided by the study of the
following subproblems:
(1) What kinds of rules and knowledge would it take to understand
the information contained in a picture model and a block of
related English text?
(2) What kind of control structure is required?
(3) How can information contained in the picture but not in the
text, and vice versa, be recognized and understood? That is,
how can coreference between text and a picture be handled?
------------------------------
Date: Wed 3 Apr 85 16:26:36-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Semantics and Metaphysics (CSLI)
Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, April 11, 1985
``Semantics for Natural Language: Metaphysics for the Simple-minded?''
Chris Menzel, CSLI
What, exactly, is the connection between semantics and metaphysics?
A semantical theory gives an account of the meaning of certain
expressions in natural language, and, intuitively, the meaning of an
expression has to do with the connection between the expression (or an
utterance of it) and the world. Thus, a simple-minded view might be
that (as far as it goes) a correct semantical theory ipso facto yields
the sober metaphysical truth about what there is.
To the contrary, implicit in much work in semantics is the idea
that all we should expect of a good theory is that it be, in Keenan's
terms, descriptively adequate: it should provide a theoretical
structure which preserves our judgments of logical truth and
entailment, never mind the question of the literal metaphysical
details of the structure (e.g., that the denotations of singular terms
are complex sets of sets rather than individuals).
For next week's TINlunch I will provide a framework for discussion
by laying out the simple-minded view and its chief rival in somewhat
more detail. Being rather simple-minded myself, I'll attempt to
defend a reasonable version of the former. As grist for both
philosophical mills I will draw upon recent work in intensional logic,
Montague grammar, generalized quantifiers, the semantics of plurals,
and situation semantics. --Chris Menzel
------------------------------
Date: Mon 8 Apr 85 11:19:34-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Diagram Understanding (SRI)
Area P1 Talk --
WHERE: SRI Int'l Room EK242 (conference room)
WHEN: Tues April 9 at 2:30
DIAGRAM UNDERSTANDING:
THE INTERSECTION OF COMPUTER GRAPHICS AND COMPUTER VISION
Fanya S. Montalvo
MIT, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
ABSTRACT
A problem common to Computer Vision and Computer Graphics is
identified. It deals with the representation, acquisition, and
validation of symbolic descriptions for visual properties. The
utility of treating this area as one is explained in terms of
providing the facility for diagrammatic conversations with systems. I
call this area "Diagram Understanding", which is analogous to Natural
Language Understanding. The recognition and generation of visual
objects are two sides of the same symbolic coin. A paradigm for the
discovery of higher-level visual properties is introduced, and its
application to Computer Vision and Computer Graphics described. The
notion of denotation is introduced in this context. It is the map
between linguistic symbols and visual properties. A method is
outlined for associating symbolic descriptions with visual properties
in such a way that human subjects can be brought into the loop in
order to validate (or specify) the denotation map. Secondly, a way of
discovering a natural set of visual primitives is introduced.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 3 Apr 85 16:26:36-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Simple Description of the World (CSLI)
Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, April 11, 1985
``What if the World Were Really Quite Simple?''
Alex Pentland, CSLI
One of the major stumbling blocks for efforts in AI has been the
apparent overwhelming complexity of the natural world; for instance,
when an AI program tries to decide on a course of action (or the
meaning of a sentence) it is often defeated by the incredible number
of alternatives to consider. Results such as those of Tversky,
however, argue that people are able to use characteristics of the
current situation to somehow "index" directly into the two or three
most likely alternatives, so that deductive reasoning per se plays a
relatively minor role.
How could people accomplish such indexing? One possibility is that
the structure of our environment is really quite a bit simpler that it
appears on the surface, and that people are able to use this structure
to constrain their reasoning much more tightly than is done in current
AI research.
Is it possible that the world is really relatively simple? In
forming a scientific theory we may trade the size and complexity of
description against the amount of error. Because modern scientific
endeavors have placed great emphasis on increasingly accurate
description, very little effort has gone toward discovering a grain
size of description at which the world may be relatively simply
described while still maintaining a useful level of accuracy.
I will argue that such a simple description of the world is
plausible, discuss progress in discovering such a descriptive
vocabulary, and comment on how knowledge of such a vocabulary might
have a profound impact on AI and psychology. --Alex Pentland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 85 17:34:14 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Illocutionary Acts (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, April 30, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
SPEAKER: Herbert H. Clark, Department of Psychology, Stan-
ford University
TITLE: ``Illocutionary acts, illocutionary perfor-
mances''
From John Austin on, theorists have said a good deal about
what it is to be a question, assertion, promise, or other illocu-
tionary act. But in their characterizations they have generally
assumed a rather strong idealization about how illocutionary acts
are performed. Among other things, they have taken these four
points for granted: (1) An illocutionary act is a preplanned
event. (2) It is performed by the speaker acting alone. (3) The
speaker acts with certain definite intentions about affecting his
addressee. And (4) the speaker discharges these intentions
merely by issuing a sentence (or sentence surrogate) in the right
circumstances. As with any idealization, these assumptions
aren't quite right. Indeed, I will document that illocutionary
acts in conversation are not preplanned events but processes that
the participants may alter midcourse for various purposes, and
that they are accomplished by the speaker and addressees acting
together. Once the traditional assumptions are replaced by more
realistic ones, we are led to quite a different notion of illocu-
tionary act.
The view I will develop is that performing illocutionary
acts in conversation is a collaborative process between speaker
and addressees. One of the goals of these participants is to
establish the mutual belief, roughly by the beginning of each new
contribution, that the addressees have understood the speaker's
meaning well enough for current purposes. The speaker and
addressees have systematic linguistic techniques for reaching
this goal. In support of this view I will report a study by
Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs and myself on how definite references get
made in conversation and another study by Edward F. Schaefer and
myself on what it is, more generally, to make certain contribu-
tions to conversation.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 85 05:01:59 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Seminar - A Computational Model of Skill Acquisition (SU)
[Forwarded from the CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Psych. Dept. Friday Cognitive Seminar
April 26th 3:15pm Jordan Hall; Rm. 100
A Computational Model of
Skill Aquisition
KURT VAN LEHN (Xerox PARC)
A theory will be presented that describes how people learn certain
procedural skills, such as the written algorithms of arithmetic and
algebra, from multi-lesson curricula. There are two main hypotheses.
(1) Teachers enforce, perhaps unknowingly, certain constraints that
relate the structure of the procedure to the structure of the lesson
sequence, and moreover, students employ these constraints, perhaps
unknowingly, as they induce a procedure from the lesson sequence. (2)
As students follow the procedure they have induced, they employ a
certain kind of meta-level problem solving to free themselves when their
interpretation of the procedure gets stuck. The theory's predictions,
which are generated by a computer model of the putative learning and
problem solving processes, have been tested against error data from
several thousand students. The usual irrefutability of computer
simulations of complex cognition has been avoided by a linguistic style
of argumentation that assigns empirical responsibility to individual
hypotheses.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 85 13:04:45 est
From: Voula Vanneli <voula%toronto.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Marker-Passing during Problem Solving (UToronto)
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
(GB = Galbraith Bldg., 35 St. George St.)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEMINAR - Wednesday, April 10, 4 pm,
GB 244
Jim Hendler
Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University
Studies of Marker Passing in Knowledge Representation
and Problem Solving Systems.
A standard problem in Artificial Intelligence systems that
do planning or problem solving is called the "late-
information, early-decision paradox." This occurs when the
planner makes a choice as to which action to consider, prior
to encountering information that could either identify an
optimal solution or that would present a contradiction. As
the decision is made in the absence of this information it
is often the wrong one, leading to much needless processing.
In this talk I describe how the technique known as "marker-
passing" can be used by a problem-solver. Marker-passing,
which has been shown in the past to be useful for such cog-
nitive tasks as story comprehension and word sense disambi-
guation, is a parallel, non-deductive, "spreading activa-
tion" algorithm. By combining this technique with a plan-
ning system the paradox described above can often be circum-
vented. The marker-passer can also be used by the problem-
solver during "meta-rule" invocation and for finding certain
inherent problems in plans. An implementation of such a
system is discussed as are the design "desiderata" for a
marker-passer.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-May-85 2330 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #60
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 May 85 23:29:23 PDT
Date: Sun 5 May 1985 16:59-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #60
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 6 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 60
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Frame Problem (UCB) &
The Sequential Nature of Unification (SU) &
Late-Bound Polymorphic Languages (IBM-SJ) &
Inclusive Predicate Existence (CMU) &
The LCF Programmable Theorem Provers (UTexas) &
Automated Programming (CMU) &
Mathematical Discovery and Hindsight (RU) &
Foundations of Horn Logic Programming (CMU) &
Property Theory and Second-Order Logic (CSLI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 85 15:29:21 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Frame Problem (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, April 9, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
SPEAKER: Jerry Fodor, Philosophy Department, MIT and
UC Berkeley
TITLE: ``Modules, Frames, Fridgeons, Sleeping
Dogs and The Music of The Spheres''
This paper continues the discussion of the frame problem
from The Modularity of Mind. It's argued that outbreaks of the
frame problem are characteristic of the study of unencapsulated -
hence nonmodular - cognitive faculties, and that this explains
why the effects of the problem are felt much more strongly when
we consider cognition and problem solving than when the topic is
perceptual integration. Since unencapsulation is a leading
characteristic of any process of rational nondemonstrative infer-
ence, it is argued that the solution of the frame problem is not
dissociable from the general problem of understanding such
processes. This rather gloomy assessment is then compared with
views current in AI according to which resort to `sleeping dog'
strategies has already made it possible to circumvent the frame
problem. I argue that the proposed solution begs the problem.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Apr 85 0000 PST
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Sequential Nature of Unification (SU)
CS Colloquium, April 9, 4:15pm, Terman Auditorium
ON THE SEQUENTIAL NATURE OF UNIFICATION
Cynthia Dwork
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Unification of terms is a crucial step in resolution theorem proving, with
applications to a variety of symbolic computation problems. It will be
shown that the general problem is log-space complete for P, even if
inifinite substitutions are allowed. Thus a fast parallel algorithm for
unification is unlikely. More positively, term matching, an important
subcase of unification, will be shown to have a parallel algorithm
requiring a number of processors polynomial in n, the size of the input,
and running in time poly-logarithmic in n.
This talk assumes no familiarity with unification or its applications.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 85 17:03:57 PST
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Late-Bound Polymorphic Languages (IBM-SJ)
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Mon., Apr. 8 Computer Science Seminar
10:30 A.M. STATIC TYPE ANALYSIS IN LATE-BOUND POLYMORPHIC LANGUAGES
Aud. A Late-bound languages are those which in some way
permit the user to delay the binding of meanings to
operation names until such time as the operation is
actually to be invoked. SIMULA is generally
considered to be the first such language and several
others, most notably Smalltalk, Zetalisp, and LOOPS,
have been introduced in recent years. These
languages gain great flexibility from the
programmer's ability to write procedures which work
on a wide variety of kinds of data, each of which
implements a small set of common operations in a
data-specific way. This kind of polymorphism,
coupled with an inheritance mechanism for sharing
code, has enabled the creation of powerful software
in remarkably little time and space. The price for
this flexibility, however, has until now been the
inability to formally reason about programs in these
languages. In particular, the lack of a decidable
and sound system of static typechecking has prevented
the application of even the simplest kinds of
compiler optimizations. In this way, late-binding
has acquired a reputation for inherent slowness and
impracticality. My talk will examine the issue of
static typechecking for these languages in detail.
The Smalltalk-80 language is studied first, leading
to an explication of both the major subtleties
inherent in the problem and the picayune but
crippling difficulties with Smalltalk itself which
render static analysis in that language ugly and,
ultimately, impracticable. An approach to the
problem and a new perspective on late-binding itself
eventually emerge and, in the final part of the talk,
these are applied to the design of a small,
late-bound, polymorphic language. I have constructed
formal semantics and a provably-sound system for
type-inference in this language. These in turn have
led to a type-assignment algorithm based on circular
unification.
P. Curtis, Cornell University
Host: J. Williams
------------------------------
Date: 2 Apr 1985 1621-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Inclusive Predicate Existence (CMU)
APPLIED LOGIC SEMINAR
Speaker: Ketan Mulmuley
Date: Monday, April 8, 1985
Time: 2:00 - 3:15 pm
Place: 2105 Doherty Hall
Title: A Mechanizable Theory For Inclusive Predicate Existence
ABSTRACT:
In denotational semantics inclusive predicates play a major role in showing
the equivalence of two semantics - one operational and one denotational, for
example - of a given language. Proving the existence these inclusive
predicates is always the hardest part of any semantic equivalence proof.
Reynolds and Milne gave a general scheme for proving such existences.
However, because of the difficult nature of these proofs it soon became
desirable to have a mechanizable theory for such proofs so that the computer
could automate a large chunk of them. We shall present one such theory and
see how it was implemented on top of LCF.
Moreover, we shall prove that this existence issue is indeed nontrivial
through diagonalization.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 7 Apr 85 13:23:27-CST
From: CL.SHANKAR@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - The LCF Programmable Theorem Provers (UTexas)
Larry Paulson (Cambridge U.) on LCF, Tue April 9, 4-5pm, Pai 3.02
Abstract: The LCF project has produced a family of interactive,
programmable theorem-provers, particularly intended for verifying computer
hardware and software. The introduction sketches basic concepts: the
metalanguage ML, the logic PPLAMBDA, backwards proof, rewriting, and theory
construction. A historical section surveys some LCF proofs. Several
proofs involve denotational semantics, notably for compiler correctness.
Functional programs for parsing and unification have been verified.
Digital circuits have been proved correct, and some subsequently fabricated.
There is an extensive bibliography of work related to LCF. The most dynamic
issues at present are data types, subgoal techniques, logics of computation,
and the development of ML.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Apr 1985 0912-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Automated Programming (CMU)
Speakers: Kent Petersson and Jan Smith
Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. of Goteborg, Sweden
Date: Tuesday, April 16
Time: 3:30 - 4:30
Place: 4605 Wean Hall
Topic: Program derivation in type theory
In Martin-Lof's type theory, programs can be formally derived from
specifications. When formulating a specification, predicate
logic is available by the interpretation of propositions as types.
Formulating the rules as tactics, programs are constructed "top
down." These ideas will be illustrated by a derivation of a
program for the partitioning problem.
------------------------------
Date: 17 Apr 85 13:28:24 EST
From: John <Bresina@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Mathematical Discovery and Hindsight (RU)
Machine Learning Colloquium
MATHEMATICAL DISCOVERY AND THE HINDSIGHT CRITERION
Michael Sims, Rutgers
Abstract
My dissertation research is an investigation into the nature of mathematical
discovery, and this talk will concern the portion of that work related to the
understanding of the relationship between changes in representation and a
discovery systems performance. More specifically, I would like to define new
concepts in such a way that the resulting representation language leads to
better efficiency in future discovery tasks. I will suggest a general
principle (Hindsight Criterion), which leads to greater future efficiency in
concept formation problems in an interestingness driven discovery system. I
will also indicate why this is expected to be true.
The Hindsight Criterion says that it is useful to define a new concept when
doing so will make an (already known) interesting expression simpler. Although
this is a widely used criterion, my work indicates how Hindsight relates to the
complexity of the search for the original expression, as well as how it can
improve the complexity of future discoveries in an actual discovery system. I
will also discuss how Hindsight is being used to direct concept formation in
the mathematical discovery system, IL, which I am currently implementing.
DATE: Friday, April 19th
TIME: 11:00-12noon (talk); 12noon-12:30 (discussion)
PLACE: Room 423, Hill
------------------------------
Date: 25 Apr 1985 0828-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Foundations of Horn Logic Programming (CMU)
Speaker: Vijay Saraswat
Date: Monday, April 29, 1985
Time: 2:00 - 3:15
Place: Scaife Hall 324
Topic: On the foundations of (Horn) logic programming.
In this talk I present the classical (van Emden, Kowalski, Apt ...)
interpretation of Horn logic (without equality) as a programming language.
In this view (computation as deduction), definite clauses are viewed as
specifications of recursively defined procedures. The least fixed point of the
functional associated with these procedures (which can be captured by a form
of resolution known as SLD-resolution, i.e. non-deterministic procedure call
with parameter passing by unification) is then seen as precisely the extension
of the corresponding predicate in the initial model of the axioms.
Various operational notions of "negation" arise in this context, which can be
related to validity in certain Herbrand models, and I will
discuss them briefly. I will also discuss recent work by Nait-Abdallah and van
Emden on the semantics of a certain kind of infinitary computation using Horn
clauses.
Finally, I will touch upon some "real" "logic" programming langauges such as
Prolog and Concurrent Prolog and show why the classical semantics is not
adequate. For Prolog it only provides a notion of partial correctness, and for
Concurrent Prolog it just bounds the space of correct answers to a query, while
not telling us anything about whether the query might fail or not terminate.
Answering such questions leads to the application of more conventional
techniques from semantics of programming languages to (Horn) logic programming.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 24 Apr 85 17:10:00-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Property Theory and Second-Order Logic (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THURSDAY, May 2, 1985
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall ``Property Theory and Second-Order Logic''
Room G-19 Chris Menzel, CSLI
``Property Theory and Second-Order Logic''
Much recent work in semantics (e.g., Barwise and Perry, Chierchia,
Sells, Zalta) involves an extensive appeal to abstract logical
objects--properties, relations, and propositions. Such objects were
of course not unheard of in semantics prior to this work. What is
noteworthy is the extent to which the conception of these objects
differs from the prevailing conception in formal semantics, viz.,
Montague's. Two ways in which they differ (not necessarily common to
all recent accounts) stand out: first, these abstract objects are
metaphysically primitive, not set theoretic constructions out of
possible worlds and individuals; second, they are untyped--properties
can exemplify each other as well as themselves, relations can fall
within their own field, and so on.
With properties, relations, and propositions playing this more
prominent role in semantics (as well as in philosophy), it is
essential that there be a rigorous mathematical theory of these
objects. The framework for such a theory, I think, is second-order
logic; indeed, I will argue that second-order logic, rightly
understood, just IS the theory of properties, relations, and
propositions. To this end, building primarily on the work of Bealer,
Cocchiarella, and Zalta, I will present a second-order logic that is
provably consistent along with an algebraic intensional semantics
which yields significant insights into the structure of the abstract
ontology of logic and the paradoxes. Time permitting, I will apply the
logic to two issues, one in semantics and the other in the philosophy
of mathematics--specifically, to the analysis of noun phrases
involving terms of order like `fourth' and `last', and the question of
what the (ordinal) numbers are, to which I will give a logicist answer
adumbrated by Russell. --Chris Menzel
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-May-85 1124 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #61
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 May 85 11:24:25 PDT
Date: Wed 8 May 1985 09:25-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #61
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 8 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 61
Today's Topics:
Machine Translation - Survey,
Games & Learning - NIM References,
Opinion - Research Literature,
Seminar - Mechanized Hypothesis Formation (SMU),
Description - CS at Linkopings University, Sweden
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 6 MAY 85 14:48-N
From: PETITP%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: more on machine translation
Here is a summary of the information I sent to Barbara Stafford concerning
Machine Translation. (cf her request in AIList V3 #54 and my note in V3 # 50)
To know what is beeing done on MT in Provo,Utah, contact Alan K. Melby at
Brigham Young University. Mr Melby works in the field of user interface for
MT and gave a paper at the ISSCO tutorial on MT: "Recipe for a translator's
workstation".
Here are ALPS and WEIDNER's address:
Alps Systems
190 West 800 North
Provo, Utah 84601
Tel: (801) 3750090
Another commercial system I didn't mentionned was developped in Germany:
LOGOS (also quite primitive). Here is their address:
LOGOS Computer Systems Deutschland Gmbh
Lyoner Strasse 26
6000 Frankfurt am Main 71
Tel: (0611) 666 69 50
Telex 4 189808
And also in Germany, Siemens just entered the market with
METAL (that I mentionned in AIList v3 #50). It was presented at the Hannover
fair this april.
In the ISSCO MT tutorial, the presentation by E.Ananiadou & S.Warwick ("An
overview of post ALPAC developments") might interest you: In that paper there
is a part on TITUS a french MT system for abstracts with a restricted syntax.
This might be close to your work. Here is their address:
Institut Textile de France
35 rue des Abondances
F-92100 Boulogne-sur-Seine (France)
Tel: 825.18.90
Telex: 250940
And some more reference to introductory readings in Machine Translation:
Kilby K.J., Whitelock P.J.
"Linguistic and computational techniques in Machine Translation system design.
- Final report", December 83
CCL/UMIST report 84/2
with description of the systems SYSTRAN, TAUM METEO,
TAUM AVIATION, GETA ARIANE-78, LRC METAL, Wilks' PS.
Centre for Computational Linguistics
University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology
PO BOX 88
Manchester, England
(Pete Whitelock's network address is pjw%minim%umpa@UCL-CS.ARPA)
Veronica Lawson (Editor)
Practical Experience of Machine Translation
North Holland, 1982
(Papers from a conference given by the ASLIB)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 May 85 13:53:17 edt
From: gross@dcn9.arpa (Phill Gross)
Subject: NIM references
With a partner, I developed a learning Nim game as part of a project
for a AI course at George Washington University. It was implemented
as a Collective Learning Automaton, a concept advanced by the instructor,
Peter Bock. The CLA concept is rather simple. It only works for small
state-space games where the current state representation contains all
information necessary to make the next move. It also works best with
games like Nim that have a perfect playing strategy. The automaton knows
the rules and begins by guessing moves. An independent process watches
the action and rewards or punishes the automaton based on the result. In
the next game, the automaton chooses moves based on what it 'learned' from
its previous experiences. After a series of games, it homes in on the
correct strategy.
We matched our automaton against 4 levels of opponents- an expert,
another learner, a dummy (made legal but totally random moves) and a
'novice' (smart enough not to make random moves but hasn't really gotten
the hang of it yet). Our interest was learning speed under various
reward/punishment regimes.
Despite the simplicity of the CLA model, some interesting, 'intuitively
obvious' anthropomorhisms were 'verified'. For example, it always learned
quickly and perfectly against an expert. Against the dummy, it exhibited
very confused behavior, characterized by slow, imperfect learning, since
it may be alternately rewarded and punished for the same move.
(The moral, I suppose, is if you want to learn a game, don't play against
schlubs). It seemed that heavier punishment was more important when playing
against the novice or the dummy. (ie, if a move loses against a dummy, it must
really be bad), whereas light punishment/heavier reward produced better
results against the expert (don't crucify the kid if he loses when he's
clearly out of his league). Interestingly enough, learning was slowed
against the expert without at least a small amount of punishment
(constructive criticism?).
AI is by no means my main interest but I feel compelled to open myself to
flames by adding a couple comments. The two AI courses I took (the other at
Penn State) were (charitably) the weakest courses I had in grad school.
While any good curriculum should include courses on topics like compilers
and operating systems, perhaps the state of AI today is such that it should
not be casually included just to broaden the course offerings. It seems
that the AI frontier is pushing forward on two fronts- a rather esoteric
'high end' exploring things like vision, natural language understanding
and cognitive processes; and a more down-to-earth 'low end' dealing with
knowledge based systems and heuristic programming. While the former mixes
a number of disciplines outside computer science and is best pursued as
thesis topics, I feel the latter could be taught to a bright class of
sophomores or juniors. A manager of KBES projects noted to me that his
experience showed that if you give some expensive tools to a smart programmer,
send her to a two week course given by one of the vendors and then let'm
hack for a while, you've got yourself a 'knowledge engineer'. If only
results in true AI could be achieved as readily.
All of this is a major digression from my original intent, which was to
add a few references to the Nim list.
* 'Basic Computer Games', David Ahl, Workman Publishing Co., 1978.
* 'Games of the World', Frederick Gruenfeld, Ballentine Books, 1975.
* 'The World Book of Math Power', (Adjunct to the good old World Book
Encyclopedia), Vol 2, "NIM", pp 667-671, 1983.
Anyone interested in CLA's should contact Peter Bock at GWU, since I
can't recall him giving references for his articles. Regretfully (and
somewhat gratefully, since I really don't feel that we did much to push
forward the AI frontiers), neither the code nor our final report is available
online, nor do I have the time and resources to make it available by mail.
Phill Gross
[Phil's approach sounds like the "learning machine" discussed in
Martin Gardner's Scientific American column in March 1962.
I remember inferring that something was wrong with my own NIM
strategy after noticing that 1) my machine quickly learned to
beat me whenever I started, and 2) it usually also beat me when
it started. That column got me interested in learning algorithms
and, eventually, AI. I still have the paper machine I constructed,
along with the card-and-hole "logic machine" from the December
1960 column.
The NIM reference I gave earlier should have been W. Rouse Ball, not
Bell. I think I have his 13th edition packed away somewhere. It
also has interesting discussions of mathematical card tricks, string
figures, and the Cambridge educational system -- much of which was
omitted from later editions. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue 7 May 85 18:25:31-EDT
From: SRIDHARAN@BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Research Literature
I read an article in New Scientist (18 April 85) that ...
".. there are 2750 different mathematics research journals. If you
conservatively estimate the annual contents of each to be, on average,
700 pages, this means that each year some 1 650 000 pages of mathematical
research are published. One estimate puts the number of profesional
mathematicians in the world at 100 000."
Compared to this AI has I would guess has less than 2 dozen journals now
and about 1000 researchers (over-estimate). In my mind, this
discipline, concerned with knowledge and reasoning, is just as
fundamental as mathematics - and I should like AI to be eventually (in
the next century) to be just as large.
One consequence of growth should be understood. When someone writes a
paper, others may not actually read it, especially not right away. I
think the time lapse between the appearance of a paper and its wide
appeal may grow QUADRATICALLY with the volume of publications. I know
that I now take about 2 years to catch up with papers of interest to me.
A decade ago, I used to finish reading relevant papers in about 6
months. For example, six months after the '73 and '75 IJCAIs, I had
managed to read or scan relevant papers from those proceedings. Now,
I am behind even with AAAI-83 and -84.
All this says, we need to cultivate patience as the discipline grows!
The process of knowledge diffusion will take longer. Our respective
distractions engendered by commercial/business hoop-la, only aggravates
this. To do anything state-of-the-art, and to push the frontiers will
take more effort as time goes on.
People who write papers, now have an increased responsibility to do
more thorough checks of existing literature. Given that we have the
use of very advanced computational tools, we ought to be able to do
this more thoroughly than most other disciplines.
------------------------------
Date: 7 May 1985 19:50-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Seminar - Mechanized Hypothesis Formation (SMU)
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Southern Methodist
University
TOPIC: Progress in Automated Research
SPEAKER: Dr. Fred N. Springsteel, Visitng Professor University of Missouri,
Columbia, Missouri
WHERE, WHEN INFO: Thursday May 9, 1985 1:30-2:30 PM Thursday May 9, 1985
315 SIC, Southern Methodist University
Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) is a lesser-known field that outgrew
the bounds of statistics. Originated by J. W. Tukey in 1962, EDA works
toward an open-ended meta-goal: to discover "all interesting"
(nontrivial, normal form, valid) hypotheses about a domain that is
represented by a large scientific sample of data, e. g. a suburban
census matrix. One very active brand of EDA is being purused by a
20-year-old Czech research circle that I visited in 1976. Their EDA is
called Mechanized Hypothesis Formation (MHF); it can heuristically
generate-and-test many types of logical/statistical forms.
MHF algorithmic decision problems have been shown, by me, to have
complexities that swift shiftly from P-time to NP-hard (TCS '79 IJMMS
'81). Users of such complex, multilevel software packages need expert
advice! Lately, consulting system technics have been applied to make a
Test Advisor for users, based on their special needs; it recommends
which statistic (of many) to run and how to parametrize the load
module. A much larger project (GUHA-80) is planned, which hopes to
apply the results of AUTOMATED EDA to the big bottleneck in building
expert systems: KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION.
------------------------------
Date: 3 May 1985 2115
From: mcvax!enea!liuida!jbl@seismo.ARPA
Subject: Description - CS at Linkopings University, Sweden
[Edited by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The Department of Computer and Information Science at Linkopings University in
Sweden announces the availability of postdoctoral research and sabbatical
leave positions. The department provides a wide range of research and
educational activities as indicated in the areas of faculty specialization.
The university is located in the town of Linkoping, approximately 200
kilometers south of Stockholm. Linkoping has a population of 120000 and is in
the heart of the rapidly expanding Ostergotland high technology industrial
area. Linkopings University employes approximately 1600 people and has
faculties of engineering, science, liberal arts, medicine and education. The
department of Computer and Information Science has approximately 80 employees
(faculty, staff and graduate students) of whom 15 have attained the doctoral
degree. [...]
Faculty members (for academic year 1984-1985)
Par Emanuelson, functional languages, program verification, program analysis
and program manipulation, programming environments, software
engineering.
Peter Fritzson (on leave to SUN MicroSystems during 1985), tool generation,
incremental tools, programming environments.
Anders Haraldsson, programming languages and systems, programming methodology,
program manipulation.
Roland Hjerppe, library science and systems, citation analysis and
bibliometrics, fact representation and information retrieval,
hypertext, human-computer interaction and personal computing.
Sture Hagglund, database technology, human-computer interaction, artificial
intelligence applications.
Harold W. Lawson, Jr. (Professor of Telecommunications and Computer Systems),
computer architecture, VLSI, computer-aided design, methodology of
computer-related education and training.
Bengt Lennartsson, programming environments, real-time applications,
distributed systems.
Andrzej Lingas, complexity theory, analysis of algorithms, geometric
complexity, graph algorithms, logic programming, VLSI theory.
Bryan Lyles (guest researcher), computer architecture, VLSI, user interfaces,
distributed systems.
Jan Maluszynski, logic programming, software specification methods.
Erik Sandewall (Professor of Computer Science), representation of knowledge
with logic, theory of information management systems, office
information systems, autonomous expert systems.
Bo Sundgren, database design, conceptual modelling, statistical information
systems.
Erik Tengvald, artificial intelligence, knowledge representation, planning and
problem solving, expert systems.
Associated Faculty Members
Jan-Olaf Bruer (Dept of Electrical Engineering), office automation systems,
especially security issues.
Ingemar Ingemarsson (Professor of Information Theory), information theory,
security and data encryption, error correction codes and data
compression.
Ove Wigertz (Professor of Medical Informatics), medical information systems,
expert systems.
During the next academic year (85/86) additional Ph.D. faculty will be joining
the department in the areas of computational complexity, computational
linguistics, software engineering and computer systems.
Department and University Computing Resources
The department has as research computers a DEC 2060, a DEC VAX11/780, several
SUNs, six Xerox 1108 InterLisp machines, and numerous smaller machines such as
PDP-11s and micro-VAXs. Department plans include significant near-term
expansion of research computing.
Undergraduate computing systems include two DEC 2065s, a DEC 2020, a DEC PDP
11/70 and PDP 11/73 running Unix, a large number of Apple Macintoshes and a
variety of small machines such as PDP 11s used for operating system labs. As
is the case with research computing, major expansions of undergraduate
computing capacity are planned in the near future. Since the total number of
undergraduates enrolled in computer related lines of study is less than at
some large U.S. universities, each student gets significant computer time.
Linkoping is part of the UUCP and SUNET networks. The campus is wired with
Ethernet and all major machines are connected via TCP/IP, DECNET or XNS
protocols.
For further information about Linkoping University and the Department of
Computer and Information Science contact:
Graduate Division
c/o Mrs. Lillemor Wallgren
Department of Computer and Information Science
Linkopings University
S-581 83 Linkoping
SWEDEN
Telephone (+46) 13-281480
Telex: 50067 LINBIBL S
UUCP: {decvax, seismo}!mcvax!enea!liuida!lew
ARPA: LEW%LIUIDA.UUCP@SEISMO.ARPA
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂12-May-85 1546 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #62
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 May 85 15:46:44 PDT
Date: Sun 12 May 1985 14:15-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #62
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 12 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 62
Today's Topics:
Book Review - Logic Programming Bibliography,
Seminars - Proof of the Church-Rosser Theorem (UTexas) &
Mechanical Proofs in Metamathematics (SRI) &
Logic Programming Environments (Penn) &
Qualitative Causal Reasoning (MIT) &
AI in Manufacturing Design (SU),
Conferences - AI and Simulation & Law and Technology
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 May 85 10:31:22 EST
From: Simon MacDonald <munnari!simonmac@seismo.ARPA>
Subject: Book Review - Logic Programming Bibliography
Logic Programming: a Classified Bibliography
by I. Balbin, and K. Lecot.
This exciting area in computer science is growing very
quickly; so quickly in fact, that an overview of its
origins, seminal papers, landmark treatises, pioneering
articles etc., may be forgotten, or difficult to identify
and obtain.
Now, the authors of this comprehensive bibliography of well
over 1,600 entries have brought it all together, classed the
type of each paper or monograph into one of 18 broad
categories. This is somewhat arbitrary, but very useful for
those wishing to cover a specific sub-topic. If the item
covers more than one category, it is entered in each
relevant section.
The bibliography is more than twice the size of the one
which appeared in Journal of Logic Programming, and is very
recent. It also has an author index, and subject index.
Approx. 330 pages, softcovers,laminated, burstbound.
Release date July 15, 1985. Prepublication price of A$17.95
[Australian] is valid only until June 30th, 1985.
Publisher: WILDGRASS BOOKS, 289A Smith Street, Fitzroy,
Victoria, 3065, AUSTRALIA. U.S. Distributor: Publishing
House, 210 Broad Street, Washington, NJ, 07882.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 May 85 22:58:07 cdt
From: briggs@ut-sally.ARPA (Ted Briggs)
Subject: Seminar - Proof of the Church-Rosser Theorem (UTexas)
A MECHANICAL PROOF OF THE CHURCH-ROSSER THEOREM
by
N. Shankar
1 PM Friday May 10
PAI 5.60
The talk outlines a formalization and proof of the
Church-Rosser theorem that was carried out with the Boyer-Moore
theorem prover. This celebrated theorem on the Lambda Calculus
lacked a widely accepted proof for over thirty years. The
mechanical proof is based on the one due to Tait and Martin-Lof.
The proof illustrates the effective use of the Boyer-Moore
theorem prover in checking difficult metamathematical proofs.
The above proof effort led to a much clearer understanding of the
proof and brought certain representational issues to light. No
familiarity with the Boyer-Moore theorem prover or Lambda
Calculus will be assumed.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 10 May 85 17:08:40-PDT
From: WALDINGER@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Mechanical Proofs in Metamathematics (SRI)
Wednesday, May 15, 4:15, in EJ232, SRI International
This is different from Shankar's talk at Stanford.
MECHANICAL PROOFS IN METAMATHEMATICS
N. Shankar
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas
Metamathematics is a source of many interesting theorems and difficult
proofs. Among these are theorems which express the soundness of
derived inference rules. The talk will describe a formalization of
first-order logic within the Boyer-Moore logic and discuss some
well-known derived inference rules that were proved to be sound using
the Boyer-Moore theorem prover. The most important of these is the
tautology theorem which states that every tautology has a proof. The
proof of the tautology theorem will be discussed in some detail. Such
proofs demonstrate a feasible way to construct sound, efficient, and
extensible proof-checking programs. No familiarity with automated
theorem-proving will be assumed.
Visitors from outside SRI should come to the Engineering building
reception, on Ravenswood Avenue opposite Pine street.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 May 85 13:50 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Logic Programming Environments (Penn)
A MODEL AND AN IMPLEMENTATION OF A LOGIC PROGRAMMING ENVIRONMENT
Henryk Jan Komorowski (Harvard)
10:30 May 17; room TBA, Moore School, Univ. of Pennsylvania
It has been claimed that logic programming offers out-
standing possibilities for new concepts in programming
environments. But with the exceptions of the pioneering
work of Shapiro on algorithmic debugging, Pereira's rational
debugging and early work on expert systems from Imperial
College, there has been little progress reported in the
field of logic programming environments. This summary
describes our current work on a generic software engineering
shell for logic programming. We use reflection and the
amalgamation of meta-level language with the object level to
express and support the INCREMENTAL character of
specifying/programming. An important facet of the shell is
that we formalize some aspects of programming methodology
and provide heuristics for avoiding errors. These heuristics
formalize what experienced programmers may already know.
The shell bears similarities to an expert system since
it has explanation mechanisms and provides programming-
knowledge acquisition. Currently, it supports single user
Prolog programming and runs in C-Prolog. The shell is gen-
eric in that it provides support for activities ranging from
artificial intelligence programming to formal specification
development.
This is a joint work with Shigeo Omori.
------------------------------
Date: 10 May 1985 22:15 EDT (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Qualitative Causal Reasoning (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
AI Revolving Seminar Tues 5/14/85 4:00pm 8AI Playroom
Qualitative Causal Reasoning in Diagnosis
Benjamin Kuipers
The classical approach to diagnosis in medical AI programs has been
based on accumulating confidence scores from weighted associations
between findings and diseases. Some of the weaknesses in this
approach can be avoided by incorporating a "causal model" of the
mechanisms involved in the disease. We have developed a causal model
representation based on qualitative simulation of the structures of
physiological mechanisms to yield qualitative predictions of behavior.
The causal model elaborates the diagnostic hypothesis and derives its
evolution through time from its primary causes. We demonstrate QSIM,
an efficient, flexible algorithm for qualitative simulation. QSIM is
a qualitative abstraction of differential equations, which makes it
possible to prove some useful properties. We show some examples of
output from QSIM on significant physiological mechanisms, and we
demonstrate our progress toward integrating hypothesis evocation and
qualitative simulation into a single diagnostic system.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 9 May 85 20:33:57-PDT
From: Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - AI in Manufacturing Design (SU)
AI in Manufacturing and Design Seminar May l5, l985
2:l5 p.m. Terman 2l7
Speaker: Professor David C. Brown
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
We are investigating the structure and operation of expert systems
for the design of mechanical components by computer. As design
in general is a poorly understood activity we have chosen to limit
ourselves to a particular class of design activity, understand it
thoroughly, and built expert systems that simulate that activity
in a realistic way.
------------------------------
Date: 9 May 1985 19:24-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference - AI and Simulation
Southwestern Region Simulation Council Spring Technical Meeting
Artificial Intelligence and Simulation
May 16-17 1985
At: University of Houston/Clear Lake
Bayou Building
2700 Bay Area Blvd.
Clear Lake/NASA JSC Area
Houston, Texas
HIghlights: Thursday 11:00
Dr. John Pinkston
Vice President and Chief Scientist
Micro-Electronics, Computer Technology Corp (MCC)
Austin, Texas
PROLOG Tutorial, Friday 9-11:15 AM
Dr. Ralph Huntsinger
Senior Vice PResident, SCS
Professor of Computer Science
California State University, Chico
Cost: $25.00 two days $15.00 one day students: $10.00
------------------------------
Date: 9 May 1985 16:09-EST
From: "George R. Cross" <cross%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - Law and Technology
========================================================
Second Annual Conference on Law and Technology
Theme: Legal Language, Computational Linguistics,
and Artificial Intelligence
Organizers:
Dr. Charles Walter, Director
Program on Law and Technology
University of Houston Law Center
Houston, Texas 77004
713-749-1422
713-749-4935
Dr. Sidney Lamb, Chairman
Department of Linguistics and Semiotics
Rice University
Houston, Texas
When: June 24-30, 1985
Where: University of Houston,
Houston, Texas
Goal: To stimulate research between jurists, linguists, and computer
scientists
Format: Tutorials, Research Presentations, and Workshops
(Tentative) Schedule
Tutorials:
June 24 A.M. Legal Language
June 24 P.M. Programming the Law in PROLOG
June 25 A.M. Natural Language Processing
June 25 P.M. Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems
Original Research Papers:
June 26-June 28
Workshops:
June 28-30 Workshop Topics to be determined by Participants
Possible Sessions and Workshop Topics:
--viewing legal language as the interface between legal concepts and
computer code
--the language of justice and legal logic: Cardozo's methods of sociology
and philosophy
--semantics of legal situations
--viewing legal language as a computerizable process
--structural & cognitive analysis of legal language
--indeterminancy and uncertainty in legal language
--the role of language in reasoning
--linguistic & cognitive networks
--computer-human interactions
--understanding natural legal language
--legal document analysis & linguistic theory
--automatic representation of semantic relationships
--non-Von Neumann architectures
--parsing natural language
--the role of language in human reasoning.
=======================================================
Please contact Charles Walter for further information
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂12-May-85 1701 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #63
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 May 85 17:01:03 PDT
Date: Sun 12 May 1985 14:32-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #63
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 13 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 63
Today's Topics:
Queries - Requirements Decomposition &
Connectionism and Parallel Distributed Processing,
Binding - Walter Reitman,
Games - Nim,
Expert Systems - Prospector on a PC,
Psychology - Emotional Attachment & Reason and Emotion &
Emotions and Memory & Simulation of Human Understanding
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 May 85 09:21 CDT
From: David←Lagrone <lagrone%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Requirements Decomposition: Correctness and Consistency
Can someone help me with a solution or even an approach to a solution to
the following problem?
Given a set of requirements; e.g., a requirements specification,
and a "first-level expansion" of those requirements into a top-
level design. Can one "prove" or otherwise demonstrate whether
the lower-level, more detailed requirements are a "necessary and
sufficient" statement of the related higher-level requirement?
It has been pointed out that this problem may mean "are you trying
to find out if all requirements mentioned in higher levels are talked
about in lower levels (by actual presence)" or "if things mentioned
in lower levels contain the right content or meaning to fulfill higher
level requirements."
I am more interested in a solution to the "content analysis" problem; how-
ever, the "presence" problem needs resolution as well.
I would appreciate responses being sent to me at:
LAGRONE%TI-EG@CSNET-RELAY
Thank you, very much, for your time and help with this.
...Regards...David LaGrone
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 May 85 16:14:56 est
From: "Marek W. Lugowski" <marek%indiana.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Info-request: Connectionism and Parallel Distr. Processing
This is a general info request concerning the design of a graduate AI course.
Over here at Indiana University CS Dept. we are working on the updating our
AI curriculum with a graduate-level course to be called "Connectionism and
Parallel Distributed Processing". A prerequisite for this course would be our
standard 2-semester sequence of AI courses taken both by undergraduates and
graduates. It involves a hefty amount of programming in Lisp. The new course
would have a programming project, too. And now, the questions:
(1) Whose AI work do you feel is most appropriate for this course?
(We're thinking along the lines of the Hinton/McClelland/Rumelhart/Sejnowski/
Smolensky axis, and Hofstadter. Others?)
(2) What textbooks, if any, would you recommend? Or should the course
be based on papers? Which ones?
(3) Could you recommend a course along those lines already taught
elsewhere? Perhaps you could send us a course outline?
Thank you. Please reply to me. Will summarize if desired. -- Marek Lugowski
IU CS Department
marek@indiana.csnet
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 May 85 18:36 EDT
From: Gibbons@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Binding: Walter Reitman
A friend of mine noticed an attempt to bind Walter Reitman in Volume 3,
Issue 47 of the AI digest. I can provide current information for you.
Walter spent some time at New York University and then, in the fall of
1983, became the department manager for the Artificial Intelligence
Department at Bolt Beranek and Newman in Cambridge, MA where he replaced
Bill Woods. In the fall of 1984, he left BBN to become the Vice President
of Palladian Software, Inc., also in Cambridge, where he has been, and is
responsible for, assembling the technical staff. Several other BBN
employees, some from the AI department (including myself), have since
joined Palladian as have others in the community.
For your information, Palladian Software is a well funded and fast growing
startup developing very sophisticated applications in the domains of
finance and manufacturing. We are constructing hybrid systems using
appropriate mixtures of both conventional and artificial intelligence
technologies. We are currently developing on Symbolics 3640's (every
developer has his/her own machine - and office).
If you wish to contact Walter, or Palladian, messages can be sent to me,
Jeff Gibbons. My arpanet address is Gibbons at MIT-MULTICS.
jeff
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 May 85 12:16:06 edt
From: Dana S. Nau <dsn@tove>
Subject: Nim
I know of two different games that are sometimes called "nim". The first
one (the ←real← nim) involves splitting piles of sticks into smaller piles
of sticks in such a way the the smaller piles contain differing numbers of
sticks.
The second game involves removing various quantities of sticks from a pile of
sticks until none are left. This game is called Bachet's game, but it has
sometimes incorrectly been called nim--even in such well-known books as
Horowitz and Sahni's "Fundamentals of Data Structures Using Pascal".
I imagine the request for information on nim programs was for the real nim.
But in the case of Bachet's game, it's trivial to tell whether a game
position is a forced win or forced loss (for example, see "Mathematical
Games and Pastimes" by Domoryad), and thus it's very easy to write a
computer program to play the game perfectly.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 9 May 85 10:57:28-PDT
From: Joe Karnicky <KARNICKY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Prospector on a PC
The April 29, 1985 issue of COMPUTER ENGINEERING contains the following
statement in an article entitled AI MOVES FROM LABS TO PERSONAL COMPUTERS
"The power of AI is illustrated by Stanford Research International
Inc.'s Prospector, a so-called knowledge-based system. Written in
Lisp, it is considered a classic example of AI.
This program, which integrated the knowledge of many US Geological
Survey experts, was responsible for suggesting the existence of
a molybdenum deposit in Cascades, Wash., a find estimated to be
worth more than $100 million. It also exemplifies AI's future
direction. The system can now be implemented on a personal computer
for less than $3000 with available software."
This rather startling statement deals with two issues about which I would
very much appreciate receiving information from readers of the AIlist:
(1) What exactly was the role of Prospector in this discovery?
Would the discovery have been made without the program? How much of the
discovery was made by the program, and how much by the programmers?
If Prospector is so competent, are other geologists using it? If not, why
not? I've never seen a thorough discussion of these issues, and
responses by AIlist readers who are familiar with the project would be very
welcome.
(2) How good an expert system can be run on a pc using one of the
many commercial tools available? What practical expert systems
have been created that run on pc's? I've seen a lot of articles describing
expert system software for pc's, but what useful systems have been/can be
contructed? It's a long jump from choosing a red wine with fish to
discovering a $100 million ore deposit. Again, any information would be
appreciated.
[I can provide a little info on the first query, although I
have not been closely connected with Prospector. First, SRI
International has not been Stanford Research Institute since
May 16, 1977. Prospector was primarily developed by John
Gashnig, Peter Hart, Dick Duda, and Rene Reboh, although others
have contributed (including M. Einaudi, a USGS geologist).
John died of lung cancer; Peter, Dick, and Rene have moved on to
found Syntelligence. Prospector lives on, but is not under active
development; the original code has suffered from hardware changes
and bit rot, but versions have been ported to many systems.
I don't know whether USGS is adding additional mineral
models to its repertoire. The geologists working on the
project seemed to feel that this was a useful exercise,
whether or not the program ever became an expert geologist.
As for it fitting on a PC, I'm not too surprised -- the core
of the program is a [compiled] inference net that does not grow
during execution. About the only thing that does grow is the
history list used for the explanatory capability. I would assume
that most of the difficulty in porting Prospector is in providing
the software tools for editing graphs and knowledge bases.
The story I heard about the molybdenum strike was that this
particular site was fed into Prospector because geologists
were already convinced that molybdenum should be there -- they
just hadn't been able to find it over several decades of
exploratory digging. Humans were thus "responsible for suggesting
the existence" of the deposit, as well as for loading in the domain
models, probability functions, and field data. What Prospector did
was to highlight a spot under a large pile of tailings as being
the best place to dig; sure enough, that's where the molybdenum was.
A strike like that more than pays for the system's entire development
cost, a fact which was not lost on the oil industry -- Schlumberger
and others soon started large in-house projects. The majority
of people interested in Prospector, however, have been looking for
an off-the-shelf expert system capable of reasoning in any
domain. ("Sure, we'll just rip out all that stuff about uranium
and load in some knowedge about rubber tires. Anything else?")
There has been surprisingly little interest in supporting the
development of new uncertain-reasoning techniques appropriate for
other problem domains. That is one reason Prospector has not
been overtaken by a new generation of expert systems.
Can anyone answer Joe's question about how sophisticated a PC
expert system can be? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 5 May 85 13:30 EDT (Sun)
From: ←Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Emotional Attachment
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
Bob Carter has answered Batali's objections
to my "assault" theory better than I would have. Thanks.
You are more than welcome. The theory has a verisimilitude that
attracts me, and I look forward to reading your book when it is
published.
But I am bowing out of this discussion and leaving it to those who
prefer to see the world in clearer tones of black and white than
I do.
They are right. Ideas @i(are) dangerous.
←B
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 May 85 8:57:20 EDT
From: Bruce Nevin <bnevin@BBNCCH.ARPA>
Subject: reason and emotion
Reason is a good servant but a lousy master.
Benjamin Franklin it was who said
What a wonderful thing it is to be a rational being: for we can
make up a reason for whatever we have decided to do!
We have this truly marvellous ability to reason, and we use it most of
the time to rationalize. We freely invent plausible premisses, complete
with supporting histories, to make our cherished beliefs into reasoned
conclusions. We can do this only by maintaining selective ignorance, by
ignoring data that do not fit.
My own impression is that artificial intelligence systems mirror the
choices made by many persons who enter fields of science and
engineering, in that they model only the intellectual fraction of human
reasoning ability.
Human belief-disbelief systems depend upon a variety of logics. (I am
thinking of research of Milton Rokeach.) Emotions have their own logic,
and this logic drives our ratiocination far more than many of us are
comfortable acknowledging.
At the risk of being trite, let me affirm that there is nothing wrong
with emotional motivations or emotionally-directed reasoning. It is
when we keep the emotional richness of our reasoning out of conscious
awareness that something is wrong, because we have hobbled ourselves.
Then there can be a great deal wrong with our reasoning and with our
responses to experience. We cripple ourselves by cutting off a limb of
our reasoning ability, and then attribute our distress and dysfunction
to the alleged unruliness of the very limb we have tried to amputate.
Integration is not a matter of reconciling contrary things. It is not
nearly so complicated. Integration is rather a matter of recognizing
unity from multiple perspectives. Binocular vision provides a
simplistic model. With both eyes you see, not two conflicting images
somehow reconciled, but one image with depth added. The third dimension
is not predictable from either single image by itself. Allowing the
full breadth of our premisses and our logic brings the equivalent of
depth perception to our conclusions. And to our belief-disbelief
systems.
The self-insulated intellect can be very alarmed by this kind of talk.
Quite emotional, in fact, in its cold, steely way. How difficult it can
be to realize that this is not a Darwinian competition (poor Charles
Darwin! He said that cooperation was far more important than
competition in evolution, but his audience heard what they wanted to
hear . . . ), not an either/or choice between intellect and that
nameless other, but the removing of a patch over one eye!
(Does the artificially intelligent computer look like a tyrannical
pirate to the nontechnical majority of the world?)
This relates very much to the `false sense of power' noted by M.
Schoppers (marcel@SRI-AI) in his note on `living programs' (3.45), to
our commonly shared Pollyana-ish beliefs about self and the world noted
by jmyers (3.56), and to the call for some reality-checking issued by
the rape survivor/counselor from Berkeley (3.56).
It is difficult to go through childhood without experiencing deep
humiliation--sometimes physical rape--at the hands of ignorant,
half-blind adults. Because of its power, and especially because it
keeps reality at arms length, we often sieze upon intellectual prowess
as a means never again ever to be so humiliated. Altogether too often
we carry with us a need to humiliate others `first'. This may be
difficult to bring to conscious awareness in ourselves. Until we do it
consciously, however, we cannot choose whether to do it or not.
And this ignorance is not bliss.
Something to consider during the discussion period after a paper or
research proposal has been presented!
------------------------------
Date: 7-May-85
From: Wolf-Dieter Batz <L12%DHDURZ2.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: emotions & memory - public discussion
Hello,
Thanks a lot to all the folks who replied to my last
advertisement in this place.
To everyone who's interested but still didn't write:
Please don't write to my personal address, but to the
Digest - I'm convinced that there is enough stuff in our
minds to be discussed in public. - ok?
Next point:
My thesis is written in German and is about 150 pages long.
Anyway it is stored on disk so that it can easily be
transmitted by means of network exchange. Such requests
will be answered as fast as possible, but in general I won't
transmit it all - so tell me about special questions.
So long Folks & kind regards *** Wodi <l12@dhdurz2.bitnet>
------------------------------
Date: 8-May-85
From: Wolf-Dieter Batz <L12%DHDURZ2.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: C. Mason on Simulation of Human Understanding
While working in the field 'History of Memory Research'
I discovered the writings of J.F. HERBART, a German philosopher
living from 1776-1841.
Writing about 'Psychologie als Wissenschaft neu gegruendet
auf Erfahrung, Metaphysik und Mathematik' he didn't use
the term 'memory', although he dealt with various topics
of information processing.
My very personal opinion is now:
HERBART's theory is a theory of memory. He just uses various
synonyms for this term, like ideas, images and so on.
If one substitutes this synonyms with 'memory' he got it made!
This indicated to me that there's no possibility theorizing
about HUMAN Information Processing without refering to memory
mechanisms.
Anyway this is a debatable point, and I'm looking forward
to public replies to this proposal.
So long folks & kind regards *** Wodi <l12@dhdurz2.bitnet>
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-May-85 1907 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #64
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 May 85 19:07:06 PDT
Date: Thu 16 May 1985 11:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #64
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 16 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 64
Today's Topics:
Queries - PROLOG on INTERLISP/LOOPS & Lisp Machines &
Microcomputer Lisps & Statecharts,
Machine Translation - Update,
Expert Systems - Prospector on a PC,
Seminars - Diagnosing Multiple Faults (SU) &
Fixpoint Extensions of First-Order Logic (CMU) &
A New "Turing" Thesis (CMU),
Course - Model Theory (CMU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 May 85 18:06:35 EDT
From: Louis Steinberg <STEINBERG@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: PROLOG on INTERLISP/LOOPS
Can anyone point me to an implementation of PROLOG that will run on
a Xerox Lisp machine, i.e. is implemented in Interlisp-D or Interlisp-D
with LOOPS? I know of Ken Kahn's version but that unfortunately does
not use standard LOOPS. This is for an educational environment so
efficiency is not essential. Also welcome would be advice on porting
some other, existing version.
Lou Steinberg
STEINBERG @ RUTGERS
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 May 85 15:32:55 pdt
From: Curtis L. Goodhart <goodhart%cod@Nosc>
Subject: Lisp Machines
Anybody have any pointers to some good references for explaining the
architectural characteristics of a lisp machine, ie why do you need a
specific kind of machine, as opposed to a conventional computer, to run
lisp?
Thanks,
Curt Goodhart (goodhart@nosc ;on the arpanet)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 May 85 10:23 EST
From: John N Frampton <frampton%northeastern.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Microcomputer Lisps comparable to GCLISP
I am writing a review of GCLISP for a computer magazine. I have used
MULISP and IQLISP on an IBM PC previously but just found out yesterday
that there are several new Lisp implementations for the IBM PC which
are competitive with GCLISP. I would appreciate very much getting a short
description of these products to include in the GCLISP review. I would
have preferred to do a comparison, but it's too late for that. At least
I can say what's out there.
I'd like a short description (better shorter and sooner than longer and later)
- particularly touching on the extent to which they implement Common Lisp
(if they do) and if they have a compiler.
Reply directly to me (and the board if you want).
Thanks, John Frampton
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 13 May 1985 15:02-EDT
From: rh@Mitre-Bedford
Subject: STATECHARTS
Dave Harel was to have given a talk "Statecharts: A Visual
Approach to Complex Systems" last week at MIT. I'd be interested
in anyone's impressions who attended or otherwise knows about this
work. Are there any available references?
Thanks,
Rich Hilliard
------------------------------
Date: Tue 14 May 85 11:08:50-MDT
From: Pete Tinker <tinker@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Machine Translation Update
A friend of mine who works as a consultant for Weidner informs me of some
corrections to the information posted by Petitpierre on Machine Translation.
Only the address for ALPS was given, but the message could be construed
to also be the address of their competitor, Weidner. Weidner is no longer
in Provo, Utah, and is no longer called Weidner. The correct name and address
are
WCC
Suite 300
40 Skokie Boulevard
Northbrook, Illinois 60062
(312) 564-8122
Also, Siemens has an active MT group in Boca Raton, Florida; LOGOS
does MT in Boston (Petitpierre mentioned only their European branches).
ISSCO is also in Sorrento Valley, California, but I don't know if they
work in MT there.
-Pete Tinker
------------------------------
Date: Tue 14 May 85 10:57:37-PDT
From: HART@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Prospector on a PC
Ken,
I saw a copy of the "Prospector on a PC" query, and thought your
AIList readers might be interested in the following clarifications and update.
First, the role of Prospector in the famous molybdenum strike:
Unfortunately for journalists, an accurate account of the role played by
Prospector is not simply stated, and a simple account is not likely to be
accurate. Prompted by the confusion surrounding these events (notwithstanding
a research report that appeared in Science in 1982), Dick Duda, Rene' Reboh
and I submitted a rather lengthy letter to the AI Journal that lays out the
details quite carefully. Since the letter should be appearing shortly, and
in recognition of my own admonition about simple statements, I will say here
only that the evaluation of the moly prospect was intended purely as a
scientific experiment and that Prospector's predictions were confirmed to
a high degree by independent means.
Second, Prospector's origins and descendants: My first notes on
the subject date from early 1974, and were motivated by the early success of
MYCIN. The project began in earnest in 1975, with Dick Duda, Nils Nilsson,
Georgia Sutherland and a geologist named Alan Campbell as the earliest
contributors. Rene Reboh joined the project shortly thereafter, and John
Gaschnig a couple of years after that. Since the earliest implementation
there have been many other contributors and any number of implementations
on other machines. Some of the earliest small-machine systems were done
by Rene Reboh (on an Apple II) and by John Reiter on a PDP-11. These and
other ports generally are not as powerful as the original PDP-10 version,
but have been useful nonetheless. The USGS has done a port to the IBM/PC,
and Alan Campbell has done an independent port to the IBM/PC and is
marketing his as "The Deciding Factor." Coincidentally, a user's review
of The Deciding Factor appeared in last Sunday's (May 12) San Jose Mercury
by Ray Levitt, a Civil Engineering professor at Stanford. (He liked it,
by the way.) I am told that some mining companies are interested in Campbell's
version; however, any discussion of use by commercial companies must
begin with the recognition that the North American mining industry has been
in a severely depressed state for quite some years.
The US Geological Service has an active program underway to extend
and use Prospector. They have the PC version mentioned above, as well as
a Xerox 1108 version. There are something like 30 - 35 models that have
been developed (a "model" is a major module of the knowledge base). The
Survey has used Prospector to evaluate mineral potential in Alaska and
in New England, and has stated (in writing) that the results obtained were
in their view superior to what would have been otherwise achievable.
(Incidentally, the USGS has a charter to assess resource potential over
large tracts of land rather than "to discover a mine".) The Survey also
has some 8-10 models under active development for the PC version, and
is planning to use the 1108 version for geographically-organized data.
Finally, I am told that their systems and plans have achieved a very high
level of visibility and excitement in their parent agency, the Dept. of
Interior, although the current size of the effort is not large.
Does this discussion answer the question of what a PC expert system can
do? Obviously not, but I hope it adds more light than heat to the current
discussions. In any case, a lot of the value of an expert system lies in the
knowledge base; I agree with Karnicky's observation that, regardless of
implementation, it's a long way from choosing red wine to discovering an
ore deposit.
Cheers,
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Tue 14 May 85 12:41:00-PDT
From: Carol Wright/Susie Barnes <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Diagnosing Multiple Faults (SU)
SIGLUNCH
DATE: Friday, May 17, 1985
LOCATION: Braun Audiltorium, Mudd/Chemistry Building
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Johan Dekleer
Xerox
TITLE: Diagnosing Multiple Faults
Diagnostic tasks require determining the differences between a model of
an artifact and the artifact itself. The differences between the
manifested behavior of the artifact and the predicted behavior of the
model guide the search for the difference between the artifact and its
model. The diagnostic procedure presented in this paper reasons from
first principles, inferring the behavior of the composite device from
knowledge of the structure and function of the individual components
comprising the device. The novel contributions of this research are:
Multiple-faults: No presupposition is made about the number of failed
components.
Measurements: Proposes optimal measurements to localize the fault.
Probabilistic: A priori probabilities of component faultedness are taken into
account.
Intermittency: The approach is robust in response intermittent faults.
The system is based on incorporating probabilistic information into an
Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance System.
------------------------------
Date: 10 May 1985 1429-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Fixpoint Extensions of First-Order Logic (CMU)
APPLIED LOGIC SEMINAR
Speaker: Yuri Gurevich (University of Michigan)
Date: Wednesday, May 15
Time: 2:00 - 3:15
Place: 5409 WeH
Topic: Fixpoint extensions of first-order logic
In 1979 Aho and Ullman noted that the relational calculus is unable to express
the transitive closure of a given relation, and suggested extending the
relational calculus by adding the least fixed point operator. From the point
of view of the expressive power, the relational calculus is exactly first-order
logic. Aho and Ullman's paper triggered an extensive study of the expressive
power of fixpoint extensions of first-order logic with emphasis on finite
structures. We survey the results of this study.
------------------------------
Date: 10 May 1985 1433-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - A New "Turing" Thesis (CMU)
JOINT LOGIC COLLOQUIUM
Speaker: Yuri Gurevich (University of Michigan)
Date: Thursday, May 16
Time: 2:00 - 3:30
Place: 4605 WeH
Topic: A new thesis
Turing's thesis is that every computable function can be computed by an
appropriate Turing machine. The informal proof of the thesis gives more:
every computing device can be simulated by an appropriate Turing machine. The
following much stronger form of the thesis seems to be very much accepted
today: every sequential computing device can be simulated by an appropriate
Turing machine in polynomial time.
Turing machines are computational devices with unbounded resources. First, we
adapt Turing's thesis to the case when only devices with bounded resources are
considered.
Second, we define a more general kind of abstract computational devices, called
dynamic structures, and put forward the following new thesis:
Every computational device an be simulated by an appropriate dynamic structure
- of approximately the same size - in real time: a uniform family of
computational devices can be uniformly simulated by an appropriate family of
dynamic structures in real time.
In particular, every sequential computational device can be simulated by an
appropriate sequential dynamic structure.
A contribution of Andrea Blass is acknowledged. Descriptions of computational
devices are solicited for further confirmation of the thesis.
------------------------------
Date: 7 May 1985 1140-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Course - Model Theory (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Department of Mathematics
CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY
COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT - MODEL THEORY
Instructor: Ana Pasztor
Textbook: Model Theory, by Chang and Keisler, North Holland, 1973
When: Fall 1985, MWF - 2:30-3:20, Porter Hall 125C
Note: If you would like to take this course and have conflicts with the
time, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. (Room 7219 or phone x2558)
Course No., Credit, and Grade: 21-753, 12 Units, based on homework.
Aimed at: those who have had a basic course in logic and are interested in
broadening their knowledge.
What is model theory:
Model theory is the branch of mathematical logic which deals with
relation between a formal language and its interpretations, or models. We
shall study the model theory of first order predicate logic.
Models are structures of the kind which arise in mathematics or
computer science. To arrive at a model theory, we set up our formal language
of first-order logic by specifying a list of symbols and giving rules by which
sentences can be built up from the symbols. The reason for setting up a formal
language is that we wish to use the sentences to reason about the models.
Typical results of model theory say something about the power of
expression of first-order predicate logic. Lowenheim's theorem, for example,
shows that no consistent sentence can imply that a model is uncountable, or
Morley's theorem shows that first order predicate logic cannot, as far as
categoricity is concerned, tell the difference between one uncountable power
and another.
Model theory also gives methods of constructing models. A special
attention will be given in this course to ultraproduct constructions and their
applications in mathematics and computer science.
Much of model theory deals with the interplay of syntactical and
semantical ideas.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-May-85 1526 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #65
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 May 85 15:25:37 PDT
Date: Fri 17 May 1985 21:53-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #65
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 18 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 65
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Seminar and Conference Notices,
Seminars - A Procedural Logic (CSLI) &
Planning and Scheduling (SU) &
Modal Temporal Logics (SU) &
Representations, Information, and the Physical World (CSLI) &
Logical Query Languages for Databases (IBM-SJ),
Conference - Symbolics Lisp Machine Users' Meeting
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 17 May 85 21:51:31-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar and Conference Notices
The number of seminar notices varies with the academic season, but
clearly AIList is now carrying far more seminar and conference
announcements than two years ago. Many readers have expressed
enthusiasm for the "clipping service" I have been providing, but
this material is now so overwhelming that it swamps other functions
of the discussion list.
A couple of weeks ago I asked for volunteers to forward bboard
messages from the major universities. No one has volunteered.
I shall continue scanning the bboards for the present, but this
service will be dropped if either AIList or my professional
duties demand more of my time.
Steve Crocker has suggested to me that a separate list be split
off for seminar notices and [perhaps] conference announcements.
Then people could subscribe to the lists separately, and could
more easily archive and search just the data stream that they
find relevant.
I was originally opposed to such a split, but I have come to favor
it -- as long as someone else takes over distribution of the
seminar list. I would provide the current distribution list,
and the new moderator could handle deletions and modifications
without much trouble. New readers to either list would receive
a welcome message mentioning the companion list. The new moderator
would be free to set his/her own policies about what to include
in the list. Do I hear any volunteers?
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 May 85 16:59:50-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - A Procedural Logic (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THURSDAY, May 23, 1985
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall ``A Procedural Logic''
Conference Room Michael Georgeff (SRI and CSLI), Amy Lansky (SRI),
and Pierre Bessiere (SRI)
Much of our commonsense knowledge about the real world is concerned
with the way things are done. This knowledge is often in the form of
`procedures' or `sequences' of actions for achieving particular goals.
In this paper, a formalism is presented for representing such
knowledge based on the notion of `process'. A declarative semantics
for the representation is given, which allows a user to state `facts'
about the effects of doing things in the problem domain of interest.
An operational semantics is also provided, which shows `how' this
knowledge can be used to achieve given goals or to form intentions
regarding their achievement. The formalism also serves as an
executable program specification language suitable for constructing
complex systems. --Michael Georgeff and Amy Lansky
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 May 85 14:32:11-PDT
From: Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Planning and Scheduling (SU)
SIMA`s final Seminar on AI in Manufacturing and Design will take
place next Wedneday, May 29th, at 2:l5 in Terman, Room 2l7.
Dr. Karl Kempf
McDonnell Douglas Research Laboratories
Principal scientist, Artificial Intelligence Group
The scheduling of tasks to be executed in the real world is difficult
because the world contains an inescapable element of unpredictability.
However much effort has been expended in preparing a schedule prior
to execution, surprises are virtually inevitable once execution
commences. Additional difficulties are often encountered through
the unnecessary confounding of planning and scheduling. Planning
requires knowledge of the capabilities of classes of resources while
scheduling uses knowledge of the availability of individual resources.
It is generally not possible for the planner to have, at plan time,
the timely data necessary for efficient scheduling. The objective
of the research described here is the clarification of the differences
between planning and scheduling, and the development of a representation
for schedules which is robust in the face of real world unpredictability.
Examples are given for the off-line construction of schedules using both
domain-independent and domain-dependent knowledge, and for the
on-line real-time knowledge-based execution of schedules. The examples
are drawn from robotic machine tending and robotic assembly.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Jun 85 0100 PDT
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Modal Temporal Logics (SU)
CS Colloquium, June 4, 4:15pm, Terman Auditorium
MODAL TEMPORAL LOGICS: A SURVEY OF RECENT RESULTS
Daniel Lehmann
Hebrew University
(visiting Brandeis University)
In a joint work with S. Shelah, some extensions of the propositional
temporal logic of discrete time were advocated as useful for stating and
proving properties of probabilistic concurrent programs. Deductive
completeness theorems were proved. In a joint work with S. Kraus
corresponding decision procedures were investigated. Recently a system for
describing time and knowledge has been proposed. All those systems can be
characterized as two-dimensional modal logics, i.e. they involve two
essentially orthogonal modalities, one of them being time, that satisfy
some interchange law. The techniques involved in studying such systems
and some open problems will be described.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 May 85 16:59:50-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Representations, Information, and the Physical
World (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THURSDAY, May 23, 1985
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall ``Representations, Information, and the
Room G-19 Physical World'' by Ivan Blair
Discussion led by Meg Withgott
The notions of representation and information have been much used
in recent cognitive psychology and philosophy of mind, yet much
remains to be done to determine more precisely what is meant by these
notions, particularly in elucidating the basis of their
intentionality. I think that the place to start with an investigation
of these matters is the analysis proposed by Howard Pattee. Pattee
has for a long time wrestled with the question of how symbols are
related to their referents, and has tried to establish some general
principles of the symbol-referent or symbol-matter relation.
I shall attempt to do two things in this presentation. Firstly, I
want to explain as briefly as possible Pattee's view of symbolic
information (information carried by a symbol or string of symbols) and
the relation of symbolic information to the physical world. Secondly,
I shall consider a prominent theory of information -- Dretske's, as
presented in his book, ``Knowledge and the Flow of Information''
(1981), -- in the light of various results about the nature of symbols
and information that emerge from Pattee's analysis. --Ivan Blair
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 May 85 13:12:18 PDT
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Logical Query Languages for Databases (IBM-SJ)
[Excerpted by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Mon., May 20 Computer Science Seminar
10:30 A.M. LOGICAL QUERY LANGUAGES FOR DATABASE SYSTEMS
Audit. A In an advanced form of relational database system, a
collection of rules, probably Horn clauses, will
stand between the user's query and the database.
Because these rules may involve recursion,
straightforward methods of query evaluation may not
work, and a variety of strategies have been proposed
to handle subsets of recursive queries. We shall
express such query evaluation techniques as "capture
rules" on a graph whose nodes represent the rules and
the terms in those rules. Nodes may be "adorned" by
codes for a limited number of special cases, such as
an indication of which variables or arguments are
free and which are bound. One essential property of
capture rules is that they can be applied
independently, thus providing a clean interface for
query-evaluation systems that use several different
strategies in different situations. Another
important property is that we be able to test in
polynomial time whether a capture rule applies, so
that we can plan queries in less time than it takes
to execute them. We show how rules suggested
previously can be fit into this framework, and we
propose some new capture rules and generalizations of
old ones. In particular, a result with Y. Sagiv
characterizes exactly the sets of rules for which a
simple top-down query-evaluation algorithm with
"sideways" passing of variable binding works.
L. Naish gave an exponential algorithm to test
whether this query-evaluation strategy works, but our
theory provides a polynomial algorithm for the case
when the number of arguments in predicates is
bounded. We also show that the problem is NP-hard if
the number of arguments is part of the problem
instance. To apply top-down capture rules, we need
to be able to prove convergence of certain
iterations. We therefore consider "unique" (logical)
rules and the way that testing their convergence can
be reduced to linear programming. An algorithm
developed with A. Van Gelder provides an even more
efficient test for applicability of the top-down
capture rule in the case of unique rules.
Prof. J. D. Ullman, Computer Science Department,
Stanford University
Host: P. Lucas (LUCAS@IBM-SJ.CSNET)
------------------------------
Date: Tue 14 May 85 00:33:14-PDT
From: Mabry Tyson <Tyson@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Symbolics Lisp Machine Users' Meeting
Early next month there will be a national Symbolics Lisp machine users
group in SF. Details are in the two messages below.
Return-Path: <CMP.COHEN@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Date: Mon 13 May 85 22:44:20-CDT
From: Rich Cohen <CMP.COHEN@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Info on National Meeting
A complete agenda of the 1985 National SLUG meeting follows in a separate
message. Printed copies of the agenda and registration form were mailed out
to people for who we had US Mail addresses. Copies were also sent to all SLUG
leaders and to all Symbolics sales offices. So, everyone interested should be
able to get a copy of the printed announcement and registration form from one
of those sources.
Summary:
The 1985 National Meeting of SLUG will be held Monday, June 3, and Tuesday,
June 4, at the Cathedral Hill Hotel in San Francisco. There will be sessions
all day Monday and Tuesday, and round table discussions both Monday and
Tuesday evenings.
Symbolics will host a wine & cheese reception at their San Francisco Training
Center Sunday evening.
The hotel has agreed to hold open a block of rooms for SLUG until Friday May
17th. There is still time to call for a reservation. The rate is $75/single,
$85/double. Please tell them you are with the Symbolics Users Group.
There is no registration fee. No meals or proceedings are included. (There
is no free lunch.) However, please to register so that we can estimate
attendence and coordinate arrangemens with the hotel. If possible, try to get
a copy of the registraion form, and mail it in. If you can't get a form, just
send a letter or post card stating your intent to:
SLUG '85
c/o Tom Fall
GTE Western Division
M/S B 212
100 Furgeson Drive
P.O. Box 7188
Mountain View, California 94039
See you in San Francisco!
Return-Path: <CMP.COHEN@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Date: Mon 13 May 85 22:45:23-CDT
From: Rich Cohen <CMP.COHEN@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Agenda for National Meeting
SLUG '85
THE 1985 SYMBOLICS LISP USERS GROUP NATIONAL SYMPOSIUM
Monday, June 3 & Tuesday, June 4, 1985
Cathedral Hill Hotel
San Francisco
This is the planned agenda for the 1985 National Symposium of the Symbolics
Lisp Users Group (SLUG). The purpose of SLUG is to promote communications
among users of Symbolics Lisp Machines, and between the users and Symbolics.
Non-technical sessions:
- Corporate directions.
- Company organization ... or "who to contact about what."
- Field Service & Hardware Maintenance ... or "where the spares are."
- Software Support ... including HOSS, FOSS, and source distribution
policies.
- Questions for Symbolics Sales/Service/Management.
General Question & Answer session with Symbolics managers from
Software Products, Documentation, Field Service, Software Support,
Education Services, Sales, and Marketing.
Technical Sessions:
- Living with Release 6.0. Jon Balgley (Symbolics). Now that you've
gotten the tape, what do you do with it? Discussion to include new
features (such as Dialnet, the Mailer, the Document Examiner, the
Command Processor), and effects on user code (e.g., coping with
lexical scoping).
- Technical Q&A.
- Performance measurement and program tuning. Dave Moon & Dave Plummer
(Symbolics).
- The Symbolics Window System: a conceptual model with practical
applications. Rich Bryan & Jon Balgley (Symbolics).
- 3600 Hardware Architecture. Dave Stryker & Linda Birch (Symbolics).
- Networks. Charlie Hornig & Scott Matsumoto (Symbolics). Chaosnet
support under VMS, Berkeley UNIX; 3600 support for various network
protocols, such as TCP/IP, DECNet, Symbolics Namespace Protocol.
- Common Lisp. Dave Moon, Dan Weinreb, and Bob Kerns (Symbolics).
Discussion of the Common Lisp language definition, and how Symbolics
Zetalisp, and Symbolics Common Lisp relate to it. (LISP in a changing
world.)
- Prolog and the 3600. Bob Cassels (Symbolics). The chief implementor
of Symbolics Prolog talks about Prolog, LISP, and the 3600.
Round Table Discussions:
- Tools for Building Expert Systems -- Some Practical Experience. Tom
Fall (GTE), chairman. A discussion of users' experience building
expert systems on the 3600; how they chose among the available tools,
and their experience in trying to use the tools effectively.
- Dealing with Symbolics: What we really do in the field. Ken Olum
(Fairchild), chairman. An open discussion with general users and a
panel of people who manage and support large sites.
Possible topics to be discussed:
* User experience with hardware maintenance,
* Service contracts vs. time-and-materials.
* Installing new Symbolics releases -- how well does it work, what
do you need to know besides what's in the installation guides.
* Management of worlds, tapes, and disk space.
* Installing larger disk drives.
* Maintaining multiple releases at one time & migrating from one
release to the next.
* Sending bug reports and getting fixes from Symbolics.
* Maintaining local patches and modifications to worlds.
SLUG Business Meeting:
- SLUG Charter.
- Election of officers
- Establishing a program library.
- Menu of our concerns & suggestions to be presented to Symbolics.
There will be a wine & cheese reception Sunday evening at the San Francisco
Symbolics Training Center (a few blocks from the hotel). The session schedule
is not complete, but we expect to hold sessions both Monday and Tuesday
evening.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-May-85 1710 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #66
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 May 85 17:10:28 PDT
Date: Sat 18 May 1985 14:51-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #66
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 19 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 66
Today's Topics:
Query - Exploring Language with Logo,
Binding - Mark Grover,
Tools - STATECHARTS Reference & Lisp Machines & TI's Explorer,
Opinion - Introspection and Communication & Emotional Reasoning,
Journal - AI in Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 May 85 14:48 EDT
From: Bill Caswell <caswell@nswc-wo>
Subject: Exploring Language with Logo
Last November, a seminar on material from a forthcoming book, "Exploring
Language with Logo", by Paul Goldenberg and Wallace Feurzeig, was announced
in this list. The book was to be published 'first quarter, 1985' by Harper
and Row, and I have not seen anything about it since. Has it been published,
or is it otherwise available? Bill
------------------------------
Date: 15 May 1985 1951-EDT (Wednesday)
From: trwatf!maverick@seismo.ARPA (Mark D. Grover)
Subject: Binding - Mark Grover
Binding: Mark D. Grover
Formerly: TRW Defense Systems Group (Advanced Technology Facility)
Fairfax, Virginia [trwatf!maverick@SEISMO]
Beginning 5/24/85: Advanced Information & Decision Systems
Washington technical office [Arlington, Virginia]
New ARPAnet address: GROVER@AIDS-UNIX
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 May 85 18:43:10 edt
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher@MIT-HTVAX.ARPA>
Subject: STATECHARTS reference
Here's the reference:
Harel, D.
Statecharts: A Visual Approach to Complex Systems
CS84-05, Department of Applied Math, Weizmann Institute of Science,
Rehovot, Israel. 1984. 35pp.
Harel's developed a nice notation for complex finite-state machines
by making use of hierarchic states, allowing both XOR-decomposition
of a state (i.e. the system's in one & only one of the substates)
and AND-decomposition (i.e. the system's in a state defined by the
cross product of the substates). By defining some other conventions
about transition arcs, the result is surprisingly compact and
expressive. However, his discussion of adding actions to arcs and
states seemed a bit less elegant. Worth a look.
Incidentally, Harel's netadress is harel%wisdom@WISCVM.ARPA ...
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 85 08:27 PDT
From: Masinter.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Lisp Machines
In reply to curtis L. Goodhart <goodhart%cod@Nosc>
You don't need any specific kind of machine to run lisp. There are lisp
implementations for lots of machines. Some of them can be quite fast.
Specialized instruction sets for Lisp allow you to get performance
without declarations, to retain full information for symbolic debugging,
better garbage collection performance, and the ability to retain
run-time type-checking even in performance critical loops.
Memory utilization is generally much better; for example, the last time
I measured, Interlisp-D programs took less than half the bytes to
represent than the same programs on a VAX, and CDR-coding allowed the
average size for a CONS cell to be 36 bits rather than 64. Lisp machines
can afford to use compact data structures because the instruction set
can be designed to deal with them; "conventional" instruction sets
generally cannot be skewed to make otherwise obscure manipulations
(fetch bits 4-5 and branch if 0) into single operations.
All of the lisp machines on the market come with software as well as
hardware. Dedicated machines allow the implementation of integrated
environments and high performance graphical interfaces which are
generally unavailable on conventional computers. The software
enviornment can be major portion of the "value added" of the system; the
proportion is likely to continue as hardware costs drop.
What is true of larger machines today will be true of smaller ones in
the future; while prices of all computer components drop, so do the
prices that people expect to pay for them.
The earliest reference I've found is Peter Deutsch's paper, "A Lisp
machine with very compact programs," IJCAI 1973. "Programming
environments" are quite popular these days, with whole conferences
devoted to them, although most of the papers spend their time extolling
individual environments rather than the notion of them.
There are other justifications more recent found in the marketing
literature of various vendors, written to make sure that its clear that
each is the best.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 18 May 85 12:17:18-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: TI's Explorer won Industrial Design Awards
[ from the Austin American Statesman - May 18 ]
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS' AUSTIN-developed EXPLORER artificial intelligence
workstation has received one of 23 Industrial Design Awards given by
ID Magazine. More than 800 entries were judged on innovation,
problem-solving, aesthetics, materials and use of the products.
The computer also won a design award in a competition at the
Hannover Trade Fair in West Germany.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 May 85 9:28:33 EDT
From: Bruce Nevin <bnevin@BBNCCH.ARPA>
Subject: indignation and clarity
From: ←Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA> (the Midnight Theorizer)
I have some doubts about that part of AI which asserts the validity
of scientific inquiry that gathers "data" by introspection. But I
have even greater doubts about moral indignation as a criterion for
rejection of hypotheses (or of humor, for that matter).
Chomsky has argued that introspective data are necessary for a science
of language. His followers and apostates have demonstrated how
hazardous they can be. His teacher, Zellig Harris, has shown that
appeals to introspective data can be well defined and few with no loss
to linguistic science.
As to moral indignation, it is possible to read this message and wonder
whether it is allowed any legitimacy, and to ask under what circumstances
the writer would find moral indignation appropriate. I believe this would be a
misreading of the message, but nonetheless a possible reading.
Ambiguity is ineluctable. I believe we have to anticipate, insofar as
is possible, the ways in which we may be misconstrued, and make our
communications clear IN TERMS APPROPRIATE TO THE MISCONSTRUING AUDIENCE.
To insist that the burden of rightly understanding rests alone on those
who have misunderstood is practically to guarantee a failure of
communication.
There is another well-known mechanism in which a social level of
communication is incongruent with a psychological level. A simple
example is the stereotype that has been made of Bateson's work on the
double bind (Mother says `I love you, come here' while appearing fearful
and angry, or in a context that punishes the child). The communication
that is not consciously acceptable to the sender is kept out of the
sender's awareness. The receiver must choose which message to believe
and act on consciously, and believes and acts on the other message
unconsciously.
Most miscommunication, it has been argued, occurs when people make
different choices about which parts of the complex message are socially
acceptable and which are not. And people often vigorously resist
recognizing the beliefs and disbeliefs that they have been communicating
and otherwise acting on out of conscious awareness.
The `talking past each other' that we have just seen on this list
concerning rape and humor has this character.
By the way, I recommend Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind,
for a perspective on belief-disbelief systems that would be useful for
modelling human `knowledge bases'.
Bruce Nevin (bn@bbncch.arpa)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 May 85 04:52:50 est
From: "Marek W. Lugowski" <marek%indiana.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Emotion & AI and its discussion on the AIList
The discussion of emotion in the context of AI can be of benefit to us all.
For too long, AI has equated thinking with "reasoning", where reasoning is
a something, and entirely apart from a something else called "passion". This
dichotomy is Plato's, and likely an AI liability, given the affective basis
for one's actions and one's interpretation of actions. Judgement as such
crucially depends on emotional state, as psychiatrists well know. Judgment
is what yesterday's Shakey the Robot lacked, and what today's naive physics
is ostentatiously after. Alas, nothing's changed: Each confines itself to
the rigid minuet of "reasoning" devoid of emotional context.
Incidentally, the AIList-Digest's discussion of emotion has been stirring up
ideas in the classical vein of emotional muckraking, not so much dispassionate
analysis. What's needed is computational ideas on how to model emotions: to
start with, in a "toy" domain. And don't assume that they are if-then rules!
-- Marek Lugowski
marek@indiana.csnet
Indiana U. CS Department
Bloomington 47405
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 13 May 1985 23:34:24 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: New Journal - AI in Engineering
A new journal on the applications of AI in Engineering will be launched at
the First Conference on Applications of AI in Engineering next April.
Details of the journal are provided below. The deadline for sending papers
for the first issue is November 15, 1985.
International Journal for
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN ENGINEERING
Editors:
D. Sriram Dr. K. J. MacCallum
Dept. Civil Engineering Dept. of Ship & Marine Tech.
Carnegie-Mellon University Marine Technology Centre
Pittsburgh, PA 15213 100 Montrose Street, Glasgow
USA Scotland
Recent advances in the applications of artificial intelligence (AI)
are begining to make a major impact in the world of engineering. As a
consequence, important opportunities for using computers to tackle
engineering problems in new ways are opening up. The engineering
industry must keep itself fully informed of these developments and
contribute to them, if it is to realize the potential of these
advances.
The aim of this journal is to establish a forum for a fruitful
exchange of ideas through the publication of up-to-date research
results and recent developments. While the range of AI topics covered
by the journal is broadly based, the emphasis will be on research and
development leading to problem solving. The journal should appeal to
engineers for all disciplines who are involved in research,
development or implementation of computer systems.
Members of the journal's leading international Editorial Board will be
responsible for the review of all papers submitted for publication to
ensure that readers receive a consistently high quality of work in
each issue.
>From time to time review papers will be published to provide
state-of-the-art analyses of various areas of current interest. In
addition the journal will provide a review of books and reports in
this expanding field as well as news letters, and a dairy of events of
conferences, courses and meetings in AI.
FIELDS COVERED
- Expert systems
- Knowledge representation
- Knowledge-based simulation
- Computer aided design
- Design modelling
- Cognitive modelling of engineering problems
- Learning
- Computer based training
- Intelligent tutors
- Robotics
- Planning and scheduling
- Constraint management
- Natural language applications
- Database interfaces
- Graphical interfaces
- Computer integrated manufacturing
REGULAR FEATURES
- Discussion of published papers
- Conference and meeting reports
- Personalia
- Letters
- Book reviews
- Current literature
- Calendar of events
- News
POLICY AND CALL FOR PAPERS
The editorial policy encourages the publication of research articles
on recent advances in AI in engineering. State-of-the-art papers will
also be included from time to time. Details on presentation of papers
for consideration of publication can be obtained from the editors.
SUBSCRIPTION
This journal will keep you abreast with the major research and
development work around the world in AI applied to engineering
problems. The editors and their international Editorial Board are well
placed to keep you informed in these rapidly developing field. For
more details contact:
Lance Sucharov
Publishing Director
CML Publications
Ashurst Lodge
Ashurst
Hants SO4 2AA
England
For a author's tookit (in US), write to D. Sriram or send mail to
sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa.
[The subscription price has not yet been determined. -- KIL]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-May-85 0046 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #67
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 May 85 00:46:08 PDT
Date: Mon 20 May 1985 23:32-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #67
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 21 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 67
Today's Topics:
Query - Cooking Knowledge,
Theory - Classes of Turing Machines,
Games - Computer Cheating,
Humor - Qualitative Calculator,
Seminars - Constraint-Interpreting Reference (MIT) &
Exceptions in Data/Knowledge Bases (LBL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 May 85 14:41:54 -0200
From: mcvax!vu44!klipper!biep@seismo.ARPA
Subject: Cooking Knowledge
Doing research on collaboration between robot systems, we need to
implement knowledge about cooking. I've heard that long, long ago,
a group in San Diego worked on that, and that some Mrs. Cordier in
Paris has done research in that field.
Does anyone have more information on these, or on other projects
using cooking knowledge, or does someone have any ideas about the
subject which might be useful?
Thanks,
Biep.
{seismo|decvax|philabs|garfield|okstate}!mcvax!vu44!klipper!biep
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 May 85 15:06 CDT
From: Patrick←Duff <pduff%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: RE: a "new" turing thesis
> From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
> Subject: Seminar - A New "Turing" Thesis (CMU)
>
> .... Turing machines are computational devices with unbounded resources.
> First, we adapt Turing's thesis to the case when only devices with bounded
> resources are considered.
When I studied Turing machines in an AI course I took back in college,
this had already been done. Here is a summary of the four types of Turing
Machines (with various bounds on the available resources), from my class
notes [if you have any corrections or additions, please send them to me]:
TYPE 3 TURING MACHINE:
Description:
1) Tape has finite length;
2) Control unit has one read head and no write heads;
3) Read head is initially positioned at beginning of tape;
4) Read head cannot be moved backwards;
5) Control unit is deterministic;
6) Control unit has finite memory.
Remarks:
1) Recognizes exactly all regular languages;
2) Making control unit non-deterministic does not increase power;
3) Equivalent to a finite-state automaton;
4) Able to decide whether a number is odd, compute the sum of two
numbers, or decide whether a number is divisible by 3, for instance.
TYPE 2 TURING MACHINE:
Description:
1) Tape has finite length;
2) Control unit has one read head and no write heads;
3) Read head is initially positioned at beginning of tape;
4) Read head cannot be moved backwards;
5) Control unit is deterministic;
6) Control unit has finite memory.
7) Control unit has a push-down stack.
Remarks:
1) More powerful than TYPE 3;
2) Recognizes exactly all context free languages;
3) Making control unit non-deterministic does not increase power.
4) Ability to read any position in push-down stack would make it more
powerful;
5) Letting read head move both ways adds power;
6) Letting head read and write adds power--more powerful than even
without the push-down stack;
7) If a second push-down stack is added, it can do anything a TYPE 0
can do;
8) Using a single counter instead of a push-down stack is more
powerful than TYPE 3 but less powerful than TYPE 2 [could check
for an arbitrary string of symbols on tape or see if parentheses
are balanced, for instance].
TYPE 1 TURING MACHINE:
Description:
1) Tape has finite length;
2) Control unit has one read/write head;
3) Read/write head is initially positioned at beginning of tape;
4) Read/write head can be moved both forwards and backwards;
5) Control unit is deterministic;
6) Control unit has finite memory.
Remarks:
1) Recognizes context sensitive languages;
2) Also called a linear bounded automata;
3) Adding multiple tapes does not increase power;
4) It is not known whether a non-deterministic control unit increases
power.
TYPE 0 TURING MACHINE:
Description:
1) Tape has infinite length;
2) Control unit has one read/write head;
3) Read/write head is initially positioned somewhere on tape;
4) Read/write head can be moved both forwards and backwards;
5) Control unit is deterministic;
6) Control unit has finite memory.
Remarks:
1) Adding multiple tapes does not increase power;
2) Adding multiple read/write heads does not increase power;
3) Adding push-down stack does not increase power;
4) Non-deterministic control unit does not increase power;
5) Infinite memory control unit does not increase power;
6) Able to determine whether a number is prime or whether a program
has infinite loops, for instance;
7) Claimed to be "an adequate and complete model of processes
that can be carried out mechanically (effective processes)"
[Church-Turing thesis].
regards, Patrick
Patrick S. Duff, ***CR 5621*** pduff.ti-eg@csnet-relay
5049 Walker Dr. #91103 214/480-1659 (work)
The Colony, TX 75056-1120 214/370-5363 (home)
(a suburb of Dallas, TX)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 00:46 EDT
From: Henry Lieberman <Henry@OZ>
Subject: Computers cheat at chess?
The chess columnist of the Boston Globe wrote an article claiming that computer
programs cheat in chess tournaments! He had two arguments for this:
* Tournament rules forbid the players to use an extra board to move pieces
while considering their moves during the game. He argued that tree searching of
moves in computer programs constitutes using an extra board.
* Tournament rules forbid the players to consult books during the game.
Most programs rely on a book to play openings.
These arguments seemed silly to me at first, but on reflection, I think he
might have a point, especially with the second point about book openings.
It might be worthwhile to try human-computer chess tournaments with relaxed
rules that, for example, permit the human to consult a book of openings, or
even better, the same on-line data base of openings that the program uses.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 May 85 18:01:50 edt
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher at mit-htvax>
Subject: Revolting Seminar - Qualitative Calculator
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
DATE: Friday, 17 May
TIME: 12 NOON
PLACE: 8th FLOOR PLAYROOM
HOST: Michael Kashket
QUALITATIVE CALCULATORS IN CLINICAL DECISION MAKING
(-: Tex Tuftsman :-)
The classical approach to decision analysis in medicine has been
based on constructing decision trees, giving numerical weights to
outcomes, and banging away at the keys of an ordinary 16-key
calculator to choose between appropriate therapies. Some of the
weaknesses in this approach can be avoided by using a QUALITATIVE
CALCULATOR (c) from Ronco.
Envision yourself with a QUALITATIVE CALCULATOR (c) -- A QUALITATIVE
CALCULATOR especially designed for Naive Physicists. Comes with [+],
[-], and [0] keys, plus a Clear key and a DeClear key. Was $20.99,
marked down to [+]. But wait -- There's more! Qual before [0] tonight
and get a free State Map for your locality. Operators are standing by!
Don't miss this landmark value!
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 May 85 18:02 EDT
From: jcma@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Constraint-Interpreting Reference (MIT)
AI REVOLVING SEMINAR
John Mallery (JCMa@MIT-MC)
"Constraint-Interpreting Reference"
Tuesday, May 21, 1985 at 4pm
8th Floor Playroom, AI Laboratory, MIT
This talk will discuss the theory of reference used in the Relatus
Natural Language System, an AI program developed at the MIT AI Laboratory in
collaboration with Gavan Duffy. Relatus parses sentences and uses a reference
system to incrementally construct a semantic model. The reference system
matches graphs and creates (interns) graph structure in a semantic network.
The separation of the constraint interpreter from specific constraints
describing the matching problem yields various benefits. For instance:
* Matching speed is independent of database size, normally faster than linear
in the size of the smallest accessible set of potential referents.
* A powerful and extensible constraint language provides the ability to
describe an infinite number of matchers, each tuned to recognize and prefer
specific structures.
In addition to the theoretical ideas, some practical uses of the implemented
reference system will also be discussed:
* It is regularly used in intersentential reference, finding references
to previously interned descriptions in new sentences. Relatus can
presently parse and reference a 10-page text (250 sentences) in under
10 minutes while running on a Symbolics 3600 (1536K real memory).
* It is regularly used to answer literal and explicit questions. The
approach to question answering depends on both the reference system and a
procedure which is actually the inverse of reference. Semantic inversion
builds constraint descriptions from the graph structure previously created
by the reference system.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 May 85 13:32:05 pdt
From: (Frank Olken [csam]) olken@lbl-csam
Subject: Seminar - Exceptions in Data/Knowledge Bases (LBL)
CSRD Colloquium
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
**********************************************************
Living with Exceptions in Data/Knowledge Bases
**********************************************************
Alexander Borgida
Department of Computer Science
Rutgers University
The ``schema'' of a large database is usually used to vali-
date the data being entered and to help set up efficient
access structures. Because the real world is irregular,
unpredictable and evolves, we contend that useful data
management systems, including large ``knowledge bases,''
must be tolerant of deviations from the constraints imposed
by the schema, including type and semantic integrity con-
straints. We therefore examine the problems involved in
accommodating exceptions to constraints, and propose a solu-
tion based on the concept of exception handling in Program-
ming Languages. This technique can also be used to deal
with problems such as null values and estimates, and in
addition has good Software Engineering properties. We con-
clude by discussing the formal logic of assertions with
exceptions, and hint at the utility of exceptions in data-
base re-design through learning.
Wednesday, May 22, 1985, 2:00pm - 4:00pm
Bldg. 50D, Room 116 - Conference Room
For further information, call Harry Wong at (415) 486-6884. Dept. of
Computer Science Research; LBL; One Cyclotron Road; Berkeley, CA
94720.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-May-85 2305 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #68
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 May 85 23:05:10 PDT
Date: Tue 21 May 1985 21:09-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #68
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 22 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 68
Today's Topics:
Conference - 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming,
Tutorials - Computational Linguistics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 May 1985 12:03:27-PDT
From: conery%uoregon.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference - 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming
-- Preliminary Schedule --
-- 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming --
For more information, contact:
John Conery (jc@uoregon.csnet) 503-686-4408
Jacques Cohen (jc@brandeis.csnet) 617-647-3370
MONDAY, July 15
Tutorials (Two parallel sessions, 9:00 - 4:30) (Two more tutorials on Friday)
"Expert Systems Using Prolog", Bob Kowalski, Imperial College
"Parallel Logic Programming", Gary Lindstrom, Univerity of Utah
8:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Early Registration and Reception
TUESDAY, July 16, 1985
8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Registration
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Robert Kowalski, Imperial College
London, England
11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. PARALLELISM
Semi-intelligent Backtracking of Prolog Based on a
Static Data Dependency Analysis, Jung-Herng Chang
and Alvin M. Despain, University of California,
Berkeley
User-defined Parallel Control Strategies, J. I.
Glasgow, M. A. Jenkins, and C. D. McCrosky,
Queen's University, Canada
AND-parallelism with Intelligent Backtracking for
Annotated Logic Programs, J. Maluszynski, Linkoping
University and P. Dembinski, Chalmbers University of
Technology, Sweden
2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. EXTENSIONS
An experiment in Programming with Full First-Order
Logic, Zerkis D. Umrigar and Vijay Pitchumani,
Syracuse University
A Meta-Level Extension of Prolog, Kenneth A. Bowen,
Syracuse University, and Tobias Weinberg, Digital
Equipment Corporation
Logic Programming Cum Applicative Programming, Nachum
Dershowitz and David Plaisted, University of
Illinois at Urbana Champaign
4:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. LANGUAGE ISSUES
On the Treatment of Cuts in Prolog Source-Level
Tools, R. A. O'Keefe, University of Edinburgh,
United Kingdom
All Solutions Predicates in Prolog, Lee Naish,
University of Melbourne, Australia
Unification-free Execution of Logic Programs,
Jan Komorowski, Aiken Computation Laboratory,
Harvard University and Jan Maluszynski,
Linkoping University, Sweden
Wednesday, July 17, 1985
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. INVITED SPEAKER
Dr. Herve Gallaire, European Computer Research
Center, Munich, West Germany
11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. CONCURRENT PROLOG
Concurrent Prolog in a Multi-process Environment,
Rosanna Lee and Randy Goebel, University of
Waterloo, Canada
A sequential Implementation of Concurrent Prolog
Based on the Shallow Binding Scheme, Toshihiko
Miyazaki, Akikazu Takeuchi and Takashi Chikayama,
ICOT, Japan
2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. SEMANTICS
The Declarative Semantics of Logical Read-only
Variables, G. Levi and C. Palamidessi,
Universita'di Pisa, Italy
Narrowing as the Operational Semantics of Functional
Languages, Uday Reddy, University of Utah
Towards an Algebra for Constructing Logic Programs,
R.A. O'Keefe, University of Edinburgh, United
Kingdom
4:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
A Microcoded Unifier for Lisp Machine Prolog, Mats
Carlssn, Uppsala University, Sweden
SLOG: A Logic Programming Language Interpreter Based
on Clausal Superposition and Rewriting, Laurent
Fribourg, Laboratoires de Marcoussis, France
A Real Time Garbage Collector for Prolog, Edwin
Pittombils and Maurice Bruynooghe, K.U. Leuven,
Belgium
Evening Banquet
Speaker Dr. Maurice Wilkes, Digital Equipment Corporation
Thursday, July 19, 1985
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. THEORY
Recursive Unsolvability of Determinacy, Solvable
Cases of Determinacy, and Their Applications to
Prolog Optimization, Jajime Sawamura and Taku
Takeshima, International Institute for Advanced
Study of Social Information Science, Japan
Graph-based Logic Programming Interpreters, Jean
Gallier and Stan Raatz, University of Pennsylvania
Surface Deduction: A Uniform Mechanism for Logic
Programming, P. T. Cox and T. Pietrzykowski,
Technical University of Nova Scotia, Canada
11:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. SPECIAL TOPICS
Towards a Programming Environment for Large
Prolog Programs, Jan Chomicki and Naftaly H.
Minsky, Rutgers University
Modular Logic Programming of Compilers, Harald
Ganzinger and Michael Hanus, University Dortmund,
West Germany
An(other) Integration of Logic and Functional
Programming, Amitabh Srivastava, Don Oxley and
Aditya Srivastava, Central Research Laboratories,
Texas Instruments, Inc.
A Technique for Doing Lazy Evaluation in Logic,
Sanjai Narain, Rand Corp.
FRIDAY July 19
Tutorials: (Two concurrent sessions, 9:00 - 4:30)
"Concurrent Logic Programming Techniques", Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Institute
"Prolog and Software Engineering", Susan Gerhart, Wang Institute.
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 1985 17:39:24 PDT
From: Bill Mann <MANN@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
Subject: Tutorials on Computational Linguistics: July 8
TUTORIALS ON TOPICS IN COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS
The conference schedule for the 1985 Association for Computational
Linguistics is now available. The conference will be held July 8-12 at
the University of Chicago, with the first day devoted to Tutorials in
Computational Linguistics, described below.
Each tutorial is a presentation of the state of the art in an important
area of computational linguistics--not just the speakers' work on the
subject--the whole range of approaches being actively pursued.
PARSER CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
Jonathan Slocum,
MCC Corporation
The tutorial on Parser Construction Techniques will cover, briefly,
the various approaches to parsing (algorithms) and implementation
methodologies; included will be discussion of matters relating to
runtime (CPU) performance. Focus will then shift to matters
concerning the user interface: what tools ought to be provided to the
linguist/developer, and how those tools can be tied to the central
parsing program. Several different parsers employing the same user
interface will be introduced (and their source code distributed in
the handout).
It will be assumed that participants are somewhat familiar with LISP,
that they know enough about formal linguistics to understand such
concepts as "context free," context sensitive," and "phrase structure
grammar," and that they know what is meant by "parsing" and related
technical terms from the computational perspective.
PROLOG WITH NATURAL-LANGUAGE EXAMPLES
Dr. Fernando C.N. Pereira, SRI International
The logic programming language Prolog is becoming an important tool in
artificial intelligence and, in particular, in computational
linguistics. This tutorial is intended as an introduction to Prolog and
its programming methodology. Rather than making an abstract
presentation of the language, we will build up a vocabulary of Prolog
programming concepts and techniques by examining a progression of
examples that show how Prolog can be used in simple
natural-language-analysis tasks. Topics covered include facts and
queries; rules; the logical variable; terms as structured information;
unification; axiomatization of phrase-structure grammars;
definite-clause grammars; the Prolog execution model; control mechanisms
(sequencing and cut); metalogical operators and alternative execution
models; program transformation and embedded formalisms; the relation
between Prolog and logic programming.
Although there are no formal prerequisites of this course, some
familiarity with elementary concepts of logic and traditional syntax
would be useful.
UNIFICATION APPROACHES TO GRAMMAR
Stuart M. Shieber, SRI International
Current trends in syntactic theory and computational syntax seem to be
converging toward a type of grammatical formalism based on complex
feature systems and an operation called "unification." This tutorial
presents this approach to the syntax and semantics of natural language.
Beginning with a characterization of the principles that underlie
grammar formalisms in general, a particular simple formalism based on
these ideas will be derived. Its relation to many of the currently
prevalent unification-based grammar formalisms--including functional
unification grammar, lexical-functional grammar, head grammar,
generalized phrase-structure grammar, and definite-clause grammar--will
be explicated as more general or more particular variants motivated by
linguistic or computational considerations. Finally, the manner in
which these approaches may be applied to the modelling of a number of
linguistic constructs will be described, and the implementation of such
formalisms discussed briefly.
A very rudimentary knowledge of traditional syntax is recommended as a
prerequisite of the course. Familiarity with Prolog, definite-clause
grammar, or elementary logic would be helpful, but is not essential.
Although intended as a sequel to Fernando Pereira's "Prolog with
Natural Language Examples," this tutorial can be taken independently.
NATURAL LANGUAGE INTERFACES
Norman K. Sondheimer, USC/ISI and
Madeleine Bates, BBN
This tutorial will outline the role of natural language interfaces
in man-machine interaction: their uses, limits, and technology. These
systems allow a user to communicate with a computer in much the same way as
he communicates with other humans. To date, english language interfaces to
databases have achieved the greatest commercial success, but interfaces for
other languages and applications, such as spreadsheet packages, are emerging.
There are at least as many implementation technologies as systems: syntactic
grammars, semantic grammars, conceptual parsers, pattern matchers, etc.
Each has its strengthens and weaknesses. The greatest variability is found
in language coverage, ease of developing new applications, and, of course,
cost. Current research promises to improve the integration of natural
language with other types of interfaces and support extended human-machine
conversations. Nevertheless, they will not be appropriate for every
application. The purpose of this tutorial will be to introduce the
technology and allow the attendee to evaluate the alternatives.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND: designers, managers, and users of human-machine
interfaces. This tutorial is aimed primarily at the individual who requires
the information to understand or evaluate natural language interfaces, but
who is not now a natural language processing professional. It should also
be of use to more experienced individuals seeking a survey current applied
state-of-the-art.
About the instructors: Dr. Norman Sondheimer is a computer scientist at the
University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute and past
President of the Association for Computational Linguistics. His research has
been into natural language understanding. Dr. Madeleine Bates is one of the
primary architects of BBN'S IRUS, a highly advanced nl system, and has
developed other systems in speech understanding, text generation, intelligent
computer assisted instruction, interfaces to databases and human factors
studies. She is currently President of the ACL. Both instructors have more
than a decade of research and development experience in AI and have authored
numerous publications.
SPEECH RECOGNITION AND SYNTHESIS
Dr. Jared Bernstein
SRI International
Dr. Beatrice T. Oshika
System Development Corporation
The tutorial will include a review of commercial speech recognition and
synthesis products, metrics for evaluation, and research issues crucial
to continued development. The synthesis section will discuss the
linguistic and phonetic problems to be solved in designing
text-to-speech systems, including letter-to-sound conversion, prosodic
assignment and spectral composition. The recognition section will cover
the problems associated with modelling continuous speech, including
discussion of phonological variation, lexical retrieval and matching,
and control structures required to handle multiple sources of knowledge.
Familiarity with phonology and data structures is helpful but not
required.
Dr. Jared Bernstein is a Senior Computer Scientist at SRI International
working on applied speech recognition projects, and has ten years
experience in speech synthesis and speech processing. At Telesensory
Systems he led the effort that resulted in the Prose 2000 text-to-speech
converter. Prior to that he was with the MIT Speech Communication Group
working on speech perception, phonetics and the analysis of deaf speech.
Dr. Beatrice T. Oshika is manager of the Research and Development
program at System Development Corporation and has seventeen years
experience in linguistics and speech processing. At Speech
Communications Research Laboratory she was responsible for formulation
and testing of phonological rules in conversational speech as part of the
DARPA Speech Understanding Research program in the 1970s.
Each tutorial is a half-day in length. They cost only $50 each,
including handouts. The conference brochure and registration form for
both the tutorials and the paper presentations are available from
Don Walker
Bell Communications Research
445 South Street, MRE 2A379
Morristown, NJ 07960 USA
on the ARPANET: bellcore!walker@berkeley.arpa
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-May-85 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #69
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 May 85 23:48:25 PDT
Date: Thu 23 May 1985 21:48-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #69
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 24 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 69
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Acquiring Control Knowledge in BB1 (SU) &
Computers and Emotion (CSLI) &
Knowledge, Beliefs, Time and More Puzzles (IBM-SJ) &
Functional Programming and the Logical Variable (SU),
Workshop - Applications of Expert Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 21 May 85 10:03:38-PDT
From: Carol Wright/Susie Barnes <WRIGHT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Acquiring Control Knowledge in BB1 (SU)
SIGLUNCH
DATE: Friday, May 24, 1985
LOCATION: Braun Auditorium, Mudd/Chemistry Bldg.
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Mike Hewett
Knowledge Systems Laboratory
TITLE: MARCK: A Module for Acquiring and Refining
Control Knowledge in BB1
MARCK is the first step in exploiting the capabilities for
knowledge acquisition and learning within the BB1 blackboard
architecture. MARCK automates the role of a BB1 knowledge
engineer by assisting the expert with defining, formulating, and
integrating new control knowledge into a knowledge base during
a problem-solving session.
While running a system in BB1, an expert may take an action
which indicates that some piece of control knowledge is missing.
MARCK uses its knowledge of the control architecture in BB1 to
guide the expert toward identifying the missing knowledge. It
then uses a set of data analysis routines and a library of generic
heuristic forms to postulate some applicable control heuristics.
Although MARCK has no knowledge of the domain, it can generate
domain-dependent control knowledge. MARCK communicates to the
expert through a translator which converts heuristic forms and
LISP code into English sentences.
MARCK is currently being used in the PROTEAN project at KSL
and several examples will be presented where MARCK has formulated
important and useful pieces of control knowledge.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 22 May 85 17:10:28-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Computers and Emotion (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
*NEXT* THURSDAY, May 30, 1985
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall ``Computers and Emotion''
Conference Room Discussion led by Helen Nissenbaum
Emotion is an integral part of human consciousness. Yet common
practice in AI takes its ideal to be an intelligent, goal-driven agent
entirely devoid of passion. The assumption behind the practice is
that emotionless intellect is possible, and that a purely cognitive
agent is a valid abstraction from the total human individual. The
TINLunch, inspired by a TINLunch held October 13, 1981, titled ``Will
Robots Need Emotions?'', probes the AI assumption. I offer the
following as starting points for the discussion:
- What would it take to have a computer with emotions?
- Why worry about this? A passionless automaton is fully rational
and far better off for not having emotions. (Too bad we humans suffer
this affliction.)
- These are idle speculations. A sufficiently complex robot, that
could truly be said to understand and be goal-driven, will, of
necessity, have emotion, no matter what the intentions of its
creators.
Background readings are excerpts from Hume's ``Of the Passions'',
Jerome Shaffer's ``An Assessment of Emotion'' and TINLunch Outline
``Will Robots Need Emotions?'' by A. Archbold and N. Haas.
--Helen Nissenbaum
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 May 85 18:36:12 PDT
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge, Beliefs, Time and More Puzzles (IBM-SJ)
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Wed., May 29 Computer Science Seminar
10:30 A.M. KNOWLEDGE, BELIEFS, TIME AND MORE PUZZLES
Cafe. A In "Knowledge, Common Knowledge and Related Puzzles,"
PODC 84, a logical system for formalizing reasoning
about knowledge and time was proposed. Ongoing
research around this system will be described and
touch on subjects such as: restrictions on how one
may acquire knowledge, surprises, beliefs, and
knowledge about time.
Prof. D. L. Brandeis
Host: J. Halpern (HALPERN@IBM-SJ)
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 85 0000 PDT
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Functional Programming and the Logical Variable (SU)
Thursday 6-6-85, 11am in MJH 352
FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING AND THE LOGICAL VARIABLE
Gary Lindstrom
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
Logic programming offers a variety of computational effects which go beyond
those customarily found in functional programming languages. Among these
effects is the notion of the "logical variable," i.e. a value determined by the
intersection of constraints, rather than by direct binding. We argue that this
concept is "separable" from logic programming, and can sensibly be incorporated
into existing functional languages. Moreover, this extension appears to
significantly widen the range of problems which can efficiently be addressed in
function form, albeit at some loss of conceptual purity. In particular, a form
of side-effects arises under this extension, since a function invocation can
exert constraints on variables shared with other function invocations.
Nevertheless, we demonstrate that determinacy can be retained, even under
parallel execution. The graph reduction language FGL is used for this
demonstration, by being extended to a language FGL+LV permitting formal
parameter expressions, with variables occurring therein bound by unification.
The determinacy argument is based on a novel dataflow-like rendering of
unification. In addition the complete partial order employed in this
proof is unusual in its explicit representation of demand, a necessity
given the "benign" side-effects that arise. An implementation
technique is suggested, suitable for reduction architectures.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 May 85 11:49:55 EDT
From: johannes@BRL.ARPA
Subject: Workshop - Applications of Expert Systems
The U. S. Army Research Office is sponsoring a Summer Workshop on
Application of Expert Systems. The workshop will be held on July 16,18
1985 at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia.
The workshops objective is to assess the application of expert systems
to military applications and to identify the state-of-the-art and research
needs. Particular emphasis shall be given to diagnostic and automatic
test applications.
The four main topics for discussion in the working sessions are:
1. Preventive maintenance -- Prognostics
2. Diagnostic maintenance
3. Automatic logistics planning
4. Automatic training
The keynote speaker for the workshop will Lieutenant General Robert Moore
Deputy Commander for Research Development and Acquisition - US Army Materiel
Command.
The workshop attendance is limited to 50 participants from the US Army
industry, and academia. The program will consist of invited and
submitted papers. A 200 word abstract must be submitted to the program
committee prior to June 15, 1985 for consideration.
Abstracts should be sent to Dr. Johannes of the Program committee.
The author will be notified of acceptance of the paper and particpation
by June 21, 1985.
Accepted papers will published in the proceedings of the conference
and will be allocted a maximum of five pages.
Program Committee
Dr. J. D. Johannes Dr. C. R. Green Dr. W. M. Holmes
Univ of Alabama US Army Research Office US Army Missile Command
Computer Science Electronics Division Redstone Arsenal, AL
Huntsville, AL P.O. Box 12211 35898-5252
35899 Research Triangle Pk.
NC 27709-2211
205-895-6255 919-549-0641 205-876-1048
johannes@brl-bmd.arpa green@brl-bmd.arpa holmes@brl-bmd.arpa
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-May-85 0101 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #70
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 May 85 01:01:00 PDT
Date: Thu 23 May 1985 21:57-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #70
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 24 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 70
Today's Topics:
Queries - Reasoning by Analogy & Functional/Procedural Translation,
Books - OPS5,
Cognition - Animal Cognition Notes,
Games - Computers Cheating in Chess,
Humor - AI Limericks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 18:27:14 pdt
From: Cindy Mason <clm@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: Reasoning by Analogy
Does anyone have a bibliography (preferably refer format) or references
for reasoning by analogy? I'm especially interested in learning by
analogy, but any nice articles relating to this area would be helpful.
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1985 at 1634-EDT
From: jim at TYCHO.ARPA (James B. Houser)
Subject: Computer Language Translation
Has any work been done in the area of machine translation of
functional languages into procedural languages? As an example LISP ->
C or PROLOG to ADA. At first glance it seems useful but also
potentially very tricky transformation.
Also do any reasonable C compilers/environments exist for LISP
Machines? I have heard rumors that something is available for the
CADR.
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1985 1547-EDT
From: Lee Brownston@CMU-CS-A
Subject: OPS5 Book
Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
"Programming Expert Systems in OPS5: An Introduction to Rule-Based
Programming," by Lee Brownston, Robert Farrell, Elaine Kant, and Nancy
Martin, is scheduled to be published by Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
on May 31 at a list price of $35.95.
The blurb from Addison-Wesley's flier for Spring 1985 says the following
about this book:
Presents practical techniques for rule-based programming of
expert systems in OPS5. This comprehensive book will prove
itself indispensible to the experienced programmer. The first
section of the book is a tutorial, teaching both the OPS5
language and effective programming techniques. The development
of a small, self-contained OPS5 programmed is followed from
problem definition to testing. The second section takes a
broader view, considering the nature of production-system
architectures and comparing OPS5 with other tools for
programming corporate systems.
It is also the only book-length treatment of OPS5 and production-system
programming. [...]
------------------------------
Date: 20 May 85 14:14:04 EDT
From: Tim <WEINRICH@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Animal Cognition
For those of you who missed the symposium on "The Question of Animal
Cognition", which was presented by the psychology department in early May,
I've written a paper which is somewhere between a transcription of the
notes I took and an informal summary of the proceedings of that symposium.
This is on
<Weinrich>ANIMAL.SYMPOSIUM
in case anyone is interested in reading it.
Twinerik
[I can mail a copy to interested readers who can't FTP it. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1985 0734-PDT
From: MEYERS%UCI-20A@UCI-ICSA
Subject: computers cheating in chess
I think there is a misconception about what it means for a computer to
"use a second board" and for a computer to have access to a book of
openings.
We don't penalize a human who has memorized a book of openings, and
we don't penalize a human who can using several "mental boards"..
I think it is proper to regard the computer memory as analogous to the
human chess player's mind -- we should not penalize the computer for
having perfect rote memory and for perfect ability to "mentally"
visualize the chess board, just as we allow any mental capabilities
and mental acts of the human chess player.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 07:40:01 EDT
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: cheating at chess
> * Tournament rules forbid the players to consult books during the game.
> Most programs rely on a book to play openings.
This raises some interesting points. It seems that the thrust of the
rules is that a player should play with no "external" help - ie the
player is expected to rely solely on his/her/its internalized
knowledge of the game. For humans, the interpretation is clear -
ie I assume it would be cheating if a human utilized *any*
externally recorded knowledge or advice (say on a handy micro).
But what interpretation can this idea have for a computer? Well,
there is a long tradition of referring to "external" storage,
ie disk, drum, and tape. Conversely "main" storage (known as "core"
to the old-timers) does really seem to be "inside" of the computer,
more an intrinsic part of it.
Sooo... rather than bend the rules to allow humans to cheat also,
why not restrict computers to the use of internal storage during
play? ie they can load up from disk, tape, whatever, but once the clock
starts, we unplug all the I/O ports, and may the best rational agent win.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 15:08 IDT
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Humor
From Datamation - March 15, 1985 - page 166:
AI YI YI
The following can be attributed to a novice system with an ignorance
base and an unnatural language interface, programmed to produce
Artifical Humor (AH).
Of a planning aid using AI,
A customer said with a sai,
"If they think we know whai,
We decide what to trai,
There's no chance that their product will flai."
After giving a robot AI,
An inventor rushed out the next dai.
With a tear in his ai,
He gave a sad crai,
"I've made a machine that can lai!"
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Jun-85 0044 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #71
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Jun 85 00:44:08 PDT
Date: Fri 31 May 1985 23:04-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #71
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 1 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 71
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Mailer Problems,
Games - Computer Scrabble,
Query - Self-Reproducing System,
Applications - Tax Rules,
PROLOG - The Berkeley PLM Benchmarks,
Humor - Contest,
Games - Cheating at Chess,
Conference - Submission Date for AIE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 31 May 85 22:54:09-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Mailer Problems
SRI-AI has been down for five days, since Sunday morning.
If you have sent mail to AIList during that time, you
should probably send it again.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Thu 30 May 85 11:47:54-EDT
From: John R. Kender <KENDER@COLUMBIA-20.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Scrabble
What is the state of the art in computer Scrabble?
I am aware of a company called Ritam that produces a device called
Monty that is "pretty good", according to the president of the
Scrabble Players' Club. I have no idea what, if any, AI techniques it
uses. Further, the Club president knows of no tournaments involving
computers. At first glance this does not appear because the game
would be trivial to program, rendering computers invincible to humans
or making games between them boring.
My interest is more in using the game as a task domain in an AI
course. Thus:
o What work has been done? References? Software? Anecdotal
remarks?
o How deep is the strategy of the game: is it more on the level of
blackjack, or of go? Are there commonly known or articulated
heuristics? How far ahead do human players look? Is a multi-
handed game qualitatively different from a two-handed one?
o Assuming a word data base, is Scrabble a game of difficulty
appropriate to the level of a homework assignment?
a term project? a Master's degree project? Would it be worth
doing: are their sufficiently interesting issues of representation,
search, and control that are not overwhelmed by bookkeeping details
or brute force methods?
------------------------------
Date: 24 May 85 06:35:12 EDT (Fri)
From: zim@mitre.ARPA
Subject: size of self-reproducing system; intelligence?
Q: What's the minimum "size" for a self-reproducing thing? For an
"intelligent" thing??
These are half-baked questions and I need help in sharpening then up.
Maybe this subject has been all worked out and all I really need is a few
pointers to the appropriate literature? I don't know... Here are some
preliminary thoughts, to clarify the question I'm trying to ask:
A measure of "size" probably needs to include the complexity of the
environment ... for instance, a virus takes advantage of a highly-ordered
set of cell mechanisms and can reproduce with only a few thousand (or so?)
bits of information ... its "size" measure should be bigger than the amount
of DNA in it might seem to imply. All living creatures make use of some
of the physical laws of the universe (mostly chemistry), and should be
charged some for that in "size" measure ... though they probably shouldn't
be charged for remote-seeming physics such as general relativity, high-energy
particle physics, etc. (On the other hand, maybe the information "cost" of
those theories is tiny compared to the more immediate environmental "size"
around a living cell??) The problem is to define a "relevant" environment.
Self-reproducing cellular automata that I've heard of seem to
generally require billions and billions of cells or so (as in
Conway's LIFE); they live in a very simple universe, where there is almost
no information stored in their environment. On the other hand, most of
the self-reproducing automata I've seen are quite huge and inefficient,
because they're structured to be comprehensible to people....
Are the questions of self-reproduction and intelligence related? I'm
thinking vaguely about notions of Godel's theorem, complexity of human
brains, self-reference, etc. Maybe an appropriate size measure would come
out about the same for a single cell and for a brain?? Presumably brains
should be charged for their structure, not for the details of how neurons
metabolize, in a size measure.... On the Godel's theorem again, the coding
schemes needed in producing the self-referential statement typically seem
to require really huge numbers (unless a lot of information is hidden
somewhere else). Maybe one could define "intelligence" in terms such as
"capable of formulating Godel's theorem", or some other definition (with
malice aforethought) to make the self-reproducing size measure come out
the same as the intelligence size measure?
So to restate the question, can one define an appropriate measure and prove
that any self-reproducing (or intelligent?) system has to be at least of a
certain size?
This might have interesting implications as to how hard it will be to make
AI systems with human-like consciousness ... how many logic elements or gates
will be required, how many gigaflops (or gigalips) are needed to think at a
human pace, etc....
-zim@mitre
[I remember John DeVore at K-State building a self-replicating
2-D binary pattern as his master's project circa 1978. I'm sure it
had millions of cells rather than billions. AIList readers interested
in such questions should be aware of the Self-Org@MIT-MC discussion
list. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20-May-85 09:52:10 PDT
From: (David Sherman) pesnta!dave@UCB-Vax
Subject: Suggestions needed for tax rules
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am trying to design a system which will apply the rules of
the Income Tax Act (Canada) to a set of facts and transactions
in the area of corporate reorganizations.
This is not a typical "AI and law" problem, because the Income
Tax Act is highly technical and extremely specific about what
rules apply and when. To the extent there is "open texture", or
issues which require legal judgment (e.g., whether an amount
is "reasonable"), I assume the lawyer using the system will
provide the judgment as an input fact. The problems are therefore
quite different from those addressed by McCarty@Rutgers' TAXMAN
program, because the approaches of the Income Tax Act and the
Internal Revenue Code are very different.
The difficulty in programming the system is simply the complexity
of the Income Tax Act. On a given transaction, a large number of
rules have to be examined to determine possible tax effects. Some
of these rules create new facts (e.g., a deemed dividend or a deemed
disposition). The passage of time is very important: steps happen
in a particular sequence, and the "state of the world" at the moment
a step is taken is crucial to determining the tax effects. In the
context of corporate transactions, this state includes such things
as who controls a corporation; who owns what assets; the residence
and status of and relationships among taxpayers; cost bases and
proceeds of disposition; and so on.
(My background to this: I'm a tax lawyer and an experienced C
programmer. I'm doing this work towards an LL.M. thesis.)
I've tried several approaches to this field before. Last year
I did a small version in C which uses an event-driven simulation,
and as it encounters each event calls a function for each rule in
the database to generate new events and tax results. (Incidentally,
if anyone wants a copy of that paper, "Towards a
Comprehensive Computer-Based Problem Solving Model of the
Income Tax Act: A Suggested Approach and Implementation of
Examples from Corporate Reorganizations", let me know.)
One of the problems with the C implementation was designing the
order in which the rules should be applied. For even the small subset
I implemented, this was awkward and difficult.
I came across Prolog at an ICS course on expert systems a few
weeks ago. It looks like the perfect tool for much of what I want
to do. Besides the workshops at the course (taught=sdcsvax!vis!greg),
I've now read Clocksin & Mellish and skimmed through How To Solve
It In Prolog.
The definitional stuff is fine. Using C-Prolog 1.4 on a VAX (not this
machine), I've already coded the Income Tax Act's definitions for
things like "resident", "private corporation", etc.
The problem I have (if you've read this far, thank you!) is how
to deal with ←time←. I suppose the overall model I need to work with
is one of "changing states", where a transaction (e.g., X transfers
property to corporation Y in exchange for shares in Y) changes the
world from state A to state B, and the rules can examine differences
between the states to determine the effects. But then how does that
jive with definitional tests which may need to look back in time
(e.g., a corporation is resident in Canada in a given year if it
meets certain conditions and it was resident in Canada, or carried
on business in Canada, in the previous year. This is a perfect
recursive definition for Prolog, and I've implemented the rule,
but only as a fixed definition, not as part of a "changing
state" system.)?
I guess part of my problem is that I'm not working in an
AI department, or even a Computer Science department, and
so I don't have knowledgeable people to bounce my ideas off.
If you have any suggestions as to approaches I should be taking,
I'd greatly appreciate hearing from you. I'd be happy to send you
a copy of the code I've written so far to explain what I mean.
(You could even learn all about Canadian tax law!)
-- David Sherman
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Osgoode Hall
Toronto, Canada M5H 2N6
(416) 947-3466
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 May 85 10:47:11 pdt
From: (Tep Dobry) Tep%ucbdali@Berkeley
Subject: The Berkeley PLM Benchmarks
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
At the Warren Abstract Machine Workshop a few weeks ago
I was asked to publish the set of benchmarks programs I've
been using on my simulator for the Berkeley Prolog
Machine(PLM). I've finally got them all collected together
in Prolog form (CProlog) and have sent them to the Digest.
They're really too big to just publish in the Digest, so
they are being set up in a directory in the PROLOG directory
at SU-SCORE. There are 11 files with a total of 400 lines.
Since our machine is based on compiled Prolog, the top level
queries are also compiled in, generally as the predicate
main/0.
The benchmarks were primarily chosen to exercise all of
the features of the PLM, not for any complexity of program-
ming. About half of them come from Warren's thesis, and the
others we've added here. Our original performance figures
were based on simulations of hand compiled versions of these
benchmarks. We are currently looking for larger, more com-
plex benchmarks to run on the hardware when it is available.
So I'd be interested seeing large benchmarks sent to the
Digest.
-- Tep Dobry
[ the code for these benchmarks is available from the SCORE
PROLOG library under the subdirectory PS:<Prolog.BM> ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 May 85 12:50:32-EDT
From: Bob Hall <RJH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: You thought it was over...
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
No, but
AI JOKES II: THE WRATH OF CONS
is entering its final week, so if you've heard any good ones
and want to get in on the glory, send your entry to me
<rjh%mit-oz@mit-mc> before June 7, 1985. Remember to include
T-shirt size and school from the list on the announcement.
------------------------------
Date: 24 May 85 11:39:32 EDT (Friday)
From: MJackson.Wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: cheating at chess
From: cugini@NBS-VMS:
"Sooo... rather than bend the rules to allow humans to cheat also, why
not restrict computers to the use of internal storage during play? ie
they can load up from disk, tape, whatever, but once the clock starts,
we unplug all the I/O ports, and may the best rational agent win."
Surely if we unplug *all* the I/O ports, one of the rational agents will
lose by exceeding the time limit before making its first move?
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 30 May 1985 22:41:31 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Submission Date for AIE
A number of people have inquired about the due date for the Artificial
Intelligence in Engineering Conference, to be held in April 1986 at
University of Southampton, UK. The due date is extended to June 15th. If you
still plan to send an abstract don't waste your money on overnight mail,
good old US mail would do the job.
Sriram
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Jun-85 1255 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #72
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Jun 85 12:54:48 PDT
Date: Tue 4 Jun 1985 09:50-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #72
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 4 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 72
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Expert System for Fault Diagnosis (SRI) &
Temporal Logic (SU) &
Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance (CSLI) &
Spreadsheets in Logic Programming (MIT) &
PCs as Vehicles for LISP (BBN),
Conferences - Association for Computational Linguistics &
Law and Technology
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 25 May 85 12:48:58-PDT
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Expert System for Fault Diagnosis (SRI)
Time: Wednesday May 29 at 11:00 am
Location: EJ232
Speaker : Guy A. Boy (NASA-Ames & ONERA, France)
Topic : HORSES
HORSES ( Human - [Orbital Refueling System] - Expert System ) is a
malfunction procedure-oriented diagnosis aid. It takes into account
two types of logic, the functioning logic of the system to be
controlled and the user logic. HORSES will be used to study a
theoretical framework of the situation recognition problem.
As a strategy for research in the use of expert systems for fault
diagnosis this example focuses attention on three interrelated issues;
1) The characterization of the fault diagnosis process with the
current ORS implementation (shuttle orbital refueling system
simulator); 2) Improved understanding of how humans recognize,
diagnose, and respond to system failures; and, 3) A deeper analysis of
the fault diagnosis process concentration a better understanding of
the knowledge and inferences required.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 24 May 85 14:19:25-PDT
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Temporal Logic (SU)
5/30/85 - Daniel Lehmann (Hebrew U. visiting Brandeis U.)
"The temporal logic of probabilistic programs"
In a joint work with S. Shelah, some extensions of the propositional
temporal logic of discrete time were advocated as useful for stating
and proving properties of probabilistic concurrent programs. Deductive
completeness theorems were proved. In a joint work with S. Kraus
corresponding decision procedures were investigated. Recently a system
for describing time and knowledge has been proposed. All those systems
can be characterized as two-dimensional modal logics, i.e. they
involve two essentially orthogonal modalities, one of them being time,
that satisfy some interchange law. The techniques involved in
studying such systems and some open problems will be described.
***** Time and place: May 30, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 May 85 17:16:33-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THURSDAY, June 6, 1985, 4:15 p.m.
CSLI Colloquium, Redwood Hall, Room G-19
``An Assumption-Based Truth-Maintenance System''
Johan De Kleer, Xerox PARC, Intelligent Systems Lab.
This paper presents a new view of problem solving motivated by a
new kind of truth maintenance system. Unlike previous truth
maintenance systems which were based on manipulating justifications,
this truth maintenance system is, in addition, based on manipulating
assumption sets. As a consequence it is possible to work effectively
and efficiently with inconsistent information, context switching is
free, and most backtracking (and all retraction) is avoided. These
capabilities motivate a different kind of problem-solving architecture
in which multiple potential solutions are explored simultaneously.
This architecture is particularly well-suited for tasks where a
reasonable fraction of the potential solutions must be explored.
--Johan De Kleer
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 85 13:10:37 EDT
From: jan@harvard.ARPA (Jan Komorowski)
Subject: Seminar - Spreadsheets in Logic Programming (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Harvard University
Center for Research in Computing Technology
COLLOQUIUM
Spreadsheets as a Subset of Logic Programming
Maarten van Emden
University of Waterloo
Tuesday, June 4, 1985
4:00 PM
Aiken Lecture Hall 101
(Tea in Pierce Hall 213 at 3:30)
ABSTRACT:
We believe that currently marketed programs leave unexploited much
of the potential of the spreadsheet interface. The purpose of our work
is to obtain suggestions for wider application of this interface by
showing how to obtain its main features as a subset of logic program-
ming.
Our work is based on two observations. The first is that
spreadsheets would already be a useful enhancement to interactive
languages such as APL and BASIC. Although Prolog is also an interactive
language, this interface cannot be used in the same direct way. Hence
our second observation: the usual query mechanism of Prolog does not
provide the kind of interaction this application requires. But it can
be provided by the incremental query, a new query mechanism for Prolog.
The two observations together yield the spreadsheet as a display of
the state of the substitution of an incremental query in Prolog. Recal-
culation of dependent cells is achieved by automatic modification of the
query in response to a new increment that would make it unsolvable
without the modification.
Host: Professor Henryk Jan Komorowski
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 85 10:20-EDT
From: Peter Mager <met128%BOSTONU.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - PCs as Vehicles for LISP (BBN)
ACM GREATER BOSTON CHAPTER SICPLAN
Thursday, June 13, 1985
8 P.M.
Bolt Beranek and Newman, Newman auditorium
70 Fawcett St., Cambridge
The Personal Computer as a Delivery Vehicle
Gerald R. Barber
Gold Hill Computers
Cambridge, MA
The growing interest in artificial intelligence technologies is
stimulating interest in how the benefits of these technologies
can be delivered on a low cost and low risk basis. This talk
focuses on the elements of a personal computer based delivery
vehicle for artificial intelligence applications.
The combination of a growing market for artificial intelligence
applications and dropping development costs have created a need
for an inexpensive, PC based delivery vehicle. Some desirable
characteristics of a PC delivery vehicle will be discussed
including characteristics of the Golden Common Lisp
implementation, performance, networking, memory needs, and use of
backend machines. A strategy for the implementation of
artificial intelligence technology in a cost effective and
incremental fashion will also be discussed.
ACM GREATER BOSTON CHAPTER SICPLAN
Dear Colleague,
Our June speaker, Gerry Barber, is president of Gold Hill
Computers and the prime mover behind their implementation of
Common Lisp for the IBM/PC. Their product Golden Common Lisp
originated when Gerry spent a post-doc year in France at INRIA
and found himself without adequate access to Lisp processors;
hence a Lisp implementation for the IBM/PC. Prior to that Gerry
studied under Carl Hewitt at MIT's AI Lab, receiving a Ph.D. in
1982. The talk should give a good perspective on where AI
application languages are going and how well they are penetrating
into the everyday world of low cost environments.
Our group customarily meets informally for dinner at Joyce
Chen's restaurant, 390 Rindge Ave., Cambridge at 6:00 P.M. (just
before the meeting). If you wish to come, please call Carolyn
Elson at 661-1840 before the day of the talk - early please.
Peter Mager
chairperson, Boston SICPLAN
------------------------------
Date: 28 May 1985 13:53:18 PDT
From: Bill Mann <MANN@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
Subject: ACL program information: papers July 9-12th
Association for Computational Linguistics
Annual Conference
University of Chicago
Presentations of Papers
July 9 - 12, 1985
TUESDAY - 9 July
morning
-------
Carole D. Hafner
Semantics of Temporal Queries and Temporal Data
Klaus Obermeier
Temporal Inferences in Medical Texts
Kenneth Man-kam Yip
Tense, Aspect and the Cognitive Representation of Time
Shozo Naito, Akira Shimazu & Hirosato Nomura
Classification of Modality Function & its Application to Japanese
Language Analysis
John C. Mallery
Universality and Individuality: The Interaction of Noun Phrase
Determiners in Copular Clauses
William J. Rapaport
Meinongian Semantics for Propositional Semantic Networks
afternoon
---------
INVITED SPEAKER
Fernando Pereira
A Survey of Natural Language Research at Japan's Institute for New
Generation Computing Technology
Philip Cohen and Hector Levesque
Speech Acts and Rationality
Jerry Hobbs
Ontological Promiscuity
Sam Pilato & Robert Berwick
Reversible Automata & Induction of the English Auxilary System
G. Edward Barton, Jr.
The Computation Difficulty of ID/LP Parsing
Aravind Joshi & K. Vijayshankar
Some Computational Properties of Tree Adjoining Grammars
David McDonald & James Pustejovsky
TAGs as a Grammatical Formalism for Generation
WEDNESDAY - 10 July
morning
-------
Michael McCord
Modular Logic Grammars
Robert Berwick & Sandiway Fong
New Approaches to Parsing Conjunctions Using Prolog
Mark Johnson
Generalizing the Early algorithm
Lauri Karttunen and Martin Kay
Structure Sharing with Binary Trees
Fernando Pereira
A Structure-Sharing Representation for Unification-Based
Grammar Formalisms
Stuart M. Shieber
Using Restriction to Extend Parsing Algorithms for
Complex-Feature-Based Formalisms
afternoon
---------
INVITED SPEAKER
William Woods
Knowledge and Language: A New Frontier
Philip Hayes
Semantic Case Frame Parsing & Syntactic Generality
Mark Jones & Alan Driscoll
Movement in Active Production Networks
Derek Proudian and Carl Pollard
Parsing Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar
Carl Pollard & Lewis Creary
A Computational Semantics for Natural Language
Leonardo Lesmo & Pietro Torasso
Analysis of Conjunctions in a Rule-based Parser
THURSDAY - 11 July
morning
-------
INVITED SPEAKER
Barbara Grosz
The Structures of Discourse Structures
Remko Scha
The Dynamic Discourse Model: A Formal Approach to Discourse
Segmentation
Sandra Carberry
A Pragmatics-Based Approach to Understanding Intersentential Ellipsis
Douglas Appelt
Some Pragmatic Issues in the Planning of Definite & Indefinite
Noun Phrases
Brad Goodman
Repairing Reference Identificaiton Failures by Relaxation
afternoon
---------
INVITED SPEAKER
Bonnie Webber
Raymonde Guindon & Burton Wagner
Focusing in Anaphora Resolution: Allocation of Short-term Memory
Karen Kukich
Explanation Structures in XSEL
Cecile L. Paris
Description strategies for naive & expert users
Kenneth Church
Stress Assignment in Letter to Sound Rules for Speech Synthesis
Brian Phillips, Michael Freiling, James Alexander, Steven Messick,
Steve Rehfuss & Sheldon Nicholl
An Eclectic Approach to Building Natural Language Interfaces
FRIDAY - 12 July
morning
-------
Daniel Flickinger, Carl Pollard & Thomas Wasow
Structure-Sharing in Lexical Representation
Thomas Ahlswede
A Tool Kit for Lexicon Building
Roy Byrd & Martin Chodorow
Using an On-line Dictionary to Find Rhyming Words and
Pronunciations for Unknown Words
Uri Zernik & Michael G. Dyer
Towards a Self-Extending Phrasal Lexicon
Andrew D. Beale
Grammatical Analysis by Computer of the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen
Corpus of British English Texts
Martin Chodorow, Roy Byrd & George Heidorn
Extracting Semantic Hierarchies from a Large On-Line Dictionary
afternoon
---------
INVITED SPEAKER
George Miller
Dictionaries of the Mind
Nan Decker
The Use of Syntactic Clues in Discourse Understanding
Helen M. Gigley
Grammar Viewed as a Functioning Part of a Cognitive System
(The tutorial program on July 8 was described in a previous AILIST message.)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 85 08:19:05 cet
From: CSCROS%NSNCCVM.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Conference Program - Law & Technology
Final Program of Second Annual Conference on Law and Technology
Legal Language, Computational Linguistics and Artificial Intelligence
June 24-30, 1985
Conrad N. Hilton Hotel
Campus of the University of Houston
University Park
Tutorials:
June 24 a.m. Understanding Legal Language
Layman Allen, Jeff Roberts, Peter Linzer
Discussion:
Jon Bing, Donald Berman, Hector Castaneda, Grayfred Gray,
Jay Hook, and Peter Seipel
June 24 p.m. Programming the Law in PROLOG
Marek Sergot, Elizabeth MacRae
Discussion:
Michael Heather, Sidney Lamb, Duncan MacRae, and Charles
Walter
June 25 a.m. Natural Language Processing
George Heidorn, Martin Kay
Discussion:
Jean-Claude Gardin, David Hays, Michael Hoey, Sidney Lamb,
and Peter Reich
June 25 p.m. Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems
L. Thorne McCarty and Donald Waterman
Discussion:
Cary deBessonet, Michael Dyer, Carole Hafner, Michael Heather,
and Michael Lebowitz
Research Presentations: June 26-June 28
Legal Language Processing
Representing Open-Textured Legal Concepts
Cognitive Processes
Non-von Neumann Architectures
Computer-Lawyer Inteface
Workshops: June 28-30
Conference faculty workshop topics will be determined by the
participants. Microcomputuers and micro-PROLOG will be available.
Conference Participants:
Layman Allen (Law, Michigan)
Donald Berman (Law, Northeastern)
Jon Bing (Informatics, U of Oslo)
Hector Castaneda (Philosophy, Indiana)
George Cross (Computer Science, Louisiana State)
Cary deBessonet (Law, Southern U)
Bethany Dumas (Linguistics and Law, Tennessee)
Michael Dyer (Computer Science, UCLA)
Margot Flowers (Computer Science, UCLA)
M. Jean-Claude Gardin (Linguistics, Ecole Pratique de Haut Etudes)
Grayfard Gray (Law, Tennessee)
Carole Hafner (Computer Science, Northeastern)
David Hays (Computational Linguistics, New York)
Michael Heather (Law and Computer Science, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Poly)
George Heidorn (Linguistics and Computer Science, IBM)
Michael Hoey (Linguistics, U of Birmingham, England)
Jay Hook (Law and Psychology, U of Houston)
Martin Kay (Linguistics, Xerox)
Sidney Lamb (Linguistics, Rice)
Michael Lebowitz (Computer Science, Columbia)
Peter Linzer (Law, U of Houston)
Duncan MacRae (Artificial Intelligence, Washington, D.C.)
Elizabeth MacRae (PROLOG and AI, Washington, D.C.)
L. Thorne McCarty (Law and Computer Science, Rutgers)
Jose Carlos Neves (Legal Informatics, U of Minho)
Michael Parks (Information Science, Houston)
Peter Reich (Linguistics and Psychology, Toronto)
Jeff Roberts (Roberts, Markel & Folger, Houston)
Charles Saxon (Computer Science, Easter Michigan U)
Marek Sergot (Law and PROLOG, London)
Peter Seipel (Legal Informatics, Stockholm)
B. Vauquouis (Linguistics, Grenoble)
Charles Walter (Law and Computer Science, Houston)
Donald Waterman (AI and Linguistics, RAND)
Tutorials:
← $250/4 Tutorials (before 6/7/85) (Includes lunch 6/24 & 6/25)
← $75/Tutorial (before 6/7/85)
← $350/4 Tutorials (after 6/7/85)
← $100/Tutorial (after 6/7/85)
Research Presentations:
← $300/five sessions (before 6/7/85) (Includes lunch 6/26 & 6/27)
← $75/session (before 6/7/85)
← $400/five sessions (after 6/7/85)
← $100/session (after 6/7/85)
Mail to:
Charles Walter
Director, Program on Law and Technology
University of Houston Law Center
4800 Calhoun
Houston, Texas 77004
Phone: (Not on network mail)
713-749-4935
713-749-4196
Accommodations:
Call University of Houston Hilton Hotel (713-741-2447) for
reservations. Additional rooms may be available at University Park
Inn, (713-224-5971).
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Jun-85 1751 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #73
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Jun 85 17:51:32 PDT
Date: Tue 4 Jun 1985 15:37-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #73
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 5 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 73
Today's Topics:
Queries - AI and Proctology & Range Data Images for Robotics &
Explorer/Symbolics Compatibility & LISP on SUN Workstations &
Lisp User Survey & AI and the CAIS & Man-Machine Interaction,
Natural Language - McDonnell Douglas Announcement,
Expert Systems - Expert Systems vs "Conventional" Programming,
Conference - IJCAI-85 UCLA Campus Housing Available
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 85 22:34:36 PDT
From: Michael Pazzani <pazzani@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: AI and proctology
I am about to start my Phd research on an expert system for proctology.
I am interested in finding out what others have done in this area.
Also I'd like to have some opinions on the best language for implementing
expert systems: PROLOG EURISKO or OPS5?
Thanks,
Mike Pazzani
------------------------------
Date: Mon 3 Jun 85 17:02:30-MDT
From: Tom Henderson <Henderson@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Range Data Images for Robotics
The IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Robotics has asked me to look
into the creation of a database of range data images. We would like to get an
idea of both the availability of range imagery and the demand for such imagery.
If you have range data images (perhaps with registered intensity images) or you
would like to have access to such images, please answer the following questions
and send to henderson@utah-20.
Name:
Address (Net and US Post):
Range Data Available (give format):
Would like access to range data (give any special requirements):
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 85 13:18:21 edt
From: Mark Weiser <mark@tove>
Subject: Explorer/Symbolics compatibility
We have a Symbolics 3600, and are looking at Explorers from TI now.
What is the software compatibility between these two? Is it the very
same zetalisp, windowing, etc.? Or is the only software similarity
that of ancient common ancestry? Thanks for any help or advice.
-mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 May 85 14:41:20 BST
From: Ewgorc@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: LISP on SUN Workstations
Can anyone gine me information about LISP availability on the SUN
workstation range?
I am interested in what variants are available, COMMON Lisp, Inter Lisp
or whatever.
Comments from actual users on how they have found the implementation would be
very useful.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 85 20:32:36 CDT
From: marick@GSWD-VMS
Subject: Lisp user survey
I'm making a survey of what users need from Lisp systems. If you use Lisp
for work other than developing Lisp itself and you would mail me answers to
the following questions, I'd much appreciate it. I will of course summarize
the results to the net.
1. (I hesitate to start this battle.) What do you consider the most
cost-effective system on which to develop programs? Special-purpose
Lisp machines? General purpose personal workstations with Lisp
(e.g., Suns, Apollos)? Timeshared systems? What about the most
cost-effective system on which to deliver programs?
2. How important is the ability to call functions written in another
language? If it's important, will those functions be specially written
for the application or will they tend to be parts of libraries like
the IMSL math library or a plotting package? If they're specially
written, are they making up for some deficiency in your Lisp (e.g., no
or weak support for handling strings)?
3. Should the editor be a part of the Lisp environment or should it be
separate? What are the important differences between an embedded
Emacs-like editor and an external Emacs-like editor that allows you
to run Lisp in a window?
4. How often could your programs run "standalone", without the support of
the full Lisp environment? Would it be useful to have some way to dump
a set of Lisp functions as an executable file, so that you could, for
example, write a reasonably-sized UNIX filter in Lisp?
5. How important is some sort of object-oriented programming package,
like Flavors or Loops? Do you have any preferences?
6. How important is the speed of your compiled code?
Obviously, everyone wants a Cray on their desk, but how many of your
programs are truly limited by machine speed or compiler quality and
would be significantly more useful if they ran faster? What operations
are most common in your tight inner loops?
7. How adequate is the standard set of debugging tools (trace,
single-stepper, debugger that lets you poke around in the stack)?
8. What other things make a Lisp system better?
If there's a question I haven't asked, please tell me.
Brian Marick
Gould Computer Systems -- Urbana
USENET: ...ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!marick
ARPA: Marick@GSWD-VMS
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 1985 08:10-PDT
From: JWOLFE@USC-ECLB
Subject: AI and the CAIS
[Also forwarded by Larry@JPL-VLSI.]
Dear Colleagues: The Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA) is
investigating the Common APSE Interface Set (CAIS) for Ada
Programming Support Environments (APSE). Although it is a
proposed DoD standard, it is unlike other standards in that it
will evolve as interface needs are identified. My particular
interest is in what needs are generated by the introduction of AI
languages and techniques (e.g. LISP, PROLOG, Knowledge Bases,
Inferencing, etc.) to software engineering environments. This
issue may effect the CAIS at two levels: First, tools may be
written using AI languages and techniques; second, applications
may use AI languages or techniques which may require unique
tools. I am coming to the Ada and AI communities to solicit your
help and advise. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has
experience in:
* Using AI languages and techniques to develop software
tools.
* Developing tools for the life cycle maintenance of
AI software.
* Anyone else who can contribute.
Since the results of this study will influence the evolution
of the CAIS standard, it is important to have the participation
of government, industry, and acedemia. Please note that since
IDA is a FCRC, issues of proprietary information and
non-disclosure CAN be resolved. Your participation is needed and
appreciated.
James Wolfe
Institute for Defense Analysis
1801 N. Beauregard Street
Alexandria, VA 22311
ARPA: JWOLFE@USC-ECLB.ARPA
Voice: (703) 845-2109
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 85 17:31:28 edt
From: Rob Jacob <jacob@nrl-css>
Subject: Query - AI and man-machine interaction
I'm trying to put together an entry on "man-machine interaction" for an
encyclopedia of artificial intelligence. My initial reaction is that the
main areas are natural language, speech, and maybe intelligent CAI-type
dialogues. Another area might be user interface techniques first pioneered
by AI people (as a byproduct of their work), like the Interlisp-D user
interface.
Have I missed your favorite topic? I'd appreciate any comments, pointers,
suggestions, vicious attacks, etc. on this topic. Please reply to me
directly, because I'm often too far behind in reading the lists.
Thanks in advance,
Rob Jacob
ARPA: jacob@nrl-css
UUCP: ...!decvax!nrl-css!jacob
SNAIL: Code 7590, Naval Research Lab, Washington, D.C. 20375
------------------------------
Date: 4-Jun-85 12:26 PDT
From: Kirk Kelley <KIRK.TYM@OFFICE-2>
Subject: McDonnell Douglas announcement
McDonnell Douglas has announced a "breakthough" in Natural Language processing
on the back cover of this week's Business Week. Of course there are no
specific references. Does anyone know what they are talking about or if there
is any substance to the hype:
... practical thinkers at our McDonnell Douglas Computer Systems Company
have created the first computer that accepts you as you are -- human.
They emulated the two halves of the human brain with two-level software:
One level with a dictionary of facts and a second level to interpret them.
The resulting Natural Language processor understands everyday conversational
English. So it knows what you mean, no matter how you express yourself. It
also learns your idiosyncracies, forgives your errors, and tells you how to
find what you're looking for.
Now, virtually anyone who can read and write can use a computer.
...
That is essentially all the "information" given. If you know what this refers
to, or what the nature of the "breakthrough" is please let me know.
-- kirk
------------------------------
Date: Tue 4 Jun 85 13:16:32-PDT
From: Michael Walker <WALKER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: expert systems vs "conventional" programming
Curt,
You sent a message to the ailist some time ago on expert
systems vs. "conventional" programming. I drafted a reply, but have
been slow in sending it to you. Here it is, perhaps better late than never.
There is a great deal of value in asking questions about what
expert systems are good for. It is important for an emerging science
to seek clear statements of its capabilities and boundaries. I think
your observations on the value of ES are accurate. There is a third
advantage which I feel is moderately well substantiated: that
non-programmers can build certain types of programs using an expert
system shell that they could not otherwise build. A specific example
is the Blue-Box pharmacology therapy advisor built by two
non-programmer medical students using Emycin. A reference is:
Benoit Mulsant and David Servan-Schreiber (1984) "Knowledge
Engineering: A Daily Activity on a Hospital Ward" Computers and
Biomedical Research 17, pp 71-91.
I recommended that they use Emycin when they visited during
their medical clercship at Stanford. Neither of them had the knowledge
to build the system in an ordinary programming language, but were
successful in building their advisor in a remarkably short time using
the expert system shell.
Your question addressed the issue of what expert systems were
good for. We should probably also ask what expert systems research, as
opposed to just expert systems, is good for. I think that expert
systems research is valuable, in part, because it is concerned with
seeking ways to represent and use knowledge that cannot currently be
readily represented or used. In this sense, we can view knowledge
representation research as being concerned with developing new data
structures and algorithms, appropriate for representing and
manipulating symbolic information. There are many other arguments that
could be made about the value of expert systems research, but I think
I'll leave that for further discussion.
Cheers,
Mike Walker
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 85 15:39:31 PDT
From: Phyllis O'Neil <oneil@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: IJCAI-85: UCLA campus housing available
Economical UCLA dormitory rooms and suites are still available for
IJCAI-85 this August. You can stay in dorm rooms for the 6-night
period beginning Saturday, August 17, or for the 4-night period
beginning Monday, August 19. Dorm rooms sleep one or two people.
Residential suites are available starting Monday, August 19. Suites
sleep two to four people; each suite has two bedrooms, bath, and living
room.
Breakfast and dinner are included when you stay in the dorms or suites.
Additionally, you can use UCLA's swimming pools, raquetball courts, and
other atheletic facilities.
Campus housing forms are on pages 27 and 29 of the IJCAI-85 conference
brochure. For copies of the brochure, contact:
AAAI
445 Burgess Dr.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
(213) 328-3123
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Jun-85 1216 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #74
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jun 85 12:15:50 PDT
Date: Thu 6 Jun 1985 09:53-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #74
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 6 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
Games - Scrabble References,
Terminology - MMI/HMI,
Automata - Size of Self-Reproducing Systems,
Report - Computational Natural Language,
Bibliography - Recent Literature
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 85 09:31:54 edt
From: "William J. Rapaport" <rapaport%buffalo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: scrabble reference
What is the state of the art in computer Scrabble?
What work has been done? References? Software? Anecdotal remarks?
Here's one reference that I know about:
Shapiro, Stuart C., "A Scrabble Crossword Game Playing Program,"
IJCAI-79, Vol. Two, pp. 797-99.
William J. Rapaport
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Computer Science, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260
(716) 636-3193
uucp: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!rapaport
csnet/arpanet: rapaport%buffalo@csnet-relay
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 85 09:55:47 edt
From: "Stuart C. Shapiro" <shapiro%buffalo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: scrabble reference
There are two papers on SCRABBLE in the book, Computer Game-Playing:
Theory and Practice, edited by M.A. Bramer, Ellis Horwood Ltd (distributed
in the U.S. by Halsted Press, a division of John Wiley & Sons), 1983:
A competitive Scrabble program, by P.J. Turcan, pp. 209-220
Scrabble crossword game-playing programs, by S.C. Shapiro, pp. 221-228
------------------------------
Date: 6 June 1985 0912-PDT (Thursday)
From: gross@nprdc (Michelle Gross)
Subject: MMI/HMI
Ron Jacob--
List "man-machine interaction" as "human-machine interaction,"
or HMI. This is how the field is referred to by people at the
university that I attend. Some link should be made between
the two names.
--Michelle Gross
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 85 07:39:55 EDT
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: size of self-reproducing system; intelligence?
> Q: What's the minimum "size" for a self-reproducing thing?
> For an "intelligent" thing??
> A measure of "size" probably needs to include the complexity of the
> environment ... for instance, a virus takes advantage of a highly-ordered
> set of cell mechanisms and can reproduce with only a few thousand (or so?)
> bits of information ... its "size" measure should be bigger than the amount
> of DNA in it might seem to imply. All living creatures make use of some
> of the physical laws of the universe (mostly chemistry), and should be
> charged some for that in "size" measure ...
> Self-reproducing cellular automata that I've heard of seem to
> generally require billions and billions of cells or so (as in
> Conway's LIFE); they live in a very simple universe, where there is almost
> no information stored in their environment. On the other hand, most of
> the self-reproducing automata I've seen are quite huge and inefficient,
> because they're structured to be comprehensible to people....
I recently ran across a new book, "The Recursive Universe" by
William Poundstone that covers a lot of these issues. It's
written in a somewhat gee-whiz style, but there's a lot of
good information, especially for Life aficianados. Anyway,
according to the book:
Von Neumann could have allowed a distinct cellular state for every
possible component of a machine. The fewer the states, the simpler
the physics, however. After some juggling, he settled on a cellular
array with 29 different states for its cells...The [next]
state of a cell...depends only on its state and the states of
its...neighbors....
What Von Neumann did is this: he proved that there are starting
patterns that can reproduce themselves...Von Neumann's pattern,
or machine reproduced in a very powerful way. It contained a
complete description of its own organization. It used that
information to build a new copy of itself. Von Neumann's
machine reproduction was more akin to the reproduction of living
organisms than to the growth of crystals, for instance. Von
Neumann's suspicion that a self-reproducing machine would have to
be complicated was right. Even in his simplified checkerboard
universe, a self-reproducing pattern required about 200,000 squares.
> Are the questions of self-reproduction and intelligence related? I'm
> thinking vaguely about notions of Godel's theorem, complexity of human
> brains, self-reference, etc.
>
> This might have interesting implications as to how hard it will be to make
> AI systems with human-like consciousness ... how many logic elements or gates
> will be required, how many gigaflops (or gigalips) are needed to think at a
> human pace, etc....
> -zim@mitre
My feeling is that many people are too ready to assume self-reference=
intelligence=consciousness, eg Hofstadter's "Godel, Escher, Bach" and/or
"The Mind's I". Von Neumann's machine seems self-referential enough,
but not too bright, and hardly conscious. I assume that dogs, cats,
birds, lizards...?? are conscious (feel pain, have visual experience,..)
but some of them aren't too bright either. I say this knowing that
they perform complex tasks such as nest-building, but I don't believe
that such performance is prima facie evidence for intelligence,
in that intelligence should include some notion of a *general* ability to
deal with abstract problem representation (calculators can do
trig functions, but they're not intelligent).
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 4 Jun 1985 10:16:06-PDT
From: billmers%rayna.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Meyer Billmers)
Subject: Re: size of self-reproducing system; intelligence?
> Q: What's the minimum "size" for a self-reproducing thing? For an
>"intelligent" thing??
...
>the self-reproducing automata I've seen are quite huge and inefficient,
>because they're structured to be comprehensible to people....
I'm not sure I agree. For straightforward replication, it has been shown
(Fredkin, Winograd, and others) to be easy. For example, in a 2-D cellular
automaton, if the states are 0 and 1 and if the result state is computed by
taking the sum of the neighbors modulo 2, then any initial configuration
will replicate forever.
It could be argued that this doesn't count as "self-reproducing"
because there is no agent which "intentionally" reproduces itself (whatever
that means). But Banks (MIT MAC TR-81, Jan. 1971) showed that a 4 state, 5
neighbor 2-D cellular automaton could be constructed which was
a) a universal computer, e.g. given the correct encoding of a function,
could compute any function, and b) a universal constructor, e.g. could
"build" another configuration in the space which would then be capable of
computing any function. a) and b) taken together imply a self-reproducing
automaton which certainly displays some degree of intentionality.
And it doesn't seem to require even millions of cells; indeed, Banks
outlines its construction as an appendix of about 10 pages (although he
doesn't actually display the entire beast).
Hope that helps.
-Meyer
------------------------------
Date: Wed 5 Jun 85 16:59:26-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report on Natural Language
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Report No. CSLI-85-24, ``Computationally Relevant Properties of
Natural Languages and Their Grammar'' by Gerald Gazdar and Geoffrey K.
Pullum, has just been published. This report may be obtained by
writing to David Brown, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or
Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jun 1985 16:12-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: New Bibliography Format
I am using a new format in handling submissions of material.
This format is the BIB citation format. BIB comes in the BSD UNIX 4.2
release. This is similar to the refer available with UNIX in general.
The only major difference is the allowance of a definition file which
I use for things like many articles from the same conference.
That is I can define a string like BOOK11 for a specific conference
in a definition file and then type BOOK11 for each paper in the
conference for the information about editor, conference title, etc.
Those users who use refer can insert the definitions in manually with
a text editor.
Definitions:
D BOOK11 First Conference of Robotics Europe--Robot Technology
and Applications\
%C Brussels, Belgium\
%D June 27-28 1984\
%E K. Rathmill\
%E P. Mac Conaill\
%E S. O'Leary\
%E J. Browne
bib citations:
%T Early Users Give Thumbs Up to TI's Expert System Tool
%D April 15
%P 13
%J ComputerWorld
%A P. Macconaill
%T Esprit and Robotics Europe
%J BOOK11
%P 1
%A H. J. Warnecke
%A G. Schiele
%T Performance Characteristics and Performance Testing of Industrial
Robots - State of the Art
%J BOOK11
%P 5
%A M. Priel
%A B. Schatz
%T Project for Development of a Photogrammetric Method for the Evaluation
of the Dynamic Performance of Industrial Robots
%J BOOK11
%P 18
%A J. H. Gilby
%A R. Mayer
%A G. A. Parker
%T Dynamic Performance Measurement of Robot Arms
%J BOOK11
%A 31
%A H. J. Warnecke
%A R. D. Schraft
%A M. C. Wanner
%T Application of the Experimental Modal-Analysis in the Performance Testing
Procedure of Industrial Robots
%J BOOK11
%P 45
%A N. Percival
%T A review of Safety Standards
%J BOOK11
%P 55
%A J. P. Vautrin
%T Safety of Robot Installations in France
%J BOOK11
%P 61
%A R. Bell
%T Assessment of Programmable Electronic Systems with Particular Reference
to Robotics
%J BOOK11
%P 68
%A P. Nicolaisen
%T Occupational Safety and Industrial Robots - Present State of Discussions
Within the Tripartite Group on Robotic Safety
%J BOOK11
%P 74
%A F. Duggan
%A R. H. Jones
%A K. Khodabandehfoo
%T Towards Developing Reliability and Safety Related Standards
Using Systematic Methodologies
%J BOOK11
%P 90
%A J. J. Hunter
%T International Standards Activities in the Field of Industrial Robots
%J BOOK11
%P 108
%A B. Knoerr
%T Standardization in the Industrial Robot Field
%J BOOK11
%P 116
%A H. Tipton
%T International Standardization Related to Industrial Robots
%J BOOK11
%P 122
%A G. Gini
%A M. Gini
%T Robot Languages in the Eighties
%J BOOK11
%P 126
%A C. Launer
%T Robot Programming Using a High-Level Language and CAD Facilities
%J BOOK11
%P 139
%A C. Blume
%T Implicit Robot Programming Based on a High-Level Explicit System and
Using the Robot Data Base RODABAS
%J BOOK11
%P 156
%A R. Dillman
%T Robot Architecture for the Integraiton of Robots into Manufacturing Cells
%J BOOK11
%P 172
%A K. Collins
%A A. J. Palmer
%A K. Rathmill
%T The Development of a European Benchmark for the Comparison of
Assembly Robot Programming Systems
%J BOOK11
%P 187
%A H. Ford
%A L. R. Hunt
%A Renjeng Su
%T A simple algorithm for computing canonical form
%J Computers and Math
%V 10
%N 4-5
%D 1984
%P 315
%A C. V. Negoita
%T Fuzzy Systems in Knowledge Engineering
%J Kuberneles
%V 14
%N 1
%D 1985
%A Michael Strizenec
%T Cognitive Psychology and AI
%P 3
%J Kybernetika
%V 21
%N 1
%D 1985
%A K. B. Zun
%A V. V. Malyshev
%T Generalized Minimax Approach to Solving Optimization Problems with
Chance Constraints
%J Engineering Cybernetics
%V 22
%N 1
%P 105
%A L. A. Sholomov
%T On Representation of a Binary Relation by a Collection of Criteria
%J Engineering Cybernetics
%V 22
%N 1
%P 93
%A Michael Georgeoff
%T Transformations and Reduction Strategies for Typed Lambda Expressions
%J ACM TOPLAS
%V 6
%N 4
%D OCT 1984
%P 603
%A P. H. Winston
%T The AI Business - A Perspective
%J Manufacturing Engineering
%V 94
%N 3
%D MAR 85
%P 75
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Jun-85 1211 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #75
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jun 85 12:09:41 PDT
Date: Fri 7 Jun 1985 09:06-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #75
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 7 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 75
Today's Topics:
Conferences - Probability in AI Workshop &
5th Int. Workshop on Expert Systems and Applications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 6 Jun 85 23:22:51-PDT
From: CHEESEMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Probability in AI Workshop
Information on the Workshop on:
Probability and Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence
Sponsored by: AAAI and RCA
University of California, Los Angeles, August 14-16, 1985
Registration Fee: Early (before July 10) $25
Late $30
The registration fee includes admission to all presentations,
discussions, patio lunches as well as the published proceedings.
Registration and refund requests will not be accepted after 5th. of
August. Registrations will be accepted on-site.
Accomodations: Single Residence Hall Room 4 nights $160
Single room accomodations have been reserved through the UCLA
conference services in university dormitories. Rates are based on a
four day period starting the evening of Tuesday August 13th. and
ending Sat. morning Aug. 17th. Check in is after 3:00p.m., check out
by 12:00 noon. Breakfast and dinner are included starting with dinner
on Tue. and ending with breakfast on Sat. 17th. Residence hall rooms
are provided with linens and towels. Shared bathroom facilities are
provided. The entire room payment for the four nights period must be
enclosed with your reservation (unless you are making your own
accomodation arrangements).
Parking: Parking permit $15
Note:
-No registration or refund after Aug. 5th.
-There are a limited number of rooms--please make your reservations
early.
-Return registration and accomodation forms to the arrangements
chairman.
Arrangements Chair: General Chair: Program Chair:
Rob. Suritis Peter Cheeseman John Lemmer
Par Technology Corp. NASA/Ames Research RCA Advanced Tech.
220 Seneca Turnpike Center, Mail Stop 244-7 Labs., Route 38,
New hartford, NY 13413 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Moorestown,
(315)738-0600 x233 (415)694-6526 NJ 08057
(609)866-6650
Registration Information should include:
Name, address, ARPA address (if any), phone number, parking permit
required ($15), date and time of arrival and whether you will be
attending IJCAI.
Checks payable to AI Workshop at UCLA, and the registration
information (and checks) should be sent to Rob. Suritis, PAR
Technology Corp., 220 Seneca Turnpike, New Hartford, NY 13413. The
workshop will occur in Sproul Hall, UCLA.
Proposed Agenda
---------------
Tue. Aug. 13th.
3:00 Registration and check-in, front desk, Sproul Hall
Wed. Aug 14th.
8:30 Session 1: Foundations of Probability Theory
10:00 Break (20 min)
10:20 Session 1 (cont.)
12:00 Patio Lunch
1:00 Session 2: Comparison of Different Uncertainty Formalisms
3:00 Break
3:30 Session 2 (cont.)
5:00 Break for day
Thurs Aug. 15th.
8:30 Session 3: Induction of Models Under Uncertainty
10:00 Break
10:20 Session 4: Combining Uncertain Information and
Model Update from Data
12:00 Patio Barbecue
1:00 Session 5: Alternative Uncertainty Formalisms
3:00 Break
3:30 Session 6: Subjective Probability and Uncertainty
5:00 Break for day
Fri. Aug. 16th.
8:30 Session 7: Applications of Probability theory
10:00 Break
10:20 Session 8: Decision Making Under Uncertainty
12:00 End of Workshop
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jun 1985 22:07-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference - 5th Int. Workshop on Expert Systems and Applications
Fifth International Workshop
Expert Systems & Their Applications
Conference & Exhibition
Palais des Papes - Avignon, France May 13 1985
Session 1: Parallelism & Real Time
Parallelism in production systems: The sources and the expected speedup
A. Gupta CMU
The PICON expert system for process control
G. C. Knickerbocker, R. L. Moore, L. B. Hawkinson and M. E. Levin
LISP Machine Inc.
Session 2A Theoretical Issues
Automatic theorem proof & expert systems
Y. Kodratoff and J. G. Ganascia Universite Paris-Sud (Orsay, France)
Session 2B Case Studies I
Distributed intelligence in alternative analysis for computer systems
selection and configuration
F. T. Zeviar Boeing Computer Services
Session 3A Environments 1
The role of the knowledge engineer in instantiating the MP
parameterizable inference engine
C. Roche CRIl (Puteaux, France)
Efficient expert system development through domain-specific tools
J. A. Alexander Tektronix
EX-TRAN 7 a different approach for an expert system generator
T. Hassan M. A. Razzak and D. Michie
Intelligent Terminals Ltd (Glasgow UK) R. Pettipher -ITT (Harlow UK)
Session 3B Medicine
A diabetes expert system using videotex technology
J. C. Buisson, H. Farreny and H. Prade-Enseeiht & Universite Paul
Sabatier (Toulouse, France)
Spatial knowledge represenation in diagnostic expert systems
Z. Xiang S. N. Srihari SUNY at Buffalo
GROK - a natural language front end for medical expert systems
K. K. Obermeier Battelle (Columbus, OHIO)
Session 4A Theoretical Issues II
Control in inference engines
M. O. Cordier ECRC (Munich, FRG), M. C. Rousset Universite Paris-Sud
Session 4B Case STudies II
A knowledge based expert system used to prevent the disclosure of
sensitive information at the US Environmental Protection Agency
J. L. Feinstein - Booz, Allen & Hamilton (Bathesda, Maryland)
Session 5 Expert systems and data bases
Expert database systems: evolutionary and revolutionary approaches
L. Kerschberg University of South Carolina
Session 6A Knowledge Representation and Management I
Knowledge representation and intentional logic
F. Lepage Universite du Quebec
KAUS - a tool for model building and evaluation
H. Yamauchi and S. OHsuga University of Tokyo
Prolog and Objects
P. Albert - BULL (Louveciennes, France)
LKJ-ex: an expert system for modifying a knowledge base
P. Mazas Renault (Rueill-Malmaison, France)
Session 6B Chemistry
Learning spectrum-structure relations for automatic interpretation of
carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance spectra
S. Belaid - CISI (Paris, France)
The DARC-EPIOS system - Structural elucidation by carbon-13 nuclear
magnetic resonance
M. Carabedian, I. Dagaine, and J. E. Dubois ITODYS (Paris, France)
EXSYLA - an expert system for interpeting laser spectrometry data
M. Lamboulle (Universite de Metz, France) JH. P. Haton (Universite de
Nancy, France) J. F. Muller (Universite de Metz, France)
Feasibility study concerning the use of expert systems for the
development of formulas in pharmaceutical analysis
D. L. Massart, M. R. detaevernier, Y. Michotte, L. Buydens, M. P.
Derde, M. Desmet, L. Kaufman, G. Musch, J. Smeyers-Verbeke, A.
Thielemans and L. Dryon Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium)
Session 6C Technical Diagnosis
Naive causal reasoning for diagnosis
W. Van de Velde - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (belgium)
Rule categories and their use in technical diagnosis
J. C. Emond Philips (Brussels, Belgium)
A general model to troubleshooting and its applications to computer
support
A. Farley Hewlett-Packard (Palo Alto, CA)
A diagnosis expert system
M. Marrakchi, B. Houriez, F. Grzesiak and D. willaeys Universite de
Valenciennes (France)
Session 7 ONboard expert systems
Military applications of expert systems
J. F. Gilmore Georgia Tech Research Institute (Atlanta, Georgia)
Session 8A Environments II
The architecture of an expert system environment
M. T. Harandi University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaigne)
Babylon-kernel system of an integrated environment for expert system
development & Operation
F. Di Primio and G. Brewka - GMD (Sankt Augustin, FRG)
Reasoning explication in expert systems
B. Safar Universite Paris-Sud (Orsay, France)
Session 8B Pattern Recognition & Signal Processing
A design expert for digital signal processing
I. Hartimo, O. Hyvarinen, K. Kronlog, O. Simula and J. Skytta Helsinki
University of Technology (Finland)
Expert graph prediction system
J. P. Tsai Y. C. Chen, R. Krelling and W. Kabat Northwestern University
(Evanston, Illinois)
An expert system for pattern recognition
A. Giordana, G. Ippolito and L. Saitta Universita di Torino (Italy)
Session 8C Applied Linguistics
NLI-ESD: An expert antural language interface to a statistical data bank
P. Bucci G. Lella and S. Pavan SARIN SpA (Pomezia, Italy)
An expert system for educational diagnosis based on default logic
M. Jones and D. Poole University of Waterloo
The twelve chairs and onamaturge - The representation of synonyms nad
of related terms in the frames of an expert system for word coinage
E. Nissan Ben gurion University of the Neguev (Beer Sheva, Israel)
Session 9A Computer Engineering
The Analyst - A workstation for analysis and design
M. Stepehns and k. Whitehead - SDL (Camberley, Surrey, UK)
An expert system for computer room facility layout
T. Watanabe, Y. Nagai, C. Yasunobu, Y. IIzuka, K. Sasaki, and T.
Yamanaka Hitachi (Kawasaki and Tokyo, Japan)
Session 9B Law & Management
Law-Expert Systems and decison aids
J. Gros and C. Bernad - IRETJ (Montpellier, France)
SESP - an expert system for personnel seleciton
X. Debanne - Data Base Informatica (Pomezia, Italy)
Session 9C Computer-Aided Manufacturing
SOJA - an expert system for daily workshop planning
B. Sauve and C. Lepape - CGE (Marcoussis, France)
Knowledge organisation in an expert system for spot-welding robot
configuraiton
R. Rehmnert and K. Sandahl - Linkoping University (Sweden) O. Granstedt
- ASEA Robotics (Vasteras, Sweden)
Session 10A Knowledge Acquisition
KADS - structured knowledge acquisition for expert systems
J. A. Breuker and B. Wielinga - University of Amsterdam
Generating expert knowledge using data analysis techniques
V. Rialle - Faculte de Medecine de Grenoble (France)
Session 10B finance & Fiscality
FINEX - an expert support system for financial analysis
L. Kerschberg and J. Dickinson - University of South Carolina
The development of an expert tax system
A. E. Roycroft - ICL (Manchester, UK) and P. Loucopoulos - UMSIT
(Manchester UK)
Session 10C Architecture
Considerations concerning expert systems in the architectural design
process
K. H. Oey Technische Hogeschool Delft (Netherlands)
ACE - an aid for architectural design
F. Iselin, J. Menu and L. de Trentinian - EPFL (Lausanne, Switzerland)
Session 11A Knowledge Represenation and Management II
Control knowledge in expert systems - relaxing restrictive assumptions
S. Fickas and D. Novick University of Oregon (Eugene, Oregon)
Conflict detection in knowledge bases
E. Pipard - Universite Paris-Sud (Orsay, France)
Session 11B - Agriculture and Botany
Counsellor - an agricultural advisory system combining expert system
and videotex technology
N. J. Jones and D. T. Crates -ICI (Franham, Surrey, UK)
An expert system for determining the families of the Swiss flora
J. M. Mascherpa - Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques (Chabesy,
Switzerland) C. Pellegrine Universite d CGeneve
Sesison 11C - CADD
Infering geometric description of objects from their functional
specifications
F. Ingrand - IMAG LIFIA (Grenoble, France)
A domain-independent knowledge engineering architecture for CAD
M. Barbuceanu - Central Institute for Management and Informatics
(Bucarest, Rumania)
Sesison 12A Environments III
BOUM - an instantiation of the (PS) sup 2 concept
J. M. PUGIN BULL (Louveciennes, France)
MI 3: A set of tools for knowledge representaitons & processing. Its
descriptiona nd use
P. Tallibert - ESD (saint-Cloud France)
Session 12 B Earth Sciences
MEPRA- A feasibility study for an avalance prediction expert system
J. M. Lefevre and T. Granier - IMAG LIFIA (Grenoble, France)
Structure and function of the SIES system
G. Jiwen, Y. Yuchuan and H. Jun - Jilin University (PRC) Z. Guosen and
C. Qianyuan China National Oil and Gas (PRC)
Session 12C engineering software
An expert system aiding developers of engineering software packages
C. Saurel - CERT (Toulouse, France)
Symatrau - an expert system for 3D finite element modelling
P. Trau - Enset (Cachan, France)
Session 13A inexact reasoning
Programming in fuzzy logic for expert systems design
I. P. Orci - Stockholm University and KTH (Stockholm, Sweden)
A hybrid-uncertainty theory
E. M. Oblow - Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA)
The LEZARD sytem: an experiment in inexact reasoning in medical
applications
O. Gascuel, J. charlet, S. genetet and B. Mari INSERM (Paris, France)
Session 13B Speech Recognition
SYSTEXP - an expert system for acousticophonetic speech decoding
N. Carbonell, D. Fohr and J. P. Haton- CRIN (NANCY, France)
An expert system for identifying analytically words in continuous speech
H. Meloni - Faculte des Sciences (Avignon, France) J. Gispert and J.
Guizol - GIA (Marseilles, France)
An expert system for speech recognition by signal segmentation
S. Minault, M. Invernizzi and B. Dupeyrat CEA (Saclay, France)
Session 13C electronics CAD
Knowledge based selection and coordination of existing algorithms
V. Jonckers - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium)
KnowPLACE - Knowledgebased placement of PCBS
Hyung-Sik Park and W. C. Kabat Northwestern University
PECOS - an expert hardware synthesis system
C. R. Green US Army Research Office (Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, USA) and S. G. Shiva Unviersity of Alabama (Huntsville,
Alabama, USA)
Session 14 - Artificial intelligence or intelligent artificats
The polarisation approach to intelligent artificats - a
hyper-hemispherical model
S. Kableshkov - Burroughs Machines Ltd (Glasgow, UK)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Jun-85 0112 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #76
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jun 85 01:12:35 PDT
Date: Fri 7 Jun 1985 21:50-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #76
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 8 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 76
Today's Topics:
Queries - Expert System-Based Databases &
Military and Financial Expert Systems & Technophobia,
AI Tools - Lisp on the Sun,
Humor - Capitalization,
New Journal - Applied Artificial Intelligence,
Obituary - King-sun Fu,
Philosophy - Self-Reproduction and Consciousness
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 85 16:44 EDT
From: susan watkins <chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Subject: expert system based database
I'm interested in finding out whether database systems using expert
system technology (or other AI techniques) have been developed.
Is it, for example, fruitful to think about the difference between an
expert-system-database and a conventional database with an `intelligent'
user-interface front end (presumably holding the `reasoning' part of the
knowledge that are domain specific to the application) ?
[The 1st Int. Conf. on Expert Database Systems will be held in
Charleston, April 1-4, 1986. See AIList vol. 3, no. 57, for an
announcement and list of the program committee. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 7 Jun 1985 20:56-EDT
From: RSHU@BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Military and Financial Expert Systems
I noticed that the Intl. Workshops on Expert Systems and Applications will
include two areas which I am interested in. The first is J.F. Gilmore's talk
on military applications of expert systems. The second is Kershberg &
Dickinson's talk on an expert support system for financial analysis.
I would appreciate the following:
1) Pointers to the above mentioned researchers. Net addresses are preferred
physical mail would also be appreciated.
2) Pointers to anyone else working in either of these two fields.
I am currently working on a support system for tank platoon tactics. Our work
centers around reasoning with a terrain database to make conclusions about
visibility and trafficability. This project is not classified so I'll gladly
provide more information if anyone is interested.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 7 Jun 85 17:20:23-PDT
From: MARCEL@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Love-Hate Computers
At present, computer science and especially artificial intelligence work is
very highly regarded by those outside the field. When people find out what
my trade is I can sometimes watch the points go up on their prestige score-
board. On the other hand there is something about computers and AI that can
arouse strong instinctive fears. For the most part it's a matter of speculation
what those fears are. Few people know the field well enough to judge it
accurately, and those who do know the field (and its resemblance to alchemy) no
longer fear it. That, and the fact that the articulated reason for fear is
unlikely to be the actual reason, makes it largely a matter of guesswork as
to what the problem is. Let me propose a few possibilities:
- AI threatens to make machines autonomous
- it's humiliating that mere machines can be smarter than us
- AI hopes to make machines capable of improving their own techniques,
thus automating the invasion of technique over spontaneity, and
multiplying Future Shock
- people don't know how to use computers, so feel intimidated
- people worry about being controlled by/dependent on machines
- we have to redefine what it is that makes us humane -- some kinds
of intelligence will become unimportant, and people are just
emotional machines -- so we lose some aspect of "what's special
about me"
- we may be machines ourselves, devoid of free will/responsibility
- machines will take over our jobs
I'd like to know of:
- other causes of technophobia
- references to literature analyzing technology (I know about Asimov,
Weizenbaum, Dreyfus, Dennett, Turkle, Ellul, Toffler, Wiener, Huxley
and the like)
Please send replies directly to me:
Marcel@SRI-AI.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 7-Jun-85 10:08:49-PDT
From: mhb@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
Subject: Lisp on the Sun
Regarding query concerning Lisp on Sun, I am familiar with the
following three versions.
(1) Franz Lisp as part of the Berkeley Distribution Tape
(2) Franz Lisp sold by "Franz, Inc." in Berkeley
This has some Common Lisp features added to it.
Vendor: (415) 540-1224
(3) Common Lisp, currently under development by "Lucid" in Palo Alto
Phone: (415) 424-8855
Mike Bender
Ford Aerospace
------------------------------
Date: Fri 7 Jun 85 09:30:24-CDT
From: David Throop <LRC.Throop@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Capitalization: Various Entities
Class Capitalization Pronoun Capitalization
=============================================================================
Inanimate Object Normally lowercase Normally lowercase
(bugs, desks, toaster) (it, them)
People First letter Normally lowercase
(Tom, Dick, Harry) uppercase (him, her, they)
Dieties First letter Always uppercase
(Christ, Krishna, Athena) uppercase (He, Him, Her)
Expert Systems All letters (Answer uncertain,
(EMYCIN, ISIS, SOLOMON) uppercase ask One)
=============================================================================
[Aside from the humor in this progression, there seem to be at least
the following factors at work: 1) FORTRAN, COBOL, and other relics
of the golden age of punched cards; 2) copyright/trademark conventions;
3) acronym syntax; and 4) the right of a developer to name a system
whatever he wants. I have been told by an editor that any nonacronym
of more than five letters (4? 6?) should have only a single capital,
e.g., Prospector, but I think that rule 4 should take precedence.
Personally, I like all caps (except for AIList). -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 85 14:42:48 edt
From: rada@nlm-mcs (Roy Rada CSB)
Subject: New Journal - Applied Artificial Intelligence
Perhaps you too have recognized the same need that we, a
group of American and European AI researchers and practi-
cioners have felt regarding the absence of a journal devoted
to practical information such as
- applications of AI, e.g. use of expert systems, natural
language systems, speech, vision, and robotics, for
solving tasks in industry, management, administration,
and education,
- evaluations of existing AI systems and tools, espe-
cially comparative studies,
- user experience,
- theoretical research with relevance to potential appli-
cations,
- economic, social, and cultural impacts of AI.
An established publisher has joined our forces, and we are
now happy to announce:
AAI Applied Artificial Intelligence,
an International Journal.
The first issue of AAI will appear in January, 1986.
If you are interested in
- being informed about the subscription prices, which are
drastically reduced for members of AAAI, ACM, IEEE, and
of member organisations of ECCAI and IFSR,
- submitting a paper and want the Information for Authors
(accepted papers will be published rapidly--at least
now!),
please contact
Hemisphere Publishing Corporation
79 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016.
June 7, 1985
------------------------------
Date: Fri 7 Jun 85 09:43:18-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Obituary - King-sun Fu, 1930-1985
[Reprinted from IEEE Computer, June 1985.]
King-sun Fu, Goss Distinguished Professor of Engineering and Professor
of Electrical Engineerinr at Purdue University died April 29 in
Washington, DC.
Fu was born October 2, 1930, in Nanking, China. He earned a BS degree
in electrical engineering in 1953 from National Taiwan University, an
MA in science in 1955 from the University of Toronto, and a PhD degree
in 1959 from the University of Illinois.
Fu was a member of the National Academy of Engineering, a member of
Academia Sinica, and a Guggenheim Fellow. He was the first president of
the International Association for Pattern Recognition. He received the
IEEE Award of Service in 1971, ASEE Senior Research Award in 1981,
IEEE Educational Medal in 1982, and AFIPS Harry Goode Memorial Award in
1982. He authored four widely adopted textbooks and edited more than
15 books, was author or coauthor of over 100 journal papers and over
200 conference papers. He also produced over 60 doctoral students.
He was a distinguished member and dedicated officer of the IEEE Computer
Society. He was elected a fellow of the IEEE in 1971 for his contributions
to the field of pattern recognition and leadership in engineering
education. He was the first editor-in-chief of the IEEE Transactions
on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence and served as vice president
for publications for the Computer Society in 1982-83. He received several
awards from the Computer Society, including the Outstanding Paper Award
in 1973, Honor Roll in 1973, Certificate of Appreciation in 1977 and 1979,
and Special Award in 1982.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 85 11:51:44 edt
From: FRAWLEY <20568%udel-cc-vax1.delaware@UDEL-LOUIE.ARPA>
Subject: Self-Reproduction and Consciousness
I'd like to make a few comments on the discussion about self-reproduction
and consciousness/intelligence.
As several people have pointed out (and I agree), size does not
ensure self-reproduction. This, of course, depends on what is meant
by "self-reproduction," but, Fodor's arguments against paramecia not
having mental representations notwithstanding, it looks as if
there is some evolutionatry continuity in consciousness: see
Griffin's book, The Question of Animal Awareness. Thus, size is not
the issue. After all, computers are very large, but they have
no consciousness and, in my opinion, no intelligence (this of course
is just Dreyfus' and Searle's arguments).
I think this discussion would profit if "self-reproduction" were
defined. Cugini is correct, I'd say, in pointing out that self-
reference does not equal intelligence or consciousness (i.e., the
Hofstadter argument pushed to the extreme). I think that we ought
to consider self-reference as "self-communication" or "symbolic
self-interaction." See Dennett's great book, Elbow Room. A computer
has self-reference, but no self-communication: A computer can "say"
"I'm a computer" (self-reference), but that "utterance" doesn't
mean anything to the machine (no self-communication); again, this
is just Searle's argument put in terms of Dennett. "Self-communication"
is important because it changes our ideas about other human
cognitive processes and the whole size/self-reference problem.
Memory is not a data-structure, but a way that a human communicates
with himself/herself through time (Michael Cole's argument). That's
why it doesn't matter how large the memory is: if memory
is not a self-communication method, the organism will never
be conscious. In any case, Dennett's book is excellent on this
problem, as is Searle's Minds, Brains and Science. Some of these
issues are addressed directly in the journal Human Development,
though that journal may be a little too social-psychological for
the hardcore AI community.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Jun-85 1738 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #77
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jun 85 17:37:50 PDT
Date: Sat 8 Jun 1985 09:05-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #77
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 8 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 77
Today's Topics:
Conference - 8th European Cybernetics and Systems Research,
Bibliography - Recent Technical Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 85 14:58:27 edt
From: rada@nlm-mcs (Roy Rada CSB)
Subject: Conference - 8th European Cybernetics and Systems Research
ANNOUNCING
Eighth European Meeting
on Cybernetics and Systems Research
April 1-4, 1986
at the University of Vienna
Contact:
Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies
A-1010 Wien 1, Schottengasse 3, Austria (Europe)
We draw your attention to symposium E
"Cybernetics in Biology and Medicine"
which is being chaired by:
Gerold Porenta
Department of Medical Cybernetics and AI
University of Vienna
Freyung 6/2, A 1010 Vienna, Austria
June 7, 1985
------------------------------
Date: 4 Jun 1985 23:59-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: recent technical reports
%A Bipin Indurkhya
%T A Computational Theory of Metaphor Comprehension and Analogical Reasoning
%R BUCS Tech Report #85-001
%I Boston University
%D February 1985
%A Michael Siegel
%A Edward Sciore
%T Automatic Constraint Generation for Semantic Query Optimization
%I Boston University
%D April 1985
%R BUCS #85--006
%A Bruce Abramson
%A Mordechai Young
%T Construction through Decomposition: A Linear Time Algorithm for the
N-Queens Problem
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-129-84
%A Rodney Farrow
%T Covers of Attribute Grammars and Sub-Protocol Attribute Evaluators
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-71-83
%A Rodney Farrow
%T Experience with a Production Compiler Automatically Generated from
an Attribute Grammar
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-102-84
%A Hussein A. H. Ibrahim
%T Image Understanding Algorithms on Fine-Grained Tree-Structured SIMD Machines
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-139-84
%A Toru Ishida
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Simultaneous Firing of Production Rules on Tree Structured Machines
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-109-84
%A John R. Kender
%T Environmental Relations in Image Understanding: The Force of Gravity
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-47-83
%A John R. Kender
%T Surface Constraints From Linear Extents
%I Columbia Universtiy
%R CUCS-49-83
%A Richard E. Korf
%T An Analysis of Abstraction in Problem Solving
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-108-84
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T "Abstract" Understanding: The Relation Between Language and Memory
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-12-81
%O describes system to "remember" patent abstracts
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Memory Based Parsing
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-13-81
%O describes system to "read" news stories
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Representing Complex Events Simply
%R CUCS-14-81
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Implementing Descriptions Using Non-Von Neumann Parallelism
%R CUCS-52-83
%I Columbia University
%O describes implementing memory search on Columbia's Non-Von computer
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Classifying Numeric Information for Generalization
%R CUCS-53-83
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Researcher: An Overview
%R CUCS-54-83
%I Columbia University
%O describes system read natural text and create an intelligent information
system
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Creating a Story Telling Universe
%R CUCS-55-83
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Putting Pieces Together: Understanding Patent Abstracts
%R CUCS-98-84
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Creating Characters in a Story-Telling Universe
%R CUCS-99-84
%I Columbia University
%A Micheal Lebowitz
%T Ill-Formed Text and Conceptual Processing
%R CUCS-101-84
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowtiz
%T Interest and Predictability: Deciding What to Learn, When to Learn
%R CUCS-110-84
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Concept Learning in a Rich Input Domain: Generalization-Based Memory
%R CUCS-111-84
%I Columbia University
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Using Memory in Text Understanding
%R CUCS-121-84
%I Columbia University
%A Andy Lowry
%A Stephen Taylor
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T LPS Algorithms: A Detailed Examination
%R CUCS-112-84
%I Columbia University
%O logic program system for parallel architectures
%A Andy Lowry
%A Stephen Taylor
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T LPS Algorithms: A Critical Analysis
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-113-84
%O logic program system for parallel architectures
%A Kevin Matthews
%A Katthleen McKeown
%T Taking the Intitiative in Problem-Solving Discourse
%R CUCS-114-84
%I Columbia University
%A Katthleen R. McKeown
%T Recursion in Text and Its Use in Language Generation
%R CUCS-39-83
%I Columbia University
%A Katthleen R. McKeown
%T The Text System for Natural Language Generation
%R CUCS-23-82
%I Columbia University
%A Kathleen R. McKeown
%T Focus Constraints on Language Generation
%R CUCS-40-83
%I Columbia University
%O responding to questions about database structure
%A Kathleen R. McKeown
%T Natural Language Systems: How are They Meeting Human Needs?
%R CUCS-76-83
%I Columbia University
%A Kathleen R. McKeown
%T Natural Language For Expert Systems: Comparisons with Database Systems
%R CUCS-91-84
%I Columbia University
%A Kathleen R. McKeown
%T User-Oriented Explanation for Expert Systems
%R CUCS-85-83
%I Columbia University
%A Marcia A. Derr
%A Kathleen R. McKeown
%T Using Focus to Generate Complex and Simple Sentences
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-86-83
%O system to decide whether to use a sequence of simple sentences or
a single complex one. student advisor expert system. Prolog
Definite Clause Grammar Function
%A Daniel P. Miranker
%T Performance Analysis of Two Competing DADO PE Designs
%R CUCS-118-84
%I Columbia University
%O DADO is a system designed for AI production systems
%A Daniel P. Miranker
%T Performance Estimates for the DADO Machine: A comparison of TREAT and RETE
%R CUCS-140-84
%I Columbia University
%A Cecile Paris
%T Determining the Level of Expertise of a User of a Question Answering System
%R CUCS-115-84
%I Columbia University
%A Alexander Pasik
%A Marshall Schor
%T Table-Driven Rules in Expert System
%R CUCS-69-83
%I Columbia University
%O interfacing database systems and knowledge based systems
%A Theodore M. Sabety
%A Brian Mathies
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T The Semi-Automatic Generation of Processing Element Control Paths for
Highly Parallel Machines
%R CUCS-127-84
%I Columbia University
%A David Elliot Shaw
%A William R. Swartout
%A C. Cordell Green
%T Inferring Lisp Programs From Examples
%R CUCS-1-75
%I Columbia University
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Structure and Abstraction in a System for Conceptual Matching
%R CUCS-2-77
%I Columbia University
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Knowledge-Based Retrieval on a Relational Database Machine
%R CUCS-9-80
%I Columbia University
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Non-Von: A Parallel Machine Architecture for Knowledge-Based Information
Processing
%R CUCS-18-81
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Learning Control of Production Systems
%R CUCS-6-79
%I Columbia University
%A Malcolm C. Harrison
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Learning Meta-Rule Control of Production Systems from Execution Traces
%I Columbia University
%R CUCS-10-80
%A Salvatore J. STolfo
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Specialized Hardware for Production Systems
%R CUCS-16-81
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Dado: A Tree-Structured Architecture for Production Systems
%R CUCS-24-82
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatoe J. Stolfo
%A Gregg T. Vesonder
%T Ace: An Expert System Supporting Analysis and Management Decision Making
%R CUCS-33-82
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%A Daniel Miranker
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Progamming the Dado Machine: An Introduction to PPL/M
%R CUCS-34-82
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%A David Miranker
%A David Elliot Shaw
%T Architecture and Applications of Dado: A Large Scale Parallel Computer
for Artificial Intelligence
%R CUCS-43-83
%I Columbia University
%K PROLOG tree-structured
%A Salvaotre J. Stolfo
%T Knowledge Engineering: Theory and Practice
%R CUCS-56-83
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T The Dado Parallel Computer
%R CUCS-63-83
%I Columbia University
%K RETE PROLOG
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T On the Design of Parallel Production System Machines: Whats in a Lip?
%R CUCS-77-83
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Five Parallel Algorithms for Productin System Execution on the DADO Machine
%R CUCS-116-84
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%A Daniel P. Miranker
%T Dado: A Parallel Processor for Expert Systems
%R CUCS-123-84
%I Columbia University
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T A Note on Implementing OPS5 Production Systems on DADO
%R CUCS-130-84
%I Columbia University
%X rebuttal to Anoop Gupta's performance analysis of DADO and conclusion
that it is not an effective OPS5 machine
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Is Cad/CAM Ready for AI
%R CUCS-128-84
%I Columbia University
%A Stephen Taylor
%A Christoher Maio
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%A David E. Shaw
%T Prolog on the DADO Machine: A Parallel System for High-Speed Logic
Programming
%R CUCS-46-83
%I Columbia University
%A S. Taylor
%A A. Lowry
%A G. Q. Maguire Jr.
%A S. J. Stolfo
%T Logic Programming Using Parallel Associative Operations
%R CUCS-96-84
%I Columbia University
%A Stephen Taylor
%A Daphne Tzoar
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Unification in a Parallel Environment
%R CUCS-97-84
%I Columbia University
%A Stephen Taylor
%A Gerald Maguire, Jr.
%A Andy Lowry
%A Salvatore J. Stolfo
%T Analyzing Prolog Programs
%R CUCS-117-84
%I Columbia University
%A Michael K. van Biema
%A Mark D. Lerner
%A Gerlad Maguire
%A Salvatore J. Stofo
%T ||PSL: A Parallel Lisp for the DADO Machine
%R CUCS-107-84
%I Columbia University
%A Kenneth Wasserman
%A Michael Lebowitz
%T Representing Complex Physical Objects in Memory
%R CUCS-37-82
%K frames patents Researcher
%I Columbia University
%A Kenneth Wasserman
%T Physical Object Representation and Generalization A Survey of
Natural Language Processing Programs
%R CUCS-62-83
%I Columbia Univeristy
%A Kenneth Wasserman
%T Understanding Hierarchically Structured Objects
%R CUCS-124-84
%I Columbia University
%A C. R. Giardina
%T The Universal Imaging Algebra
%R Tech Rep. EECS 8307
%D March 1983
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%K translation thresholding erosion counting covariance function
%A C. R. Giardina
%T Observations on the Variety of the Universal Imaging Algebra
%R Tech. Rep. EECS 8309
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%K convex hull
%A C. R. Giardina
%T A Bernstein Polynomial Feature Extraction Technique
%R Tech. Rep. EECS 8310
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%D April 1983
%K Chebychev norm chain encoded
%A C. R. Giardina
%T The Method of Moments in the Universal Imaging Algebra
%R Tech. Rep. EECS 8311
%D May 1983
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%K ellipse image segmentation
%A C. R. Giardina
%T Syntactical Pattern Recognition via the Universal Imaging Algebra
%R Tech. Rep. EECS 8317
%D June 1983
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%A C. R. Giardina
%T The Fuzzification of Morphological Operators in the Universal Imaging
Algebra
%R Tech. Rep. EECS 8321
%I Stevens Institute of Technology
%D August 1983
%K dilation erosion indicator thinning thickening
%A Christian Lengauer
%A Chua-Huang Huang
%T Automated Deduction in Programming Language Semantics: The Mechanical
Certification of Program Transformations to Derive Concurrence
%R TR 85-04
%I University of Texas at Austin
%K automated theorem proving semantic relations
%A Michael R. Eisler
%A Armar Mukherjee
%T An Approximate String Matching Chip
%R CS-TR-85-01
%I University of Central Florida
%A F. Gomez
%T Objective Understanding: Explanatory Driven Comprehension of
Elementary Scientific Test
%R CS-TR-85-03
%I University of Central Flordia
%A Fernando Gomez
%T TQ: A Specification Language Based on Conceptualizations Underlying
Natural Language
%R CS-TR-83
%I University of Central Florida
%A Fernando Gomez
%T Prepositions and Participles in LLULL
%R CS-TR-62
%I University of Central Florida
%K natural language
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂14-Jun-85 0738 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #78
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jun 85 07:37:24 PDT
Date: Thu 13 Jun 1985 23:05-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #78
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 14 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 78
Today's Topics:
Query - Animal Predation,
Humor - Capitalization,
Conference - IJCAI-85 Campus Housing,
AI Tools - Explorer/Symbolics Compatibility & New List of PROLOGs,
Reports - Semantics for Modal Logic & Recent Reports and Articles,
Seminars - Plausible Reasoning (SU and SRI) &
A Partial Correctness Logic for Procedures (MIT)
Conferences - AI at Upcoming Conferences
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 Jun 1985 13:14-EDT
From: SDMARTIN@BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Animal Predation
I would appreciate any information about the modelling of group
intelligence among animals, particularly predatory behavior.
Has anyone written any AI programs which "learn" the best
strategies for group food collection, for example cooperation
within a hunting wolf pack? Thanks. sdmartin@bbng.
[This seems to have some similarity to studies of the "commons"
problem, in which different strategies for sharing a common
resources (such as the village "common" or "green" used to graze
sheep) are seen to collapse if individual greed is not kept in
check. I remember reading about psychological simulations,
probably in Popular Psychology or the defunct Human Nature, but
I don't know of any AI studies. Do any of the "core wars"
automata learn cooperation? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jun 1985 0358 PST
From: Larry Carroll <LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA>
Reply-to: LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA
Subject: Capitalization
The progression is obvious: pronouns referring to artificial intelligences
are all caps. Thus you should have said: "Uncertain; ask ONE." Or one
may say in another context, "Ask IT if IT's intelligent."
Larry @ jpl-vlsi
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 85 11:32:22 PDT
From: Phyllis O'Neil <oneil@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: IJCAI-85: campus housing available
Economical UCLA dormitory rooms and suites are still available for
IJCAI-85 this August ...
Campus housing forms are on pages 27 and 29 of the IJCAI-85 conference
brochure. For copies of the brochure, contact:
AAAI
445 Burgess Dr.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
(415) 328-3123
The incorrect area code for AAAI's phone was given on the previous
announcement.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Jun 1985 1743-CDT
From: Doug <Johnson%ti-csl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Explorer/Symbolics Compatibility
Texas Instruments has a document that is the result of our experience
(and that of our customers) in porting code from Symbolics to Explorers.
The document is available from me on request. I can send it via the net
(preferred) or U.S. mail if desired. In general, porting is not a
difficult task. The differences are largely the kind of things you
would expect from software with common ancestry and different
maintainers.
-- Doug
Johnson%ti-csl@csnet-relay
Douglas Johnson MS 238
Texas Instruments
P.O. Box 226015
Dallas, Texas 75266
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 85 17:27:27 edt
From: Bruce Smith <BTS%UNC@csnet-relay>
Subject: New LIST of PROLOGs
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The "LIST of PROLOGs" was started by Randy Harr (then at
CWRU) and myself, largely from the USENET and ARPANET
computer networks. It's grown over the last couple of
years, with help from numerous Prolog folks.
The list emphasizes Prolog systems that are currently
available. Also, I've tried to note which vendors offer
educational discounts. There are a lot of new Prolog
systems being announced, with rumors of still more on the
way. In particular, I expect that this list'll be very
much out of date after this summer's Logic Programming
Symposium and, of course, IJCAI.
Please let me know of any additions or corrections
to the list. Sorry, but I didn't have time to verify all
the information. Some of the entries are also over a year
old and are likely out of date.
-- Bruce T. Smith
[ this file is available from the SCORE:PS:<Prolog>
directory as Prolog.NImplementations -ed ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 12 Jun 85 16:53:43-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Semantics for Modal Logic
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI REPORT
Report No. CSLI-85-25, ``An Internal Semantics for Modal Logic:
Preliminary Report'' by Ronald Fagin and Moshe Vardi, has just been
published. This report may be obtained by writing to David Brown,
CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jun 1985 17:23-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Tech Reports and some articles
%A D. Rozenshtein
%A J. Chomicki
%T Unifying the Use and Evolution of Database Systems: A Case Study in
PROLOG
%R LCSR-TR-68
%I Laboratory for Computer Science Research, Rutgers University
%K frame control
%A C. V. Srinivasan
%T CK-LOG, A Calculus for Knowledge Processing in Logic
%R DCS-TR-153
%I Laboratory for Computer Research, Rutgers University
%K MDS
%A A. Hsu
%A T. Imielinski
%T Integrity Checking for Multiple Updates
%R DCS-TR-155
%I Laboratory for Computer Science Research, Rutgers University
%K and-or database
%A S. M. Ehrlich
%A J. R. Gabriel
%A A. Gonen
%A L. Kuchnir
%T Graph Theoretic Approaches to Diagnostics: Applications of Logic
Programming and Cutset Theory to Aspects of Reactor and Circuit
Analysis
%R ANL-84-74
%D JAN 1985
%I Argonne National Labs Mathematical and Computer Science Division
%K PROLOG
%A J. R. Gabriel
%A T. G. Lindholm
%A E. L. Lusk
%A R. A. Overbeek
%T A Short Note on Achieveable LIP Rates Using the Warren Abstract
Prolog Machine
%R MCS-TM-36
%I Argonne National Labs Mathematics and Computer Science Division
%A J. R. Gabriel
%A P. R. Roberts
%T A Signal Flow Model for Sequential Logic Built from Combinatorial
Logic Elements and Its Implementation in PROLOG
%R ANL-84-89
%D SEP 1984
%I Argonne National Labs Mathematics and Computer Science Division
%A E. Lusk
%A R. Overbeek
%T Comment atteindre le milliard d'inferences par seconde
%J Intelligence Artificielle et Productique
%V 3
%D NOV 1984
%P 5-7
%O (in French)
%X describes work on the Denelcor Hep to get high number of logic inferences
per second
%A E. Lusk
%A R. Overbeek
%T Non-Horn Problems
%J JAR
%V 1
%N 1
%P 103-114
%D FEB 1985
%X Problems illustrating difficulties when a problem cannot be formulated
naturally in Horn clauses
%A E. L. Lusk
%A R. A. Overbeek
%T Research Topics: Multiprocessing Algorithms for Computational Logic
%R MCS-TM-31
%I Argonne National Labs Mathematical and Computer Science Division
%A L. Wos
%T Achievements in Automated Reasoning
%J SIAM News
%D JUL 1984
%P 4-5
%A L. Wos
%T Automated Reasoning
%J American Mathematical Monthly
%V 92
%D FEB 9185
%P 85-92
%A L. Wos
%T Automated Reasoning Programs: How They Work
%J SIAM News
%D SEP 1984
%P 4-5
------------------------------
Date: Mon 10 Jun 85 09:52:45-PDT
From: LOWRANCE@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminars - Plausible Reasoning (SU & SRI)
**** SPECIAL JOINT SEMINAR ****
Sponsored by SRI International and
the Stanford Medical Information Sciences Program
Professor Judea Pearl
Computer Science Department
University of California, Los Angeles
Friday, June 14
Room M-114, Stanford Medical School
1:30pm-3:30pm
"A Graph-Calculus for Plausible Reasoning"
or
"How to Do with Probabilities what People Say You Can't"
ABSTRACT
Numbers are known to be bad summarizers of knowledge. However,
probabilistic networks of conceptually related propositions, in which
the numbers serve to regulate and propel the flow of information,
allow reasoning about uncertainty to be as knowledge-intensive,
accurate, and psychlogically plausible as the level of details which
we care to explicate. The talk will describe a calculus which
facilitates concurrent, self-activated and stable propagation of
beliefs in such networks, and which is based on strict compliance
with probability theory.
Specific attention will be paid to the following issues:
1. Constructing probabilistic knowledge-bases without
collecting "massive amounts of data".
2. Making explicit assertions about independencies without
feeling guilty, without leaning on "Entropic" principles,
and without hiding assumptions under the guise of new calculi.
3. Distinguishing ignorance from uncertainty, postponing
judgments, and representing uncertainty about
probabilities.
4. Handling uncertain evidence without "ad-hoc-ery".
5. Admiting implicit (i.e. "intangible") evidence.
6. Maintaining consistency without interpolations.
7. Identifying conflicting evidence.
8. Making sure that evidence in favor of a hypothesis
would not be construed as partially suporting its
negation.
9. Tracing back assumptions and sources of belief to
produce sound explanations.
10. Updating beliefs in hierarchical hypotheses spaces,
avoiding circular reasoning, using self-activated
propagation mechanisms.
11. Optimizing the acquisition of data.
12. Recommending actions with meaningful guarantees
and reasoned assumptions.
Judea is planning to visit SRI the morning of June 14, before the
joint seminar at Stanford. At that time we will discuss "a short
appetizer" that he is preparing, "My strugles with Mr. Holmes." We
will meet at 10:30 in EJ232.
------------------------------
Date: 06/10/85 10:57:52
From: AH at MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - A Partial Correctness Logic for Procedures (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
DATE: JUNE 12, 1985
TIME: 1:45PM Refreshments
2:00PM Lecture
PLACE: NE43-374
A PARTIAL CORRECTNESS LOGIC FOR PROCEDURES
(IN AN ALGOL-LIKE LANGUAGE)
Kurt Sieber
University of Saarlandes
We extend Hoare's logic by allowing quantifiers and other logical connectives
to be used on the level of Hoare formulas. This leads to a logic in which
partial correctness properties of procedures (and not only of statements) can
be formulated adequately. In particular it is possible to argue about free
procedures, i.e. procedures which are not bound by a declaration but only
"specified" semantically. This property of our logic (and of the corresponding
calculus) is important from both a practical and a theoretical point of view,
namely:
- Formal proofs of programs can be written in the style of stepwise refinement.
- Procedures on parameter position can be handled adequately, so that some
sophisticated programs can be verified, which are beyond the power of other
calculi.
HOST: Professor Albert R. Meyer
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jun 1985 22:17-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI at upcoming conferences
Twelth International Symposium on Computer Architecture
Boston Park Plaza Conference June 17-19, 1985
Lisp Machines
Architecture of the Symbolics 3600 D. Moon Symbolics
Parallel Garbage Collection without Synchronization Overhead. A. Ram
J. Patel Univ. of Illinois
An Efficient LISP-Executive Architecture with a New Presentation for
List Structures G. Sohi, Et. al. Univ. of Illinois
LOGIC Programming Machines
Performance Studies of a Prolog Machine Architecture T. Dobry, A.
Despain, Y. Patt Berkeley
Design of a High-Speed Prolog Machine R. Nakazaki et. al. NEC, ICOT
A Hardware Unification Unit: Design and Analysis N. Woo, Bell Labs
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
ACM Sigplan 85 Symposium on Language Issues in Programming Environments
Session 2-3:30 Wednesday June 26, 1985
Debugging in a Side Effect Free Programming Environment
Cordelia V. Hall, John T. O'Donnell, Indiana U.
Session 6 11-12:30 Thursday June 27, 1985
An Algebra for Program Fragments Bent Bruun Kristensen, Aalborg U.;
Ole Lehrmann Madsen, Aarhus U; birger Moller-Pedersen Norwegian
Computing Center; Kristen Nygaard U. of Oslo
Session 8 Friday June 28, 1985 9:30-1:00
An Environment for Logic Programming Nissim Francez, Technion, Shalom
Goldenberg, Ron Pinter, Michael Tiom,kin, IBM Israel Scientific Center,
Shalom Tsur, MCC
Logic Programming Engineering Shell Henryk Jan Komorowski, Shigeo Omoro,
Harvard U.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂17-Jun-85 2342 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #79
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jun 85 23:41:57 PDT
Date: Mon 17 Jun 1985 22:30-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #79
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 18 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 79
Today's Topics:
Education - Proposal for IJCAI ICAI Meeting,
Psychology - Cooperation,
Information Display - Typography,
AI Tools - Lisp User Survey & Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 14 Jun 85 13:59:39-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: proposal for ijcai ICAI meeting
I have suddenly gotten an urge to find out who is interested in
applications of AI to educational computing. That would include knowledge
based tutoring systems, interactive encyclopedias, etc. Is there a bboard
on the net that discusses such issues?
I was speaking with someone who is also interested in this area and
It occurred to me that it would be neat to have an interest group meeting
at IJCAI this august. Is anyone out there interested? Does anyone know
who to contact about setting up such a meeting at IJCAI? (someone involved
with setting up the conference). It would be nice to have a time and place
to meet and an advance announcement about it in some form. Perhaps, 1 or
more people want to volunteer to be discussion leaders.
mark
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jun 85 08:44 EDT
From: WAnderson.wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: Animal Predation
The two papers that I remember reading that refer to sharing commons are
"The Tragedy of the Commons," by Garrett Hardin, and "Tragedy of the
Commons Revisited" (I'm not sure of the author of this one). Both
appeared in SCIENCE, Hardin's paper came out in the late 1960's or early
1970's, "The Tragedy ... Revisited" later in the 1970's. If anyone
needs the exact references, I can dig them up at home upon request.
Bill Anderson
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 85 15:15:22 edt
From: hal%gvax@Cornell.ARPA (Hal Perkins)
Subject: Typography
[...] I don't want to start a holy war about typography in the
digest, but ...
> Personally, I like all caps (except for AIList). -- KIL
Actually, an initial capital and small caps, or all caps in a slightly
smaller size looks much better than all caps (in my non-expert opinion).
All-caps is awfully obtrusive.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 85 13:39:36 CDT
From: marick@GSWD-VMS
Subject: Lisp user survey -- Results
Here's a summary of my survey of what users want from Lisp systems. I've
also produced a longer document containing the full text of each question
together with the relevant text from each response. Send me mail
(ARPANET: MARICK@GSWD-VMS; USENET: ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!marick)
if you want it.
Nine people responded; all of them were from the ARPANET. (No one on the
USENET uses Lisp?) If anyone wants to send more responses, I'll take them
and incorporate them.
I hope I've summarized people's responses adequately. If you have more than
a passing interest in the issues, please send for the full report.
1. Lisp machines vs. general-purpose workstations vs. timeshared
"mainframes".
For development purposes, Lisp machines or general-purpose workstations
are the clear favorite. The argument is that people are very expensive
compared to hardware, and that the productivity gain of a personal
computer offsets the hardware cost. There is a counter-argument that
the productivity gain is not necessarily due to features unique to
Lisp machines, but which happen to be available only on Lisp machines.
For delivery purposes, the obvious answer is "it depends". Dumb
question. However, it's not clear that developers have considered
delivery carefully enough.
2. Calling functions written in another language.
A majority finds this feature necessary. It is less necessary on the
Lisp machines, but there is still the need to use foreign code.
People need to be able to invoke both canned packages and
one-of-a-kind functions.
3. Embedded editor vs. external editor
Most people don't care, provided the editor provides a good enough
connection to LISP. The definition of "good enough" varies, and
it's of course easier to provide if the editor is internal.
4. Creating as-small-as-possible stand-alone "application programs".
No particular consensus. Some people would like it, some don't care,
and some don't think as-small-as-possible is particularly small.
5. Object-oriented programming.
Object-oriented programming is important. The right system has yet
to be invented.
6. Speed.
Speed is very important. Both the speed of the development system when
doing development tasks and the speed of the final compiled code are
important.
7. How adequate are the standard debugging tools?
Most people think they're adequate, but could be better. (One person
thought they were quite insufficient; one thought they were overkill.)
The use of embedded languages creates the need to debug at the level
of those languages.
8. Other important things.
Tight integration, consistency of user interface, good documentation,
availability of understandable source code, a standard dialect for
portability, access to external devices, large address space,
source code control.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1985 23:19 PDT
From: DAVIES@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Subject: Scheme
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is Hal Abelson's response to my request for information
about what's good about Scheme:
The following description of Scheme is taken from the "Chez Scheme
Manual" by Kent Dybvig, with some editing by Hal Abelson:
Scheme is an applicative-order, lexically-scoped, and block-structured
dialect of Lisp. Like almost all Lisp dialects, Scheme is an
interactive language with automatic storage management for data
objects, including lists, strings, various numeric datatypes, and
symbols. Because of this, Scheme is ideally suited to symbolic and
dynamic computation. Because Scheme is interactive, it is easy to
learn Scheme by experimenting with it.
Scheme also employs lexical scoping and block structure. In this way,
it is similar to Algol 60 and Pascal and unlike traditional
(dynamically-scoped) Lisp dialects. But Scheme goes beyond either
traditional Lisp or Algol-like languages by providing procedures as
"first-class" data objects. A Scheme procedure may be passed as an
argument, returned as a value, made part of a compostive data
structure, and stored indefinitely while still retaining the
environment of its definition.
Like Scheme, Common Lisp also provides lexical scoping and first-class
procedures. However, Common Lisp does not treat procedures and data
in a uniform manner: Procedure identifiers are separate from data
identifiers, evaluation of the operator position of a combination
follows different rules than evaluation of the operand positions, and
procedures must be "quoted" in a special way if they are to be treated
as data. Scheme really does treat procedures and data uniformly,
greatly simplifying evaluation rules and cutting down namespaces, and
gaining expressive power with no loss of efficiency.
Another difference between Scheme and Common Lisp is that Scheme is
specified to be tail-recursive -- procedure calls can be evaluated
without building up space for "control stack." This permits the
definition of a wide variety of "imperative" constructs (such as
loops and other iterators) purely in terms of procedure application.
Additionally, Scheme does not prescribe the order of argument
evaluation (as does Common Lisp) so there is more freedom for the
Scheme implementor to rearrange programs for optimization or for
parallel evaluation.
As a consequence of lexical scoping and tail recursion, Scheme
encourages functional (side-effect free) programming. The
higher-order procedures that a Scheme programmer can easily construct
and use provide alternative and more elegant ways to perform most of
the computations that are usually accomplished with side-effects.
Another feature of Scheme places it beyond other Lisp dialects, and
most other programming languages as well. This is the provision for
continuations, a general control facility based on solid semantic
principles. Continuations allow the implementation of control
structures such as coroutines, non-blind backtracking, and multiple
tasks.
These semantic attributes of Scheme help the programmer to create
clear, concise, and maintainable programs and program systems.
However, the most important attribute of Scheme supporting this
goal is its simplicity. The Scheme community has staunchly resisited
the addition of new language features that have not proven themselves
to be general engough to warrant making the language larger. As a
result, Scheme is a fairly small language that relies on a small set
of underlying concepts, which once mastered, provide more power than
the less general mechanisms found in other programming languages.
A complete description of Scheme can be found in the "Revised Revised
Report on Scheme," edited by Will Clinger. This is published as a
joint technical report of the Indiana University Computer Science
Department and the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (June 1985).
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Jun-85 1444 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #80
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jun 85 14:44:20 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Jun 1985 11:50-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #80
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 21 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 80
Today's Topics:
Seminars - A General Machine-Learning Mechanism (GM) &
Distributed Decision Procedures (IBM-SJ) &
Organisms' Internal Models (CSLI) &
Design Expert Systems (CMU) &
Unification of Logic, Function and Frames (MIT) &
Automatic Example Generation (UTexas) &
Qualitative Process Theory (CSLI) &
Architectures for Logic Programming (GE) &
Reasoning about Programs via Constraints (MIT) &
Planning as Debugging (SRI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 85 15:47 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - A General Machine-Learning Mechanism (GM)
Towards a General Machine-Learning Mechanism
Paul Rosenbloom
Stanford University
Thursday, June 27, 1985, 10:00 a.m.
General Motors Research Laboratories
Computer Science Department
Warren, Michigan
Machine learning is the process by which a computer can bring about
improvements in its own performance. A general machine-learning mechanism
is a single mechanism that can bring about a wide variety of performance
improvements (ultimately all required types). In this talk I will present
some recent progress in building such a mechanism. This work shows that the
combination of a simple learning mechanism (chunking) with a sophisticated
problem-solver (SOAR) can yield: (1) practice speed-ups, (2) transfer of
learning between related tasks, (3) strategy acquisition, (4) automatic
knowledge-acquisition, and (5) the learning of general macro-operators of
the type used by Korf (1983) to solve Rubik's cube. These types of learning
are demonstrated for traditional search-based tasks, such as tic-tac-toe and
the eight puzzle, and for R1-SOAR (a reformulation of a portion of the R1
expert system in SOAR).
This work has been pursued in collaboration with John Laird (Xerox PARC) and
Allen Newell (Carnegie-Mellon University).
-Steve Holland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 85 16:25:22 PDT
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Distributed Decision Procedures (IBM-SJ)
[Excerpted from the IBM-SJ Calendar by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Tues., June 25 Computer Science Seminar
11:15 A.M. DECISION PROCEDURES
Aud. A Distributed artificial intelligence is the study of
how a group of individual intelligent agents can
combine to solve a difficult global problem. This
talk discusses in very general terms the problems of
achieving this global goal by considering simpler,
local subproblems; we drop the usual requirement that
the agents working on the subproblems do not
interact. We are led to a single assumption, which
we call common rationality, that is provably optimal
(in a formal sense) and which enables us to
characterize precisely the communication needs of the
participants in multi-agent interactions. An example
of a distributed computation using these ideas is presented.
M. Ginsberg, Stanford University
Host: J. Halpern (HALPERN@IBM-SJ)
------------------------------
Date: Wed 19 Jun 85 17:02:36-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Organisms' Internal Models (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
*NEXT* THURSDAY, June 27, 1985
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall ``An Organism and Its Internal Model of the World''
Room G-19 Pentti Kanerva, CSLI
Discussion led by Alex Pentland
ABSTRACT OF NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
``An Organism and Its Internal Model of the World''
There is a glaring disparity in how children and computers learn
things. By and large, children are not instructed explicitly but
learn by observation, imitation, and trial and error. What kind of
computer architecture would allow a machine to learn the way children
do?
In the model I have been studying, an organism is coupled to the
world by its sensors and effectors. The organism's mind-ware consists
of a relatively small focus and a large memory. The sensors feed
information into the focus, the effectors are driven from the focus,
the memory is addressed by the contents of the focus, the contents of
the focus are stored in memory, and the memory feeds information into
the focus. The contents of the focus at a moment account for the
subjective experience of the organism at that moment.
The function of the memory is to store a model of the world for
later reference. The memory is sensitive to similarity in that
approximate retrieval cues can be used to retrieve exact information.
It is dynamic in that the present situation (its encoding) brings to
focus the consequences of similar past situations. The model sheds
light on the frame problem of robotics, and it appears that a robot
built according to this principle would learn by trial and error and
would be able to plan actions and to perform planned sequences of
actions.
Reading: ``Parallel Structures in Human and Computer Memory,''
available from Susi Parker at the Ventura Hall receptionist desk and
on line as <PKANERVA>COGNITIVA.PAPER at SU-CSLI.ARPA.
--Pentti Kanerva
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jun 85 11:16:01 EDT
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Seminar - Design Expert Systems (CMU)
DESIGN RESEARCH CENTER BI-WEEKLY SEMINAR SERIES
COPS - A Concurrent Production System
BY
Luiz Alberto Villaca Leao
Department Of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Wednesday, June 26 at 1:30 pm in the Adamson Wing, Baker Hall
Existing tools for writing expert systems are most helpful when one wants to
emulate a single human expert working alone and without the aid of large
number crunching programs. Few engineering problems fit this template. Rather,
they tend to require multiple experts, working concurrently and supported by
numbers of CAD, CAM and other tools. COPS has been designed with these
requirements in mind. It is an interpreter of a superset of the OPS5 language.
It provides the means for implementing multiple blackboards that integrate
cooperating, concurrent expert systems, running in a distributed network of
processors.
-------
Refereshments will be served at 1:15
------------------------------
Date: Thu 20 Jun 85 10:49:56-EDT
From: Monica M. Strauss <MONICA%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Unification of Logic, Function and Frames (MIT)
Date: Friday 21 June, 1985
Time: 11:00AM
Place: 8th Floor Playroom
The Uranus System -- Unification of Logic, Function and Frames
Hideyuki Nakashima
Electrotecnical Laboratory
Tsukuba, Japan
Abstract
Uranus is a knowledge representation system based on the concept of logic
programming. The basic computational mechanism is the same as that of the
famous (or infamous!) logic programming language, Prolog, with several
extensions.
One important extension is the introduction of a multiple world mechanism.
Uranus consists of several independent definition spaces called worlds.
Worlds are combined at execution time to form a context for predicate
definitions. Regarding a given world as a frame for a given concept, and
predicates as slots, you have a frame-like system in logic programming.
Another extension is along the lines of functional notations within the
semantics of logic. Uranus has only one semantics, that of logic
programming. At the same time, it has the expressive power, or
convenience, of functional programming. Lazy execution of functional forms
follows naturally, since portions are computed only when they are necessary
for unification.
A brief demonstration of the system is scheduled following the talk.
Host: Gerald J. Sussman
REFRESHMENTS will be served.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 15:11:31 cdt
From: briggs@ut-sally.ARPA (Ted Briggs)
Subject: Seminar - Automatic Example Generation (UTexas)
EGS: A Transformational Approach to Automatic Example Generation
by
Myung W. Kim
noon Friday June 28
PAI 5.60
In the light of the important roles of examples in AI, methods for
automatic example generation have been investigated. A system
(EGS) has been built which automatically generates examples given
a constraint specified in the Boyer-Moore logic. In EGS examples
are generated by successively transforming the constraint formula
into the form of an example representation scheme. Several
strategies have been incorporated: testing stored examples,
solving equations, doing case-analysis, and expanding
definitions. Global simplification checks inconsistency and
rewrites formulas to be easy to handle.
EGS has been tested for the problems of controlling backward
chaining and conjecture checking in the Boyer-Moore theorem
prover. It has proven to be powerful -- its power is mainly due
to combining efficient procedural knowledge and general formal
reasoning capacity.
In this talk I will present the operational aspect of EGS and
some underlying principles of its design.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 19 Jun 85 17:02:36-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Qualitative Process Theory (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
*NEXT* THURSDAY, June 27, 1985
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall ``Qualitative Process Theory''
Room G-19 Ken Forbus, University of Illinois, Computer Science
``Qualitative Process Theory''
Things move, collide, flow, bend, stretch, break, cool down, heat up,
and boil. Intuitively we think of the things that cause changes in
physical situations as processes. Qualitative Process Theory defines
simple notions of quantity, function, and process that allow
interesting common-sense inferences to be drawn about dynamical
systems. This talk will describe the basics of the Qualitative
Process Theory, illustrate how it can be used to capture certain
aspects of different models of physical phenomena, and discuss the
claims it makes about causal reasoning. --Ken Forbus
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 85 10:04:54 EDT
From: coopercc@GE-CRD
Subject: Seminar - Architectures for Logic Programming (GE)
Computer Science Seminar
General Electric R & D Center
Schenectady, N.Y.
Experimental Computer Architectures
for Logic Programming
Prof. John Oldfield
Syracuse University
Tuesday, June 25
10:30 AM, Conference Room 2, Bldg. K1
(Refreshments at 10:15)
ABSTRACT: Syracuse University is an established center
for research in logic programming languages and their
applications. In the last few years research has com-
menced on ways of speeding-up the execution of logic
programs by special-purpose computer architectures and
the incorporation of custom VLSI components.
The Syracuse Unification Machine (SUM) is a co-
processor for a host computer executing LOGLISP. Unifi-
cation is a fundamental and common operation in the
execution of logic programs, and is highly recursive in
nature. SUM speeds up unification by the combination of
separate functional units operating concurrently, high-
speed pattern matching and the use of content-
addressable memory (CAM) techniques. Unification fre-
quently requires a variable to be bound to something
else, such as an expression, a constant or even another
variable. The Binding Agent of SUM holds the set of
current bindings in the form of a segmented stack, and
with the aid of a CAM made up of custom nMOS circuits
it is possible to check if a variable is already bound
in under 150 nS. Binding is an operation which may be
carried out concurrently in most situations, and an
extra Binding Agent may be used to advantage. The
Analysis Agent is another custom nMOS component which
implements the pattern-matching and case-by-case
analysis required. It is organized as a pipeline, and
uses a state machine implemented as a PLA.
(Note: the June issue of Byte Magazine contains an
informative article on this work by Phillip Robinson)
Notice to Non-GE attendees: It is necessary that we ask
you to notify Marion White ((518) 387-6138 or
WHITEMM@GE-CRD) at least two days in advance of the
seminar.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1985 11:58 EDT
From: DICK%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Reasoning via Constraints (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Tuesday, June 18
8th Floor Playroom
4:00PM
REASONING ABOUT PROGRAMS
VIA
CONSTRAINT PROPAGATION
Thomas G. Dietterich
Department of Computer Science
Oregon State University
This talk describes a program reasoning system (PRE) and its application to
problems of incremental program development in machine learning. PRE solves
the following problem: given a program (in a modified Programmer's Apprentice
notation) with tokens labeling some of the ports in the program, find the set
of possible "interpretations" of the program. That is, compute the set of
executions consistent with the given information. The characterization of
these executions should be succinct and their computation should be efficient.
To perform this task, PRE applies constraint propagation methods. The talk
will focus on (a) modifications made to the P.A. notation, (b) techniques
introduced to handle failure of local propagation, and (c) strategies for
resolving the frame problem. PRE is part of a larger system, EG, whose task is
to form (procedural) theories of the UNIX operating system through
experimentation and observation. EG's theories take the form of programs, and
PRE is applied to perform tasks of data interpretation and goal regression.
Refreshments will be served.
Host: Richard C. Waters
------------------------------
Date: Tue 18 Jun 85 19:27:09-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Planning as Debugging (SRI)
PLANNING AS DEBUGGING
Reid Simmons -- MIT AI Lab / SPAR
11:00 am, Monday, June 24
Room EJ232, SRI International
We are currently building a domain independent planner which can
represent and reason about fairly complex domains. The first part of
the talk will focus on the representations used and the rationale for
choosing them. The planner uses explicit temporal representations,
based on time points and the notion of "histories". It also extends
the traditional precondition/postcondition representation of actions
to include quantification, conditionals and the ability to reason
about cumulative changes.
The second part of the talk will focus on techniques to organize
and control the search for a plan. We view planning as "debugging
a blank sheet of paper". We correct a bug (ie. unachieved goal) by
changing one of the underlying assumptions in the plan which are
responsible for the bug. This problem solving approach combines
backtracking with traditional planning techniques, giving the planner
the potential for finding a solution with much less search. We also
present a simple, but effective, technique for choosing which plan
modification to pursue, based on maintaining a complete goal structure
of the plan.
This planner has been partially implemented and tested on
traditional blocks-world and register-transfer examples. It is
currently being applied to the problem of geologic interpretation and
to diagnosis of chip manufacturing problems.
-------
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Jun-85 1719 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #81
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jun 85 17:19:14 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Jun 1985 12:04-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #81
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 22 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 81
Today's Topics:
Queries - EMYCIN KBs & Expert System Tools,
Games - Scrabble Program,
News - New BBoard on Application of AI to Education &
Symbolic Math Mailing List,
Psychology - Common Sense,
Seminar Series - Pixels and Predicates (CSLI),
Conference - NAFIPS Call for Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 19 Jun 85 09:25:21-MDT
From: Pete Tinker <tinker@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: request: EMYCIN KBs
We are implementing an EMYCIN-like system in the functional language FEL
and would like to feed it a substantial knowledge base. We would appreciate
hearing from anyone who can make one available to us for internal use.
Thanks,
-Pete
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jun 1985 at 1102-EDT
From: jim at TYCHO.ARPA (James B. Houser)
Subject: Expert system tools
I would like to find out which of the "canned" expert system
development systems like KEE or KES are considered reasonable to use
on a Lisp machine. An approximate idea of cost and machine resources
required, and a POC would also be helpful.
Thanx - Jim (jim@tycho)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 07:03:33 pdt
From: Guy Lapalme <lapalme%iro.udem.cdn%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Scrabble Program
Dear Dr. Kender:
Following your inquiry about programs for playing Scrabble, you might
be interested to know that we have built a championship level program
called Athena. It plays a version of the game called duplicate Scrabble
which is the form used for championships in french. The idea is that
everybody is playing the same board at the same time, each person
has a 3 minute lapse of time to find the best play, each player gets
the points for the word he/she found but the best word is put on everybody's
board. That way, luck is eliminated and each player can find out what
proportion of the optimal he/she found. In doing so, all strategy is of
no use because at each move the best play FOR THAT MOVE is put on the
board for everybody.
Under those rules, our program consistently plays more than 98% .
For the last four years, we had the program play the world championship
games, and only last year it would not have been first.
A paper describing the program was published in
TSI (Techniques and Science of Informatics) vol2, no 4, p249-256, 1983.
This is an english translation of a french publication.
We also have a report that describe it in english. Honestly, we cannot
call the techniques we use AI techniques but more of "Scrabble Hacks",
but so are in my opinion the last Chess Programs (ie the ones that win).
I hope that you find this information useful.
Guy Lapalme
Dept IRO
Universite de Montreal
PS: The programs now plays in french because we had access to a 80000 words
dictionnary of acceptable words in french. We hope to get access to
a similar list in English, Do you have one????
Should you want to organize a tournament we would be glad to come.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 20 Jun 85 15:28:04-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: NEW BBOARD on Application of AI to education
There seemed to be enough interest to create a bboard on artificial
intelligence in education. Here the description:
AI-ED@SUMEX-AIM
Discussions related to the application of artificial intelligence to
education. This includes material on intelligent computer assisted
instruction (ICAI) or intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), interactive
encyclopedias, intelligent information retrieval for educational
purposes, and pychological and cognitive science models of learning,
problem solving, and teaching that can be applied to education.
Issues related to teaching AI are welcome. Topics may also include
evaluation of tutoring systems, commercialization of AI based
instructional systems, description of actual use of an ITS in a
classroom setting, user-modeling, intelligent user-interfaces, and the
use of graphics or videodisk in ICAI. Announcements of books, papers,
conferences, new products, public domain software tools, etc. are
encouraged.
Archives of messages are kept on SUMEX-AIM in:
<BBOARD>AI-ED.TXT
All requests to be added to or deleted from these lists, problems,
questions, etc., should be sent to AI-Ed-Request@SUMEX-AIM
Coordinator: Mark Richer <Richer@SUMEX-AIM>
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jun 1985 22:42-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: symbolic math mailing list/news group announcement
Symbolic math mailing list/news group announcement
Mailing list covering symbolic math algorithms, applications and problems
relating to the various symbolic math languages. It is primarily the
USENET newsgroup net.math.symbolic; items are forwarded to ARPANET,
BITNET and CSNET from randvax.
Mail to be forwarded to the list should be sent to lseward@RAND-UNIX
(ARPANET/MilNet) or net.math.symbolic (USENET). Requests to be included
on the list should be sent to lseward@RAND-UNIX.
Coordinator: Larry Seward <lseward@RAND-UNIX>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 85 20:14:32 pdt
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@Pescadero>
Subject: Common Sense
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
For reasons too weird to explain, some friends and I have been trying to come
up with a definition or characterization of "common sense". I'd like to
throw the question to the bboard community and hope for some help. Though
I wouldn't mind getting cute little epigrams and silly jokes, I'm really
much more interested in a serious and thorough characterization.
As for the progress of our discussion so far, there seem to lots of things
that go under the heading of common sense: street sense (don't wave lots
of money around in bad neighborhoods), minor mechanical aptitude (the ability
and willingness to fix the toilet when it's running), perspective (don't
cry if you drop an egg; do if you drop your kid). At this point I want
to try to separate those from common sense and let common sense denote
things that don't fit under those titles--although perspective and common
sense may overlap. (Of course, a good argument could convince me to
include them.)
We've come up with two main traits that a person with common sense has:
the ability to completely learn something once they've been taught it,
and the ability to understand others' motives and how their motives will
likely affect their behavior. As an example of the first, a person may
not know that the quickest way to Formico's Pizza is down Embarcadero.
He may instead always go down University to 101 and head south. However,
once he's driven down Embarcadero once and seen how much shorter it is,
he would seem foolish to go the long way if his motivation is to avoid
wasting time. Having learned something, he should internalize the knowledge
to the point of being able to use whenever it's applicable.
As an example of the second, one should understand that if someone is
trying to sell you something, they're more likely to tell you the good
things about it than the bad, even if they're honest. This is not just
street sense (let the buyer beware) but the ability to imagine yourself
in the situation of another person.
Any other such traits? Or a neater way of summarizing them?
--Eric
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 85 22:24:45 pdt
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@Navajo>
Subject: common sense
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Common sense: that which is obvious once it has been pointed out.
More precisely, the two criteria for common sense are:
common knowledge basis (all facts depended on must be common knowledge)
low computational complexity (easy to check the conclusion).
------------------------------
Date: Wed 19 Jun 85 17:02:36-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Series - Pixels and Predicates (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
AREA P1 MEETING
``Pixels and Predicates''
Beginning Wednesday, June 26 we will start a discussion series on
visual (graphic) communication: how can we relate predicates to
pixels, and vice versa?
Topics will include:
* What image regularities do we perceive as the primitive elements
of form, the ``visual morphemes'' that convey information?
* How do people organize images into these parts, gain information
about the situation from them, and use them in communication?
* How can we use our knowledge of such matters to design graphic
interfaces to facilitate visual communication?
Those interested in these topics are encouraged to attend, debate
vigorously, and perhaps suggest further topics for discussion. The
first speaker (tentative) is:
``Visual Morphemes in the 3-D World.''
Alex Pentland, CSLI
Wednesday June 26th, 3:00pm, Ventura Hall
People have a strong perceptual notion of the ``parts'' of a 3-D
form; a good understanding of what constitues ``a part'' is critical
to communication about visual data. A theory of parts will be
presented and a 3-D graphics modeling tool based on this theory will
be discussed. --Alex Pentland
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 13:14:47 cdt
From: Don Kraft <kraft%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Call for Papers -- NAFIPS Meeting
CALL FOR PAPERS
North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS)
International Meeting
Monteleone Hotel New Orleans, Louisiana
(In the Heart of the French Quarter)
June 1-4, 1986
Papers on all fuzzy topics are encouraged, and wide
international participation is expected.
Deadlines
Notice of intent with a title and abstract 9/1/85
Completed paper (3 copies) 10/15/85
Notification of acceptance 1/15/86
Camera-ready copy due 3/15/86
Proceedings will be distributed during Conference
registration.
Send all abstracts and papers to:
NAFIPS86
Department of Computer Science
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306
Abraham Kandel and Wyllis Bandler, Program Committee Co-Chairs
Fred Petry and Donald H. Kraft, General Meeting Co-Chairs
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Jun-85 1323 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #82
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jun 85 13:23:23 PDT
Date: Mon 24 Jun 1985 09:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #82
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 24 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 82
Today's Topics:
Queries - VAX Lisp & PC Lisps & McDonnell Douglas NL Breakthrough,
Games - Optimal Scrabble,
Automata - Predation/Cooperation,
Psychology - Common Sense,
Analogy - Bibliography,
Seminar - Evaluating Expert Forecasts (NASA)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 85 07:38:35 EDT
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: VAX Lisp
Just looking for a little consumer information here - does anyone have
any experience with Digital's VAX LISP ? DEC advertises it as a
full-fledged implementation of CommonLisp. Any remarks on price,
performance, quality, etc are appreciated.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Sun 23 Jun 85 15:09:12-EDT
From: Jonathan Delatizky <DELATZ%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: PC Lisps
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Can some of you out there who have used Lisp implementations on IBM PC
type machines give me some recommendations as to the best PC Lisp? I
plan to run it on a PC/XT and a PC/AT if possible. Also, any expert systems
shells that run on the same machines, real or toy-like.
...jon
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jun 1985 13:20-EST
From: George Cross <cross%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: McDonnell Douglas NL Breakthrough
The following is the text of a full page color ad on page 49
in the June 24, 1985 New Yorker. It has also been run in the
Wall Street Journal. Does anyone know what the breakthrough
is? This was mentioned on the ailist some time ago but I
didn't notice a response. There is a photo of a hand holding
the chin of smiling boy.
BREAKTHROUGH: A COMPUTER THAT UNDERSTANDS YOU LIKE YOUR MOTHER
Having to learn letter-perfect software languages can be frustrating to the
average person trying to tap the power of a computer.
But practical thinkers at our McDonnell Douglas Computer Systems Company
have created the first computer that accepts you as you are - human.
They emulated the two halves of the brain with two-level software: One level
with a dictionary of facts and a second level to interpret them. The
resulting Natural Language processor understands everyday conversational
English. So it knows what you mean, no matter how you express yourself. It
also learns your idiosyncrasies, forgives your errors, and tells you how to
find out what you're looking for.
Now, virtually anyone who can read and write can use a computer.
We're creating breakthroughs not only in Artificial Intelligence but also in
health care, space manufacturing and aircraft.
We're McDonnell Douglas.
How can I learn more?
Write
P.O. Box 19501
Irvine, CA 92713
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jun 1985 13:07-EDT
From: Jon.Webb@CMU-CS-IUS2.ARPA
Subject: Optimal Scrabble
Anyone interested in computer Scrabble should be aware that Guy
Jacobson and Andrew Appel (some of the people that did Rog-o-matic)
have written a program which in some sense solves the problem. Using a
clever data structure, their program makes plays in a few seconds and
always makes the best possible play. Their dictionary is the official
Scrabble dictionary. The program is not completely optimal because it
doesn't take into account how the placement of its words near things
like triple word scores may help the other player, but in all other
senses it always makes the best play. I suppose some simple strategic
techniques could be added using a penalty function, but as the program
almost always wins anyway, this hasn't been done. It regularly gets
bingos (all seven letters used), makes clever plays that create three
or more words, and so on. The version they have now runs on Vax/Unix.
There was some work to port it to the (Fat) Macintosh but that is not
finished, mainly for lack of interest.
Jon
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 85 17:17:58 EDT
From: David←West%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Predation/Cooperation (AIL v3 #78)
Re: enquiry of sdmartin@bbng about learning cooperation in predation:
For an extensive investigation of a minimal-domain model (prisoner's
dilemma),see ←The Evolution of Co-operation← (NY: Basic Books, 1984;
LC 83-45255, ISBN 0-465-02122-0) by Robert Axelrod (of the U of Mich).
He is in the Institute of Public Policy Studies, but one of his more
interesting methods was the use of the genetic algorithms of John
Holland (also of the U of Mich) to breed automata to have improved
strategies for playing Prisoner's dilemma. A one-sentence summary of
his results is that cooperation can displace non-cooperation if
individuals remember each other's behavior and have a high enough
probability of meeting again. An intermediate-length summary can be
found in Science ←211← (27 Mar 81) 1390-1396.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 21 Jun 85 19:23:03-PDT
From: Calton Pu <CALTON@WASHINGTON.ARPA>
Subject: definition of common sense
I had a discussion with a friend on this exact topic just a few weeks
ago. My conclusions can be phrased as an elaboration of V. Pratt's
two criteria.
1. common knowledge basis (all facts depended on must be
common knowledge)
I think the (abstract) common knowledge basis can be more concretely
described as "cultural background". Your Formico's Pizza example
shows clearly that anybody not familiar with San Francisco will not
have the "common sense" to go there. The term "cultural background"
admits many levels of interpretation (national, provincial, etc.)
so most of REALLY COMMON knowledge basis will be encompassed.
2. low computational complexity (easy to check the conclusion).
I think the key here is not the checking (NP), but the finding (P) of
the solution. So here I differ from Vaughan, in that I believe common
sense is something "obvious" to a lot of people, by their own
reasoning power.
There are two factors involved: the first is the amount of reasoning
power; the second is the amount of deductive processing involved. On
the first factor, unfortunately usual words to describe people with
the adequate reasoning power such as "sensible", "reasonable", and
"objective" have also the connotation of being "emotionless". Let's
leave out the emotional aspects and use the term "reasonable" to
include everybody who is able to apply elementary logic to normal
situations. On the second factor, typical words to picture easy
deductive efforts are "obvious", "clear", and "evident".
So my definition of common sense is: that which is obvious to a
reasonable person with an adequate cultural background.
I should point out that the three parameters of common sense, cultural
background, reasoning power, and deductive effort, vary from place to
place and from person to person. If we agreed more on each other's
common sense, it might be easier to negotiate peace.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 24 Jun 85 01:38:08 EDT
From: shrager (jeff shrager) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: Analogy Bibliography
[Someone asked for an analogy bibliography a while back. This was compiled
about two years (maybe more) ago so it's partial and somewhat out of date,
but might serve as a starter for people interested in the topic. I've added
a couple of thing just now in looking it over. The focus is primarily
psychological, but readers will recognize some of the principle AI work as
well. I've got annotations for quite a few of these, but the remarks are
quite long and detailed so I won't burden AIList with them. -- Jeff]
ANALOGY
(A partial bibliography)
Compiled by Jeff Shrager
CMU Psychology
24 June 1985
(Send recommendations to Shrager@CMU-PSY-A.)
Bobrow, D. G. & Winograd, T. (1977). An Overview of KRL: A Knowledge
Representation Language. Cognitive Science, 1, 3-46.
Bott, R.A. A study of complex learning: Theories and Methodologies. Univ. of
Calif. at San Diego, Center for Human Information Processing report No.
7901.
Brown, D. (1977). Use of Analogy to Acheive New Experience. Technical Report
403, MIT AI Laboratory.
Burstein, M. H. (June, 1983). Concept Formation by Incremental Analogical
Reasoning and Debugging. Proceedings of the International Machine
Learning Workshop. pp. 19-25.
Carbonell, J. G. (August, 1981). A computational model of analogical problem
solving. Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver. pp. 147-152.
Carbonell, J.G. (1983). Learning by Analogy: Formulating and Generalizing
Plans from Past Experience. In Michalski, R.S., Carbonell, J.G., &
Mitchell, T.M. (Ed.), Machine Learning, an Aritificial Intelligence
Approach Palo Alto: Tioga Press.
Carnap, R. (1963). Variety, analogy and periodicity in inductive logic.
Philosophy of Science, 30, 222-227.
Darden, L. (June, 1983). Reasoning by Analogy in Scientific Theory
Construction. Proceedings of the International Machine Learning Workshop.
pp. 32-40.
de Kleer, J. & Brown, J.S. Foundations of Envisioning. Xerox PARC report.
Douglas, S. A., & Moran, T. P. (August, 1983). Learning operator semantics by
analogy. Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial
Intelligence.
Douglas, S. A., & Moran, T. P. (December, 1983b). Learning text editor
semantics by analogy. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference on
Computer Human Interaction. pp. 207-211.
Dunker, K. (1945). On Problem Solving. Psychological Monographs, 58, .
Evans, T. G. (1968). A program for the solution of a class of geometric
analogy intelligence test questions. In Minsky, M. (Ed.), Semantic
Information Processing Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. pp. 271-253.
Gentner, D. (July, 1980). The Structure of Analogical Models in Science.
Report 4451, Bolt Beraneck and Newman.
Gentner, D. (1981). Generative Analogies as Mental Models. Proceedings of
the 3rd National Cognitive Science Conference. pp. 97-100. Proceedings
of the 3rd annual conference.
Gentner, D. (1982). Are Scientific Analogies Metaphors? In D. S. Miall (Ed.),
Metaphor: Problems and Perspectives New York: Harvester Press Ltd. pp.
106-132.
Gentner, D., & Gentner, D. R. (1983). Flowing Waters or Teeming Crowds: Mental
Models of Electricity. In Gentner, D. & Stevens, A. L. (Ed.), Mental
Models Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. pp. 99-129.
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogic Problem Solving. Cognitive
Psychology, 12, 306-355.
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema Induction and Analogic Transfer.
Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1-38.
Halasz, F. & Moran, T. P. (1982). Analogy Considered Harmful. Proceedings of
the Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems, New York.
Hesse, Mary. (1955). Science and the Human Imagination. New York:
Philisophical Library.
Hesse, Mary. (1974). The Structure of Scientific Inference. Berkeley: Univ.
of Calif. Press.
Kling, R. E. (1971). A Paradigm for Reasoning by Analogy. Artificial
Intelligence, 2, 147-178.
Lenat, D.B. & Greiner, R.D. (1980). RLL: A representation language language.
Proc. of the first annual meeting. Stanford.
McDermott, J. (December, 1978). ANA: An assimilating and accomodatiing
production system. Technical Report CMU-CS-78-156, Carnegie-Mellon
University.
McDermott, J. (1979). Learning to use analogies. Sixth Internation Joint
Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
Medin, D. L. and Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context Theory of Classification
Learning. Psychological Review, 85(3), 207-238.
Minsky, M. (1975). A Framework for Representing Knowledge. In Winston, P.H.
(Ed.), The Psychology of Computer Vision New York: McGraw Hill.
Minsky, M. (July, 1982). Learning Meaning. Technical Report, . Unpublished
MIT AI Lab techinical report.
Moore, J. & Newell, A. (1974). How can MERLIN Understand? In L.W.Gregg (Ed.),
Knowledge and Cognition Potomic, Md.: Erlbaum Associates.
Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond Literal Similarity. Psych Review, 86(3), 161-179.
Pirolli, P. & Anderson, J.R. (1985) The role of Learning from Examples in the
Acquisition of Recursive Programming Skills. Canadian Journal of
Psychology. Vol. 39, no. 4; pgs. 240-272.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princton, N.J.: Princeton U. Press.
Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Reed, S. K., Ernst, G. W., & Banerji, R. (1974). The Role of Analogy in
Transfer Between Similar Problem States. Cognitive Psychology, 6,
436-450.
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boynes-Braem, P.
(1976). Basic Objects on Natural Kinds. Cog Psych, 8, 382-439.
Ross, B. (1982). Remindings and Their Effects in Learning a Cognitive Skill.
PhD thesis, Stanford.
Rumelhart, D.E., & Norman, D.A. (?DATE?). Accretion, tuning, and
restructuring: Three modes of learning. In R.Klatsky and J.W.Cotton
(Eds.), Semantic Factors in Cognition Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum
Associates.
Rumerlhart, D.E. & Norman, D.A. (1981). Analogical Processes in Learning. In
J.R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition Hillsdale,
N.J.: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. pp. 335-360.
Schustack, M., & Anderson, J. R. (1979). Effects of analogy to prior knowledge
on memory for new information. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior, 18, 565-583.
Sembugamoorthy, V. (August, 1981). Analogy-based acquisition of utterances
relating to temporal aspects. Proceedings of the 7th International Joint
Conference on Artificial Intelligence. pp. 106-108.
Shrager, J. & Klahr, D. (December, 1983). A Model of Learning in the
Instructionless Environment. Proceedings of the Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 226-229.
Shrager, J. & Klahr, D. Instructionless Learning: Hypothesis Generation and
Experimental Performance. In preparation.
Sternberg, R. (1977). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical
reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale,
N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
VanLehn, K., & Brown, J. S. (1978). Planning nets: A representation for
formalizing analogies and semantic models of procedural skills. In Snow,
R. E., Frederico, P. A. and Montague, W. E. (Ed.), Aptitude Learning and
Instruction: Cognitive Process Analyses Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Weiner, E. J. A Computational Approach to Metaphore Comprehension. In the
Penn Review of Linguistics.
Winston, P. H. (December, 1980). Learning and Reasoning by Analogy.
Communications of the ACM, 23(12), 689-703.
Winston, P. H. Learning and Reasoning by Analogy: The details. MIT AI Memo
number 520.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 85 11:42:26 pdt
From: gabor!amyjo@RIACS.ARPA (Amy Jo Bilson)
Subject: Seminar - Evaluating Expert Forecasts (NASA)
NASA
PERCEPTION AND COGNITION SEMINARS
Who: Keith Levi
From: University of Michigan
When: 10 am, Tuesday, June 25, 1985
Where: Room 177, Building 239, NASA Ames Research Center
What: Evaluating Expert Forecasts
Abstract: Probabilistic forecasts, often generated by an expert,
are critical to many decision aids and expert systems.
The quality of such inputs has usually been evaluated in
terms of logical consistency. However, in terms of
real-world implications, the external correspondence of
probabilistic forecasts is usually much more important
than internal consistency. I will discuss recently
developed procedures for evaluating external correspondence
and present research on the topic.
Non-citizens (except permanent residents) must have prior approval from
the Directors Office one week in advance. Permanent residents must show
Alien Registration Card at the time of registration.
To request approval or obtain further information, call 415-694-6584.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂26-Jun-85 0030 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #83
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jun 85 00:30:44 PDT
Date: Tue 25 Jun 1985 22:22-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #83
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 26 Jun 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 83
Today's Topics:
Queries - Lisps for VAX,
Book - Logic Programming Text,
Seminars - A Situational Theory of Analogy (CSLI) &
Implementing Dempster's Rule (SU),
Conference - 2nd ACM N.E. Regional Conference
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 85 06:51:42 EDT
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: Lisps for VAX
Does anyone have recommendations for incarnations of Lisp to run
under VAX/VMS, especially ones with features for object-oriented
programming? Is there something called XLISP which fits this
description, and if so, where does it live? Thanks for any help.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 85 09:02:59 mdt
From: cib%f@LANL.ARPA (C.I. Browne)
Subject: Common Lisp on VAX/UNIX (Query)
We would be most grateful for pointers to a source of Common Lisp
for a VAX 11/780 running under UNIX 4.2bsd.
Thank you.
cib
cib@lanl
cib@lanl.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jun 85 1842 PDT
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Logic Programming Text
[Excerpted from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI. The original
contained a lengthy abstract for each section of the book; to get a
copy, FTP file <ailist>logicprog.txt on SRI-AI, or write to me at
AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA. -- KIL]
LOGIC PROGRAMMING: RELATIONS, FUNCTIONS, AND EQUATIONS
Doug DeGroot
Gary Lindstrom
Editors
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Publication date: Summer 1985
June 14, 1985
1. Concept
This book addresses the topical and rapidly developing
areas of logic, functional, and equational programming, with
special emphasis on their relationships and prospects for
fruitful amalgamation. A distinguished set of researchers
have contributed fourteen articles addressing this field
from a wide variety of perspectives. The book will be
approximately 500 pages, published in hard cover form, with
foreword by the editors and combined index.
2. Table of Contents
2.1. Setting the Stage
- Uday Reddy: On the Relationship between Logic and
Functional Languages (34 pp.).
- J. Darlington, A.J. Field, and H. Pull: The Unification
of Functional and Logic Languages (34 pp.).
2.2. Unification and Functional Programming
- Harvey Abramson: A Prological Definition of HASL, a
Purely Functional Language with Unification Based
Conditional Binding Expressions (57 pp.).
- M. Sato and T. Sakurai: QUTE: a Functional Language
Based on Unification (24 pp.).
- P.A. Subrahmanyam and J.-H. You: FUNLOG: a
Computational Model Integrating Logic Programming and
Functional Programming (42 pp.).
2.3. Symmetric Combinations
- R. Barbuti, M. Bellia, G. Levi, and M. Martelli:
LEAF: a Language which Integrates Logic, Equations and
Functions (33 pp.).
- Shimon Cohen: The APPLOG Language (38 pp.).
2.4. Programming with Equality
- Wm. Kornfeld: Equality for Prolog (15 pp.).
- Joseph Goguen and Jose Meseguer: EQLOG: Equality,
Types, and Generic Modules for Logic Programming (69 pp).
- Y. Malachi, Z. Manna and R. Waldinger: TABLOG: a New
Approach to Logic Programming (30 pp.).
2.5. Augmented Unification
- Robert G. Bandes (deceased): Constraining-Unification
and the Programming Language Unicorn (14 pp.).
- Ken Kahn: Uniform -- A Language Based upon Unification
which Unfies (much of) Lisp, Prolog, and Act 1 (28 pp.).
2.6. Semantic Foundations
- Joxan Jaffar, Jean-Louis Lassez and Michael J. Maher:
A Logic Programming Language Scheme (27 pp.).
- Gert Smolka: Fresh: A Higher-Order Language with
Unification and Multiple Results (56 pp.).
------------------------------
Date: Mon 24 Jun 85 16:03:14-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Reply-to: davies@csli
Subject: Seminar - A Situational Theory of Analogy (CSLI)
"A Situational Theory of Analogy"
Todd Davies
Conference Room, Ventura Hall
CSLI, Stanford University
Monday, July 1, 1985
1:15 p.m.
Analogy in logic is generally given the form:
P(A)&Q(A)
and P(B) are premises
---------
therefore Q(B) can be concluded,
where P is a property or set of properties held by the analogous
situation A in common with the present situation B, and where Q is a
property which is initially held to be true of A. The question is:
What justifies the conclusion? Sometimes the conclusion is clearly
bogus, but for other pairs of situations and properties it seems quite
plausible. I will give examples of both intuitively good and
intuitively bad analogies as a way to argue that theories of analogy
hitherto proposed are inadequate, and that the rationale for analogy
which has been assumed for most early work on analogy in AI -- namely,
that the inference is good if and only if the situations being
compared are similar enough -- is based on a mistake. I will also
point to traditional logic's inadequacies as a formal language for
analogy and develop a theory which incorporates ideas from (and finds
its easiest expression in) the theory of situations of Barwise and
Perry. The theory suggests a general means by which computers can
infer conclusions about problems which have analogues for which the
solution is known, when failing to inspect the analogue would make
such an inference impossible.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 24 Jun 85 15:16:42-PDT
From: Alison Grant <GRANT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Implementing Dempster's Rule (SU)
SPECIAL MEDICAL INFORMATION SCIENCES COLLOQUIUM
Tuesday, June 25, 1985
3:00 - 4:00 P.M.
Room M-112, Stanford University Medical Center
Speaker: Professor Glenn Shafer
University of Kansas
Title: IMPLEMENTING DEMPSTER'S RULE FOR HIERARCHICAL EVIDENCE
Abstract: Gordon and Shortliffe have asked whether the computational
complexity of Dempster's rule makes it impossible to combine belief
functions based on evidence for and against hypotheses that can be arranged
in a hierarchical or tree-like structure. In this talk I show that the
special features of hierarchical evidence make it possible to compute
Dempster's rule in linear time. The actual computations are quite
straightforward, but they depend on a delicate understanding of the
interactions of evidence.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 85 10:29:34 edt
From: Alan Gunderson <asg0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Call For Papers-2nd ACM N.E. Reg. Conf. -- AI Track
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL ACM NORTHEAST REGIONAL CONFERENCE
Integrating the Information Workplace:
the Key to Productivity
28-30 October 1985
Sheraton-Tara Hotel
Framingham, Mass.
and
The Computer Museum
Boston, Mass.
The conference sessions are grouped into tracks corresponding to major
areas of interest in the computer field. Papers are solicited for the
Conference's Artificial Intelligence Track. The Track's program will
emphasize "real world" approaches and applications of A. I.
Topics of interest include:
- Expert Systems
- Natural Language
- Man-Machine Interface
- Tools/Environments
- A. I. Hardware
- Robotics and Vision
Submit papers by: July 22, 1985
Please send three copies of your paper to:
Dr. David S. Prerau
Track Chairman
Artificial Intelligence Track
ACM Northeast Regional Conference
GTE Laboratories Inc.
40 Sylvan Road
Waltham MA 02254
For additional information on the Conference, write:
ACM Northeast Regional Conference
P.O. Box 499
Sharon MA 02067
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂30-Jun-85 2302 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #84
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jun 85 23:01:52 PDT
Date: Sun 30 Jun 1985 21:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #84
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 1 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 84
Today's Topics:
Queries - Expert System Validation & LISP Productivity,
Psychology - Predation/Cooperation & Common Sense,
Business - TI and Sperry Join Forces,
Games - Chess Programs and Cheating,
Seminars - Learning in Expert Systems (Rutgers) &
How to Clear a Block (SRI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 85 01:58:21 edt
From: Walter Maner <maner%bgsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Expert System Validation
I would appreciate pointers to research dealing with answers to questions about
expert system bugs, e.g.,
How can expert-system advice be validated?
Are there failure modes specific to expert systems?
What classes of error can be prevented by consistency enforcers?
I am primarily interested in how these answers would apply to very large
rule-based systems which have evolved under multiple authorship.
Walter Maner
CSNet maner@bgsuvax
UseNet ...cbosgd!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!maner
SnailMail Department of Computer Scinece
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 85 13:02 CDT
From: Patrick←Duff <pduff%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: requested: papers concerning LISP programmer man-hours
I am trying to locate articles which discuss the differences between LISP
and non-AI languages in terms of the time and effort required to create
prototype systems, to make additions or revisions to a design after much of
the programming is completed, total programming time from start to finish,
etc.. My opinion is that in general, it takes fewer man-hours to create a
LISP program than to create a program to do the same task using languages
such as Ada, Pascal, FORTRAN, or an assembly language. Note that I am
*not* claiming that the program will also be "better", more efficient, or
faster--just that most relatively large programs will take less time to
write in LISP. I have been asked to come up with justification for using
LISP based upon the total man-hours required. Does anyone know of a paper
which would support or undercut my opinion? Has there been a convincing
demonstration or test of the power of LISP (and its powerful programming
environment) versus more traditional languages?
regards, Patrick
Patrick S. Duff, ***CR 5621*** pduff.ti-eg@csnet-relay
5049 Walker Dr. #91103 214/480-1659 (work)
The Colony, TX 75056-1120 214/370-5363 (home)
(a suburb of Dallas, TX)
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 29 Jun 1985 22:22-EST
From: munnari!psych.uq.oz!ross@seismo
Subject: Predation/Cooperation (AIL v3 #78)
David West (AIL v3 #82) mentioned the work of Robert Axelrod on the
evolution of cooperation. Another good summary of Axelrod's work can
be found in Douglas Hofstadter's Metamagical Themas column in Scientific
American, May 1983, v248 #5, pp 14-20.
UUCP: {decvax,vax135,eagle,pesnta}!mulga!psych.uq.oz!ross
ARPA: ross%psych.uq.oz@seismo.arpa
CSNET: ross@psych.uq.oz
ACSnet: ross@psych.uq.oz
Mail: Ross Gayler Phone: +61 7 224 7060
Division of Research & Planning
Queensland Department of Health
GPO Box 48
Brisbane 4001
AUSTRALIA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 85 14:08:05 pdt
From: Evan C. Evans <evans%cod@Nosc>
Subject: Common Sense
Common sense = conclusions reached thru the processes of
natural reasoning (or behaviors resulting from such). I borrow
heavily from Julian Jaynes, The Origin of Consciousness in the
Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Natural reasoning is neither
conscious nor rigorous in the sense of formal logic. For in-
stance, upon observing a piece of wood floating on a given pond
one will conclude directly that ANOTHER piece of wood will float
on ANOTHER pond. This is sometimes called reasoning from partic-
ulars. More simply, it's expectation based on subliminal gen-
eralization. A baby quickly concludes that objects will fall
without being AWARE of that conclusion. We're constantly ex-
ercising natural reasoning to reach conclusions about others'
feelings or motives based on their expressions or actions. Such
reasoning was early recognized as unconscious & called automatic
inference or COMMON SENSE, see John Steward Mill or James Sully.
Pu's elaboration on Pratt stands, but it is well to
remember that natural reasoning is usually unconscious & does not
necessarily proceed by logical means. In fact, automatic infer-
ence sometimes achieves correct conclusions by demonstrably il-
logical means.
evans@nosc-cc
------------------------------
Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 15:54:15-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: news: TI and SPERRY join forces to sell AI
[ from Austin American Statesman - June 26, 1985 ]
TI captures computer deal with Sperry
=====================================
(Kirk Ladendorf - Statesman staff) - TI has landed what it calls its biggest
ever sales contract in the still-infant artificial intelligence industry - a
three-year, $42 million deal to supply computers and related equipment to
Sperry Corp.
Sperry, one of the largest computer makers with $5.7 billion in sales last
year, plans a large-scale campaign to develop specialized, salable uses for the
TI machine, which Sperry will call the Knowledge Workstation.
For TI the contract gives credibility that its well-regarded artificial
intelligence system, called Explorer, is more than just an esoteric product
with limited sales potential.
.....
Sperry will combine the TI machine with a software system called the Knowledge
Engineering Environment software developed by Intellicorp of Menlo Park, Calif.
Intellicorp software is regarded as a very sophisticated tool for building
specialized AI-programs.
The new system can be used to create so-called "expert systems" which ...
Such programs have been used on a demonstration basis to perform such tasks as
the running of an electrical power-plant and experimental weather forecasting.
Sperry's 26 specialized applications programs will be aimed at areas that have
been difficult to serve with traditional computers. Those areas include
software development; testing and debugging; navigation; communications sognal
processing; CAD/CAM; and scheduling and resource allocation.
Sperry chose TI over 2 principal competitors in the field, Symbolics and Lisp
Machine Inc, because TI "has the best AI hardware available," a Sperry
spokesman said.
.....
Sales of AI Lisp-machines totaled only about $85 million last year, but Sperry
projects the AI market will mushroom to more than $4 billion by 1990.
.....
TI has announced no major additions to its 3,000 person Austin staff because of
the new contract, but ... it has already begun to build the staff it needs to
support the Explorer and the Business Pro.
TI is already at work developing new features for the Explorer. They include
developing computer communications links so that the AI machine can interact
with Sperry and other IBM-compatible mainframes.
....
------------------------------
Date: Fri 21 Jun 85 21:44:18-EDT
From: Andrew M. Liao <WESALUM.A-LIAO-85@KLA.WESLYN>
Reply-to: LIAO%Weslyn.Bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Chess, Programs And Cheating
A Consideration Of "Do Computers Cheat At Chess?"
I've been giving some thought to the question, "Do computers
actually cheat at chess?". To start, I'm going to assume that
what is at issue in the first objection is a chess program's use
of a game tree whose nodes are representations of
potential board/piece/move configurations. I think the
objection that computers cheat because they use "external
boards" (albeit represented internally) can be answered by
saying, "No - there is no cheating involved because humans 'look
ahead' in some way and since no physical external boards are
allowed, the only way to 'look ahead' is to represent an
'image' of potential board positions in one's mind [though in
a real limited way]. But isn't this just what a program does -
only better?" I think that, in some sense, the argument that
programs cheat at chess by virtue of having "internally
represented 'external boards'" is just wrong. What a program
tries to do on one aspect is to simulate what is going on
inside a person's mind and, in a limited sense, this is
actually achieved (albeit by brute force game trees).
The second objection concerns the problems of "moves-made-
by-reference". The objection, if I understand it correctly,
is that (1) one cannot refer to moves that have been pre-
recorded for the player's use during a match and that (2) such
moves are encoded into a program (we disallow an external
database file of moves since it is, in some way, a set of moves
that have been pre-recorded for future use), and without these
encoded moves, a program does not know what opening
move(s)/strategy(ies) is optimal. Presumably, the reason for this
rule is to force a player to rely on his experience and no one
else's (i.e. no outside help) and at the same time, prevent any
player being put at an unfair disadvantage. But I think it
cannot be denied that encoding any move into a chess program is
tantamount to making the program dependent upon the author's
experience and not its own - a clear violation of the spirit of
the rule. The question remains - Is it cheating? I am of the
opinion that such a program is cheating on the basis that the
program cannot decide during the opening of the game what
strategy is optimal for it and hence must rely on outside help,
in the form of stored data, given to it by its author.
Although I feel the first objection is easily answered, I am
still not happy with my reply to the second, although my
intuition tells me that my reply to the second objection is, at
least in spirit, on the right track. The motivation for my second
reply is due (in great part) to J.R. Searle's conception of the
Background which directly relates to the problem of "experience"
and the like.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 26 Jun 85 09:58:03-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Chess, Programs And Cheating
Reply to Andrew Liao:
When I open with a king pawn, I am relying on the experience and
knowledge of others -- that doesn't seem to be cheating. I prefer
an interpretation of the rules as "you run what you brung" -- namely
that you cannot access external help >>during the match<<. I do
admit that stored book openings seem questionable (although chess
masters certainly memorize such material), but to say that a
computer's superior memory gives it an advantage is no more damning
than to say that its superior speed gives it an advantage. In just
a few years it will be obvious that computers are inherently better
"chess machines" than people are, and people will stop quibbling
about handicaping the computer in one way or another to make
the contest "fair".
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jun 85 11:07:37 EDT
From: PRASAD@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Learning in Expert Systems (Rutgers)
LEARNING IN SECOND GENERATION EXPERT SYSTEMS
Walter Van De Velde
AI Laboratory, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
This talk discusses a learning mechanism for second generation expert
systems: rule-learning by progressive refinement. Second generation expert
systems not only use heuristic rules, but also have a model of the domain of
expertise so that deeper reasoning is possible whenever the rules are
deficient. A learning component is described that abstracts new rules out of
the results of deep reasoning. Gradually, the rule set is refined and
restructured so that the expert system can solve more problems in a more
effecient way. The approach is illustrated with concrete implemented
examples.
Date: Friday, June 28, 1985
Time: 11 AM
Place: Hill Center, Room 423
------------------------------
Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 12:21:03-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - How to Clear a Block (SRI)
"HOW TO CLEAR A BLOCK"
or
Unsolved Problems in the Blocks World #17
Richard Waldinger -- SRI AI Center
11:00 am, WEDNESDAY, July 3
Room EJ232, SRI International
ABSTRACT:
Apparently simple problems in the blocks world get more complicated
when we look at them closely. Take the problem of clearing a block.
In general, it requires forming conditionals and loops and even
strengthening the specifications; no planner has solved it.
We consider how such problems might be approached by bending a
theorem prover a little bit.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Jul-85 1150 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #85
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jul 85 11:49:48 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jul 1985 09:33-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #85
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 2 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 85
Today's Topics:
Query - Othello,
Games - Hitech Chess Performance & Computer Cheating,
Psychology & AI Techniques - Contextual Reasoning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Jul 85 17:36:29 EDT
From: Kai-Fu.Lee@CMU-CS-SPEECH2
Subject: Othello (the game)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am leading a PGSS project (for high school students) that will implement
an Othello program in Common Lisp on the IBM PC. Any program source,
clever tricks, and good evaluation functions that you're willing to share
will be appreciated.
/Kai-Fu
------------------------------
Date: 30 June 1985 2144-EDT
From: Hans Berliner@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Computer Chess (Hitech)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CLOSE BUT NO BIG CIGAR is an appropriate summary of the performance
of Hitech in this week-ends Pittsburgh Summer Classic. In a field
of 24, including 3 master and several experts, Hitech won its
first three games against an 1833 (Class A), 1802 (Class A), and
2256 (Master) before losing in the final round to another Master
(2263) who won the tournament. This was Hitech's first win against
a Master. Its overall performance in two tournaments is
6 1/2 - 2 1/2; better than 70 percent. As it was, it finished
2nd in the tournament. Its provisional rating is now around
2100; middle expert.
We will hold a show and tell on Friday at a time and place to
be announced.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Jul 85 10:29:54 EDT
From: Murray.Campbell@CMU-CS-K
Subject: More on Hitech Result
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The 3-1 result Hitech achieved in the chess tournament this
past weekend was a performance rating of about 2300, well above
the master standard of 2200. And it should be noted that the
last round loss was to Kimball Nedved.
After 2 tournaments, Hitech's performance rating is approximately
2210.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 85 22:37:20 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Cheating.
Computer programs are the consequences of people, like novels, as
ripples are to rocks thrown in a smooth pond. Hence, it is the authors
of these programs who are the cheaters!
In fact, computer chess is simply another iteration, as is speed
chess, double bug-house, and probably several other versions I have not
heard of. Consenting adults can do what every they want as long as they don't
bill the government. So, questions as to whether computers are cheating
are really questions about whether a programmer who writes a program
and watches it play is on the same footing as the live opponent. Practically
I think he is, philosophically I think not.
If the chess program is going to take more responsibility for its
actions, I think it should have to 'learn' as you or I (are all of you,
if expert systems, *learning* ones?). Of course, the author of the
program still is partly responsible for how efficiently the program
learns, and in finite time how good his creation will become.
So, to apply the principles of recursion, let the program have
to learn how to learn. At this level it is easy to see that skilled
opponenets will cause a 2nd-loop learner to learn faster; hence the
product is less a function of its original architecture and more a function
of its environment -- which I guess we can (by default) attribute to the
program (not its creator). At his point, if we put it in a closet and let
it vegetate, it probably will not be very good at chess. This is certainly
true in the limit as n (as in nth-loop learner) approaches infinity.
It is easy to see that man is effectively an n-loop learner
which cannot comprehend an o-loop learner for o>n. To be precise
I should have said a *single* man. Groups of people, similarly and
perhaps even including women, can function at some level p>n. Hence
it should be possible for teams of people to beat individuals (and
generally is). I see no reason for p or q to be bounded (where q
is the class of learning evidenced by machine), and the problem has
been reduced to a point: that is that man is just a transient form
of intelligence which cannot be quantified (by himself anyway), only
*measured*.
Chess in its various forms does so (well you think when you
win, poorly when you lose): and in its various forms is *fun*. Just
remember, computer chess wouldn't be around if several smart people
were not whipped at the game through careless errors by people so
dumb that 'even a computer could beat them' or 'except for one
careless mistake...'
RKJ.
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 29 Jun 1985 22:16-EST
From: munnari!psych.uq.oz!ross@seismo
Subject: Use of context to allow reasoning about time
David Sherman (AIList V3 #71: Suggestions needed for tax rules)
writes:
> I am trying to design a system which will apply the rules of the Income
> Tax Act (Canada) to a set of facts and transactions in the area of
> corporate reorganizations.
> ...
> The passage of time is very important: steps happen in a particular
> sequence, and the "state of the world" at the moment a step is taken is
> crucial to determining the tax effects.
> ...
> The problem I have ... is how to deal with ←time←.
The following is just a suggestion. I have not actually tried it and I
am not familiar enough with the literature to even say whether it is an
old idea. However, it seems plausible to me and might be a useful
approach.
Time is not directly perceptible. It is perceived indirectly by noting
that the environment (physical and cognitive) changes. There is a lot
of survival advantage to believing in causality so the brain likes to
attribute a cause to every change and when there is nothing obvious
around to attribute causality to, we invoke the concept of time. As
Dave Sherman pointed out, time is bound up with changes in the "state
of the world", what I just called the environment. Lets shift into
psychology and call it the context.
Context plays a very important role in psychology. All the human and
animal decision processes that I know of are context dependent.
Consider a classic and simple memory experiment. The subject is given a
list of nonsense words to memorise and is then given a new list of
words some of which are from the memorised list to judge as old or
new. This process may be repeated a dozen or more times in a session.
How does the subject restrict his definition of old/new to the list he
has just seen?
It seems that the words are not remembered as individual and isolated
objects but are remembered along with associative links to the context,
where the context contains everything else that happened
simultaneously. So, when memorising words in a list the subject links
the words to each other, any extraneous noises or thoughts, even small
changes in posture and discomfort. It has been shown that recognition
and recall are greatly enhanced by reconstruction of the context in
which memorisation occurred.
Context is also evolutionarily important. It obviously enhances
survival to be able to form associative links between the centre of
attention and possibly anything else. The nasty thing about many
environments is that you can't tell before hand what the important
associations are going to be.
Lets look at how context might be applicable to AI. In MYCIN, data are
stored as <object,attribute,value> triples. This is also a reasonable
way to do things in PROLOG because it allows the data to be treated in
a more uniform fashion than having each attribute (for instance) as a
separate predicate. The objects in MYCIN are related by a context
tree, but this has nothing to do with the sense in which I am using
"context" so I will continue to call them objects. An object is a more
or less permanent association of a bundle of attributes. That is, there
is some constancy about it, which is why we can recognize it as an
object (although not necessarily a physical one). By contrast the
context is an amorphous mass of other things which happen to be going
on at the same moment. There is little constancy to the structure of
the context.
The MYCIN triple cannot be related to it's context other than through
the values of its object, attribute or value fields. There is no
explicit way of showing that a fact was true only for a certain
interval of time or only when a particular goal was active. I propose
that the triple be extended to explicitly represent the context so it
becomes <context,object,attribute,value>. The values of the context
variable would normally be unique identifiers to allow a particular
context to be referred to. The context does not actually store any
information, but many facts may be tied to that context. A context is a
snapshot of the facts at some stage in the computation.
Obviously there needs to be a lot of thought put into when to take the
snapshots and the appropriate strategy will vary from application to
application. The context will contain the facts being reasoned about
at the time of the snapshot (probably when they had been whipped into
consistency) but would also contain other relevant information such as
goal states and clock times. For Dave Sherman's application there
would probably be a new context snapshot when each transaction occurred
(e.g. transfer of property in exchange for shares). Two additional
facts within the context would be the earliest and latest clock times
for which the context is valid. This would allow reasoning about
changes of state and elapsing of time because the before and after
states are simultaneously present in the fact base along with the clock
times for which they were true.
A couple of other uses of contexts suggest themselves. One is the
possibility of implementing "possible worlds" and answering "what if"
questions. If the system is capable of manipulating contexts it could
duplicate an existing context (but with a new context ID of course),
modify a few of the facts in the new context and then start reasoning
in that context to see what might have happened if things had been a
little different. Another possibility is that it might be useful in
"truth maintenance systems". I have heard of them but not had a chance
to study them. However their references to assumption sets and
dependency directed backtracking sound to me like the idea of tracking
the context, attributing changes in the context to various facts within
the context and then using that information to intelligently manipulate
the context to implement backtracking in a computation.
UUCP: {decvax,vax135,eagle,pesnta}!mulga!psych.uq.oz!ross
ARPA: ross%psych.uq.oz@seismo.arpa
CSNET: ross@psych.uq.oz
ACSnet: ross@psych.uq.oz
Mail: Ross Gayler Phone: +61 7 224 7060
Division of Research & Planning
Queensland Department of Health
GPO Box 48
Brisbane 4001
AUSTRALIA
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Jul-85 0009 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #86
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jul 85 00:09:20 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jul 1985 22:10-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #86
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 3 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 86
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Addresses of Seminar Presenters,
Queries - Statistics of Syntactic Structures & Spatial Reasoning &
UNIVAC 1100 LISP & Symbolics's User Interface,
Expert Systems - Validation,
AI Tools - Interlisp Comments & C vs. LISP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Monday, 1 Jul 1985 20:49-EST
From: munnari!psych.uq.oz!ross@seismo.ARPA
Subject: addresses of seminar presenters
Being from out of town I find it a little difficult to get to most of the
seminars advertised in the AIList. However, there are some I would like a
little more information on by contacting the presenter to get a copy of the
talk or, more likely, a related paper or report.
Unfortunately, most of the seminar announcements give no network address for
the presenter and an inadequately specified postal address. Would it be
possible to exhort seminar hosts to put complete addresses in the announcements
or at least make sure that they ask the presenter for an address so that
others may find out from the host?
-- Ross
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 85 10:26:31 EDT
From: "Ben P. Yuhas" <yuhas@hopkins-eecs-bravo.ARPA>
Subject: Read My Lips
Here at the Sensory Aids Lab, we are beginning to explore
some of the strategies used by lip readers to decode the visual
speech signal. One of the questions we want to answer is to what
degree does syntactic structure influence a sentence's lip read-
ability.
In developing a data base of test sentences on laserdisk,
we began to wonder whether anyone had ever attempted to find
the statistical distribution of syntactic structures in spoken
English. I realize this distribution might vary greatly from
group to group. If there are any computational linguists with
references or thoughts on this matter I would appreciate hearing
from you.
yuhas@hopkins-eecs-bravo
Snailmail: Ben Yuhas
Dept EECS
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD 21218
------------------------------
Date: 2 Jul 85 08:27:00 EDT
From: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: spatial reasoning
Can anyone suggest a good survey article or textbook that covers
AI for spatial reasoning, especially for 3-D? I have in mind
things like, "will this refrigerator fit thru that door", etc.
Thanks for any help.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 85 11:51:36 EDT
From: Marty Hall <hall@hopkins-eecs-bravo.ARPA>
Subject: UNIVAC 1100 Series LISP
I am trying to find where I can find documentation or info on the
Univac 1100 LISP. We are referring to a system that was written in
that dialect, and converting it to Common LISP. However, there are two
functions that appear that are found in neither MACLISP or LISP 1.5
(which this LSP was supposed to be), that we can't find out what they
do. The functions are "AMB" and "STACK". They are used:
(setq <var> (amb (stack <var2>)))
We have called lots of people, including the local Sperry Corp folks,
and no one seems to know. Any suggestions on where to look or who
to call/send to ?
-Marty Hall
hall@hopkins
aplvax!m2lab!hall@maryland
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 85 11:26 EDT
From: susan watkins <chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolics's application user interface
I'm working as a developer at Symbolics, Inc. in Cambridge, Ma.
I would like to get opinions, reactions, problems encountered,
constraints the system s/w imposes, etc. from programmers who have
use the Symbolics s/w to develop a reasonably sized product. e.g. what
problems they have run into trying to use the window system. I'll be at
IJCAI, so I'll more than happy to meet and talk with anyone who is
interested. My mail-stop is chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 1 Jul 85 09:54:22-PDT
From: Bruce Buchanan <BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: validation of expert systems
Ted Shortliffe & I tried to address the issues surrounding evaluation
of expert systems in chapter 30 of RULE-BASED EXPERT SYSTEMS. We
did not specifically talk about what to do in the case of very large
knowledge bases built by multiple experts, but chapter 8 does discuss
some knowledge-base editing facilities that should help.
I would like to know of work on these problems.
B.Buchanan
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jun 1985 1215-PDT (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@Camelot>
Subject: Putting comments in Interlisp programs (flame)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This is
part of an exchange on hacking and software engineering.]
I didn't say that comments are impossible in Interlisp -- merely that it's
painful to put them in.
For the edification of those who have not had the privilege of being
subjected to Interlisp's slavish adherence to the principle that it
should constitute an entire programming environment (as opposed to being
just another programming language living on a general purpose computer
system), one of the concomitant requirements of this philosophy is that all
operations, including editing, be done on Lisp objects. This means that
comments (which are handled by a function called * that does not evaluate
its arguments) are a part of the running program. Thus, extreme care is
required in the placement of comments. For example, the following function
fails:
(DEFINEQ (FOO (LAMBDA (X Y)
(COND ((GREATERP X Y) X) (* Return the maximum value)
(T Y]
because the comment is treated as a clause to the COND. Similarly, a
comment placed as the last form in a function (Interlisp provides an
implicit PROGN in function definitions) will return the first word of the
comment as the value of the function. In fact, because Lisp is largely a
functional language, there are relatively few safe places to put comments.
A further indication of the low repute with which comments are held in
Interlisp is the fact that the common way of displaying a function at
the top level, PP (pretty-print), replaces all comments with the symbol
**COMMENT**. To me, this is backwards -- if anything, the comments should
be given prominence over the Lisp code. Similarly, in the display editor
on Interlisp-D, comments are kept as far away from the executable code
as possible (on the same line) and displayed in a font which is considerably
less readable than that used for non-comments.
This is the basis on which I justify my earlier claim that Interlisp
"discourages" comments, which I consider an undesirable goal.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 11:47:41-PDT
From: Liam Peyton <PEYTON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Interlisp
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
If Interlisp's approach to comments prevents one from inserting mindless
comments like the following:
(DEFINEQ (FOO (LAMBDA (X Y)
(COND ((GREATERP X Y) X) (* Return the maximum value)
(T Y)))))
then it should be praised not criticized. A step by step translation
is not helpful commenting and certainly does not give the comments more
prominence than the actual code. (if anything it reduces the relevance of
comments). A short summary before the cond explaining what the code is
doing is far neater and more useful.
Why would one ever want to have a comment in the last line of a PROG?
(* comment: this is the end of the prog)
This is not to say by any means that Interlisp has the ideal means of
handling comments or that Interlisp doesn't have its problems. It
does, but they are certainly not a basis for rejecting it as a
programming environment.
Some of the things that result from "Interlisp's slavish adherence to
the principle that it should constitute an entire programming environment"
are incremental execution for debugging purposes, sophisticated mouse
and window system with interactions between windows, online text processing,
and online graphics.
A general purpose computer is a computer that can do anything painfully.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 85 21:46:21 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: C vs LISP
We have continuing debates about that subject all the time,
and I think for us we have come to the conclusion (for now) that
C is better than LISP.
Currently we have MS-DOS 2.0, XLISP 2.0, and Lattice C
compiler version 2.0. A new man (fish@aerospace) was given
the simple task to write a plotter driver. He did this by
first writing a plot spooler of sorts in assembly language (after
failing miserably in basic). At this point, he was a virgin
programmer, save some fortran programming on large machines.
He then started on another program to help people interactively
develop a 'plotter language' file which his plot spooler could plot.
At this point he was manually generating the plotter language, to
produce vu-graphs (as I said he was *the* new man). Using a copy
of Winston's Lisp text, he set out with XLISP to produce this
translator. After a month or so, his incentive to write an
interactive translator (to get him out of the vu-graph making loop)
dissipated.
About a month ago, he went to NARDAC and attended a 1-day
C tutorial. Then he brought up the C compiler, and now is just
about done. There is no doubt in my mind that he prefers Lattice
C to XLISP.
Before all the LISP people flame let me make a few comments. I
am familliar with both C and XLISP, and have programmed in each. Both
are pretty basic, but in my opinion I would chose XLISP to write the
basic program, and then recode it to C if it was going to be maintained.
During this effort I acted as the trouble shooter, and let me say that
if I was going to supervise a programming team, THEY WOULD USE C. In
fact, from the management level, I think Lisp is only marginally better
than assembly language: perhaps.
By September we should be using PC-AT's with GC-LISP, and the
new Microsoft C compiler. By December we will probably have our
Symbolics, without a C compiler (although the salesman evidently has
one to sell which ought to say something). So shoot me a note about
Jan and I may have changed my tune.
To conclude, if you have a one man project, and the lisp environment
you plan to use has a lot of functionality you need in you application
built-in, lisp can probably be justified. The source libraries now
available in C (or Pascal, real soon now for Ada) will be increasing
difficult to beat, especially in the context to C interpreters and
incremental compilers, and the fact C runs on *everything*. If you
are starting from scratch -- common Lisp -- (even XLISP is extended to
support object oriented programming) ***good luck***!
Richard Jennings
AFSCF/XRP
Sunnyvale ARPA: jennings@aerospace
->standard disclaimer applies<-
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Jul-85 1607 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #87
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jul 85 16:06:59 PDT
Date: Sat 6 Jul 1985 14:47-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #87
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 6 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 87
Today's Topics:
AI Scholarship - NMSU,
Seminars - Logic Programming with Functions (BBN) &
Shape from Function (GE),
Conferences - Expert Systems Application in Business &
Intelligent Simulation Environments &
North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 85 11:25:17 mdt
From: yorick%nmsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI Scholarship - NMSU
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOLARSHIPS:
New Mexico State University, Computing Research Laboratory, invites
applications from excellent graduate and
undergraduate students interested in
Artificial Intelligence, including Expert Systems, Natural Language,
Cognitive Modelling, Intelligent User-Interfaces, Vision and
Robotics, and interdisciplinary projects that integrate these
fundamental aspects of computing science. The CRL offers
scholarships of up to $12,000 for graduates and $3,000 for
undergraduates per year including tuition and cash.
Successful applicants will additionally be employed for up to
20 hours per week during the academic year, and 40 hours per week
during the summertime on CRL sponsored research programs.
Applications should include a letter indicating your intent to be
considered for one of these scholarships, a statement of your
experiences, a statement of your interests and future goals,
transcripts of all undergraduate work, and names and addresses of
3 references who know your abilities in computing science.
Please send applications, by 20 July 1985 to: Dr. Yorick
Wilks, Director, Computing Research Laboratory, Box 3CRL,
New Mexico State University,
Las Cruces, NM 88003.
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jun 1985 16:11-EDT
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Logic Programming with Functions (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Labs SDP AI Seminar
Speaker: Uday S. Reddy
University of Utah
Title: Logic Programming with Functions
Time: Friday, July 19th, 10:30 a.m.
Place: 3rd Floor Large Conference Room
10 Moulton Street, Cambridge
While functional programming has been with us for more than two
decades, logic programming is a relatively new programming
language concept. A comparison of the two styles shows that
functional programming is done by rewriting expressions to
semantically equivalent ones, while, on the other hand, logic
programming is done by solving formulas for values of their free
variables. Thus, logic programming provides significantly more
expressive power than functional programming.
However, it is possible to perform logic programming in
functional languages. Whereas Horn-clause logic languages use
resolution as the operational mechanism, functional logic
languages use a mechanism called "narrowing". Given an
expression with free variables, the narrowing mechanism answers
the question "for what values of the variables does the
expression reduce to a value?". Narrowing is a generalization of
both rewriting and resolution and so makes it possible to use
both the styles of programming in a unified framework.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 85 14:14 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Shape from Function (GE)
SHAPE FROM FUNCTION VIA MOTION ANALYSIS
with Application to the Automatic Design of
Orienting Devices for Vibratory Part Feeders
Dr. Tomas Lozano-Perez
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Cambridge, MA. 02139
Wednesday, August 14, 1985, 11:00 a.m.
General Motors Research Laboratories
Computer Science Department
Warren, Michigan 48090-9057
This talk explores the premise that the function of many devices can be
characterized by how they interact with other objects. I suggest a
representation of function of these devices in terms of motion constraints.
These motion constraints are expressed as a diagram in configuration space.
Combinations of these diagrams serve both in describing a device's function
and in designing devices with specified behavior.
This leads to a view of design as an inverse of the motion planning problem
in robotics. In both cases we know the shape of the moving part. In
motion planning, we are given the obstacles and we must find a legal path
between the specified origin and distination. In this view of design,
however, we are given the desired motion (actually a range of possible
motions) and are asked to find a legal shape of the obstacle, that is, the
device.
I illustrate this approach to design with a case study of mechanical part
feeders, a class of real devices with an interesting and direct
relationship between shape and function.
Dr. Lozano-Perez has authored technical articles in the areas of motion
planning, robot programming, and model-based object recognition. He has
been affiliated with the M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory since
1973.
------------------------------
Date: 07/05/85 15:18:19 MEZ
From: Christian Bader <BADER%DB0TUI11.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Expert systems application in business
A workshop on Expert Systems in business will be held November
26/27 1985 in Berlin (West Germany) as a part of the BIG-TECH fair.
We are interested to know about business applications
of Expert Systems both in Germany and elsewhere. Please let me know
if you have an expert systems application that you could present
at the workshop.
Please contact
Christian Bader
Technische Universitaet Berlin
Sekr. FR 6-7
Franklinstr. 28/29
D-1000 Berlin 10 West Germany
phone: (49-30)-314-4903
or (49-30)-314-73260 (leave message)
Network address: ARPA : BADER%DB0TUI11.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
BITNET : BADER at DB0TUI11
CSNET : BADER%DB0TUI11.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 85 16:03 CST
From: Adelsberger%tamu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference - Intelligent Simulation Environments
CALL FOR: PAPERS, PANELISTS, SESSION COORDINATORS
INTELLIGENT SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS,
1986 SCS MULTICONFERENCE, JAN 23 - 25, SAN DIEGO
The Society for Computer Simulatiion is sponsoring a
multiconference January 23-25, 1985 in San Diego, California.
Solicited are papers in the areas of:
* User friendly simulation environments.
* Knowledge based simulation sytems.
* Artificial intelligence applied to simulation
environments.
Papers of special interest might describe models that (1)
have many symbolic processes, (2) use heuristic search, (3) have
a command structure separate from knowledge domain, (4) have
expertise built into the model so that decisions by the user
would be minimized.
AI papers dealing with subjects that are not necessarily
directly simulation related but which have a strong time
dimension or concern would also be welcome.
We are also interested in panel discussions or sessions
coordination on a particular aspect of the subject.
Detailed abstracts (300 words) of proposed papers and special
sessions should be sent direct to the program chairmen not later
than July 21, 85. Camera ready copies of accepted papers would
be due October 15, 1985.
Heimo H. Adelsberger
Program Chairmen
Texas A&M University
Computer Science Department
College Station, TX - 77843
Phone: (409) 845-0298
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 85 15:31:56 cdt
From: Don Kraft <kraft%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Call for Papers -- NAFIPS Meeting
CALL FOR PAPERS
North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS)
International Meeting
Monteleone Hotel New Orleans, Louisiana
(In the Heart of the French Quarter)
June 1-4, 1986
Papers on all fuzzy topics are encouraged, and wide
international participation is expected.
Deadlines
Notice of intent with a title and abstract 9/1/85
Completed paper (3 copies) 10/15/85
Notification of acceptance 1/15/86
Camera-ready copy due 3/15/86
Proceedings will be distributed during Conference
registration.
Send all abstracts and papers to:
NAFIPS86
Department of Computer Science
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306
Abraham Kandel and Wyllis Bandler, Program Committee Co-Chairs
Fred Petry and Donald H. Kraft, General Meeting Co-Chairs
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Jul-85 1241 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #88
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jul 85 12:40:45 PDT
Date: Sun 7 Jul 1985 10:51-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #88
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 7 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 88
Today's Topics:
Queries - Generators in Lisp & Expert Systems for Configuration &
Natural Language Processing Software,
Robotics - Spatial Reasoning,
Games - Learning in Chess Programs,
Publications - New IEEE AI Journal,
Review - AI Report Vol 2 No 5 & AI Report Vol 2 No 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Jul 1985 14:17-EDT
From: Conal.Elliott@CMU-CS-CAD.ARPA
Subject: Generators in Lisp query
I'd like to implement a simple generator-language (i.e. functions with
backtracking and able to return more than once) on top of Common Lisp. It
doesn't need to be anything fancy, as it will be for my own use. I would
appreciate any hints or pointers.
Conal Elliott
conal@cmu-cs-cad.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Tue 2 Jul 85 22:29:55-PDT
From: Marty Tenenbaum <Tenenbaum@SRI-KL>
Subject: Expert Systems for Configuration
Does anyone know where I might acquire an expert system for solving
configuration problems (ala R1/XCON) on a PC. I am interested in such
a system, more as a tutorial aid than as a serious application.
Jay M. Tenenbaum, Schlumberger Palo Alto Research.
Please respond to Tenenbaum@SRI-KL, or call me at 415-496-4699.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 85 12:24:15 cdt
From: Mark Turner <mark%gargoyle.uchicago.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: natural language processing
TIRA at U Chicago is looking for a robust Natural Language
Processing system - actual code - it can obtain and install
on a 4.2BSD Unix system.
To elaborate: Many faculty members from Departments of
Library Science, English, Linguistics, Classics, Romance
Languages, etc. at U Chicago who currently work in searching and
processing natural language text data bases have now formed the
Textual Information Retrieval and Analysis (TIRA) research
center. The Department of Computer Science at U Chicago is
only a few years old, and although I understand that it would
be interested in hiring an Assistant Professor in AI/NLP,
it has not yet done so. Consequently, we lack a faculty
member who might focus his energies on installing and tuning
a Natural Language Processing System. Several of us are familiar
with NLP, though, and we have some programmers on staff.
So I am beginning to wonder how we might obtain, for academic
research purposes, the code and documentation for someone
else's NLP system, and install it here with relative ease,
to help us with semantic, grammatical, thematic, and morphological
parsing, in various Indo-European languages, principally
English, French, Greek, Latin, Italian, German, and Spanish.
I would appreciate your responses.
Mark Turner
Department of English
U Chicago 60637
>ihnp4!gargoyle!puck!mark
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1985 14:14 EDT
From: Juliana Kraft <ROBOT.JULIE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Spatial Reasoning Query
From: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini at nbs-vms>
Can anyone suggest a good survey article or textbook that covers
AI for spatial reasoning, especially for 3-D? I have in mind
things like, "will this refrigerator fit thru that door", etc.
Thanks for any help.
For 3D you must consider 6 degrees of freedom (3 translational and 3
rotational). I recommend "Motion Planning with Six Degrees of
Freedom," by Bruce Donald, (261 pp), MIT AI-TR 791, available from
Publications Office
MIT AI Laboratory
Room NE43-818
545 Tech Square
Cambridge, MA 02139
(617) 253-6773.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 85 17:08 pst
From: "furth john%d.mfenet"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: The Best Chess Program
I would like to add something to Richard Jennings' words on the
responsibility of the author of a chess program for its performance.
The most rigid chess program will play chess only as its author
would at his/her best. The program that learns has the possibility of
doing better. Suppose the author wrote his/her program without any
instructions for playing chess but only for learning how to play
chess. Then the program could learn and execute maneuvers that
the author was unaware of. Now this program learns only as
its author learns at his/her best. We may continue this iterative
procedure to some arbitrary degree and declare the author's taint
to be negligible. In the process, however, we will probably have
accumulated some large overhead. The time spent passing information
up and down this ladder of learners and the storage required at each
rung of the ladder will make the program unusable.
To attain an independent and useful intelligence, the learner
must be able to discard signifigant portions of the means by which
it has arrived at its present level of ability. The original hub
of its actions must fall away and a new one be generated.
So the adult forgets the involvements of childhood and the state
the cares of its early days. With whatever vestiges remain, the
organism must take on a whole new orientation to meet new
needs with a closer approach to the optimum. It is better to
forget the past than to live there. The best chess program
will forget most everything its author ever told it to do.
John Furth
------------------------------
Date: Sun 7 Jul 1985 11:11-PDT
From: Laws@SRI-AI
Subject: New IEEE AI Journal
From IEEE Computer, July 1985, p. 101:
IEEE Expert is the newest addition to the Computer Society's list
of publications, which already includes five magazines. The Computer
Society Board of Governors gave its approval to the new quarterly at
its May 10 meeting ...
David Pessel of Standard Oil of Ohio will serve as acting editor-in-
chief and will have the responsibility of preparing for the initial
publication in the first quarter of 1986. The magazine is expected
to treat such AI areas as knowledge engineering, natural language
processing, expert systems, and conceptual modeling. ...
------------------------------
Date: 4 Jul 1985 10:46-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI Report Vol 2 No 5 Summary
Report on Stanford University AI efforts including Knowledge Systems
Laboratory (VLSI design, MOLGEN, interpretation of nuclear magnetic
resonance data on proteins, computer-aided teaching of diagnostic
reasoning, ONCOCIN for administration of medical treatment protocols,
lymph node pathology diagnosis system, robotic manufacturing strategy
development, financial resource planning). Basic AI research includes
non-monotonic reasoning, robotics, mechanical construction of computer
programs, design, description and interaction with computer systems,
database retrieval research. RADIX [formerly RX] is a project which will
use computer programs to examine over 50,000 patient years of accumulated
medical data.
Report on ESPRIT and ALVEY, AI efforts of the European Economic
Community and England respectively:
The following are a list of some books mentioned in the report:
Artificial Intelligence Applications for Manufacturing
Artificial Intellgience Applications for Business Management
The 1985 Handbook of Manufacturing Software (all three by SEAI Techical
Publications)
Machine Vision -- A Summary and Forecast (Tech Tran Corporation)
A Practical Guide to Designing Expert Systems by S. Weiss and C.
Culikowski
William Gevarter: Artificial Intelligence, Expert System, Computer
Vision and Natural Language Processing
William Gevarter: Artificial Intelligence and Robotics: Five Overviews
Mitsubishi Research Institute has inititated a multi-client AI research
project
Report of work done by the Knowledge Information Research Institute of
Computer Services Corporation of Japan
Report on AI at Ohio State: medical systems which infer data from broad
data descriptions and concepts including a red cell antibody
identification system, a system for diagnosing fuel problems in
autombile engines, an air cylinder design system.
Report on Imperial Chemical Industries which has developed an expert
systems shell called Savoir, an agricultural advisor system.
Infologics of Stockholm has announced a PROLOG for IBM-PC costing
295 dollars.
Automata Design Associates has five versions of PROLOG available
for IBM-PC (public domain, educational $29.95, FS Prolog, $49.95,
Virtual memory prolog $99.95 and Large virtual model prolog $300).
TOPSI is selling an OPS-5 for CP/M and MS-DOS for $400.00.
The Automated Reasoning Corporation is selling a fault-diagnosis system.
Odetics (the maker of six legged robots) has announced the
development of an AI center.
Expert Technologies has been developed to sell AI technology to
printers and publishers.
Report on new shareholders of NCC.
Lynn Conway has left Darpa to join University of Michigan
------------------------------
Date: 4 Jul 1985 10:18-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: The AI Report Vol 2 No 7 Summary
The Artificial Intelligence Report July 1985 Volume 2 No 7
Nippon Telephone and Telegraph
Report on Nippon Telephone and Telegraph, the Japanese AT&T, (NTT)
includes general description of company and its computer related R&D
efforts. In AI, they are working on a Japanese-English translation
effort, medical expert systems, systems to recognize handwritten
Japanese and Chinese characters, robotics, speech recognition and
speech synthesis. They have also developed a Lisp machine using the
language Tao, which is a blending of LISP, PROLOG and Smalltalk. It
40 to 50 times faster than ZetaLisp interpreter, 3 times faster than
Smalltalk-80 on the Xerox Dolphin and five times faster than the
DEC-10 Prolog interpreter.
Also Computer Services Corporation (CSK) is completing work on a LISP
machine prototype which will run Prolog, LISP, UNIX and process
Japanese natural language input.
The AI profits
discusses interest by new and old companies in AI. based at a Gartner
group forum. Reports on Lisp machine vendors, Texas Instruments,
Symbolics, Xerox, Lisp Machine Inc (LMI). Symbolics revenues are
expected to top 85 million dollars this year and LMI revenues will top
25 million dollars. They predict that Xerox will introduce a 10,000
dollar low-end AI machine. The Gartner's group of Lisp machine sales in
1990 is over one billion dollars.
Also discusses expert systems. They feel that natural language
understanding will not be as big a seller as expert system tools.
IBM has over 300 researchers pursueing AI objectives.
Reports on new DEC microvax products, management changes at Lisp
Machine Inc, announcement by Radian Corproation of a IBM PC expert
system shell, an apple Macintosh OPS5 interpreter, R&D expenditures
for various companies, a prediction that a billion transistors will
be packed on a single chip.
The Institut fur Entscheidungstheorie und Unternehmesforschung at der
Universitat Karlsruhe in Germany is conducting an international survey
on Expert Systems in business.
They review the following:
The Fourth Technical Conference of the British Computer Society
Speicalist Group on Expert Systems which has been published as
"Research and Development in Expert Systems"
V. Daniel Hunt's "Smart Robots: A Handbook of Intelligent Robotic
Systems"
Eugene Charniak and Drew McDermott's "Introduction to Artificial
Intelligence"
Also report on the Army AI Center which is doing research on systems to
field new equipment to the army.
The following is a list of some government documents on AI that I found
in this report:
An Overview of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, NASA-TM-85836
An Overview of Computer Vision PB83-217554, An Overview of
Computer-Based Natural Language Processing PB83-200832, Overview of
Expert Systems PB83-217562 and Flexible Manufacturing System Handbook
ADA-127927.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Jul-85 1758 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #89
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jul 85 17:57:59 PDT
Date: Sun 7 Jul 1985 16:28-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #89
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 8 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 89
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - Lisp vs. C & Interlisp Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1985 15:30 EDT
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp vs. C
I won't try to take issue with Richard Jennings's views on Lisp vs. C,
except to note that he is only in a position to compare one dialect of
Lisp (XLISP) to one dialect of C on some sort of MS-DOS machine --
presumably a tiny one -- for one particular kind of task with one
particular virgin programmer who had been trained in in a different way
on the two languages. His observations are probably valid for this
case, but I wouldn't draw any sweeping generalizations from this.
Lisp really requires a full-fledged environment in order to be an
attractive language. A lot of people got turned off very badly back in
the bad old days when the Lisp environment was primitive and the address
space of most machines was too small to hold the kinds of features that
we see today on the various Lisp machines. Now we are seeing the same
"turn off" among people whose exposure to Lisp consists only of using
very small Lisps on machines with only, say, 512K bytes of memory. On
such a machine, a language like C (which evolved to fit the PDP-11, a
machine whose address space is even smaller) probably is superior for
getting real work done. This phase will pass just as soon as machines
with adequate virtual memory systems become as common as PC's are today.
-- Scott Fahlman
------------------------------
Date: Wed 3 Jul 85 13:55:02-PDT
From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ~= re: Interlisp comments
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[...] Unfortunately at least once programming system I know of
(Interlisp) actively discourages this by making it painful to put
comments in programs. For this reason alone Interlisp disqualifies
itself as a serious programming environment.
Isn't that a little like saying that Boeing, by having tiny restrooms
disqualifies itself as a serious airplane manufacturer?
I didn't say that comments are impossible in Interlisp -- merely that
it's painful to put them in.
Pain is subjective. For my money, tracking down bogus indentation, missing
semicolons or unbalanced parentheses or misspelled symbols in a
text-editor-oriented language is ever so much more painful than commenting
Interlisp.
All of these problems associated with the syntactic sugar of most
programming languages are non-issues in Interlisp, where the interned
form is edited. For the non-Interlisper it should be explained that
in DEdit (the Interlisp-D display structure editor) the programmer
selects S-expressions with the mouse and operates on them through a menu.
Note that the user selects S-expressions; not the textual representation
of an S-expression. Eg., a user can't select a parenthesis because it
is only an artifact of the pretty-printer. Since parentheses are generated
only by the pretty-printer on redisplaying a transformed S-expression,
they can never be unbalanced. Since atoms are typically "typed" into a
program by buttoning an existing instance and using a menu command which
copies the interned pointer (not the characters of the PNAME) spelling
errors can't occur. Similarly, indenting is the job of the pretty printer--
not the programmer--and is done per-window, so editing windows may be of
different sizes. I am amused to see CADR-sized editor windows on 3600's.
For the edification of those who have not had the privilege of being
subjected to Interlisp's slavish adherence to the principle that it
should constitute an entire programming environment (as opposed to
being just another programming language living on a general purpose
computer system), one of the concomitant requirements of this philosophy
is that all operations, including editing, be done on Lisp objects.
Some of us are willing slaves.
This means that comments (which are handled by a function called *
that does not evaluate its arguments) are a part of the running program.
Thus, extreme care is required in the placement of comments. [...]
Extreme care must be taken when spelling identifiers in C programs and placing
semicolons and parentheses. Nobody said programming would be safe! <:-)
[...] In fact, because Lisp is largely a functional language, there
are relatively few safe places to put comments.
I don't think that it is unfair to ask a programmer to learn the semantics
of the programming language he is using. Given an understanding of PROGN,
COND, AND, OR, and the interpreter, I don't think it is difficult to comment
Interlisp programs at all. Anyway, the compiler catches instances where
the programmer has used a comment for its value and warns him with a message
like "Warning: value of comment used". Actually, I haven't seen this message
in a year or two. When was the last time cc barfed on a semicolon you forgot?
[...] Similarly, in the display editor on Interlisp-D, comments are
kept as far away from the executable code as possible (on the same
line) and displayed in a font which is considerably less readable than
that used for non-comments.
You have only to rebind COMMENTFONT to a larger/bolder fontclass if you
don't like the default. What font does EMACS use for comments in C programs?
This is the basis on which I justify my earlier claim that Interlisp
"discourages" comments, which I consider an undesirable goal.
As I've said too many ways above, I don't think Interlisp discourages
misplaced comments any more than C discourages misplaced semicolons.
--Christopher Schmidt
------------------------------
Date: Sat 6 Jul 85 00:01:40-PDT
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Interlisp comments
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The Interlisp manual contains roughly 25 chapters which average
approximately 25 pages each. These are big pages with closely
packed type. The Interlisp environment has been evolving for
almost 20 years. This should suggest to you that it is a rich
and complex entity.
Are we really expected to take seriously the proposition that
we shouldn't use this language because it doesn't let you put
comments anywhere you please? [...]
------------------------------
Date: Fri 5 Jul 85 16:24:29-PDT
From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ~= re: Interlisp comments
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[...]
We're not talking about syntactic sugar or ease of use. We're talking
about a limitation on the functionality of the programming environment.
My mistake then. I think that C comments are the epitome of syntactic sugar;
discarded by the cc parser as if they never existed. And rather than
Interlisp's being a programming environment that "holds comments in contempt"
I would go so far as to claim that it gives them MORE respect than
unix/EMACS/C. In the unix/EMACS/C environment let's say that we have an
error. unix gives us one of the many helpful error messages from the set
{bus error core dumped | segmentation error core dumped}. The user invokes
the break package (cdb) (by hand). Where are the comments now? Where is
the symbol table? The hacker only gets that if he is lucky! In Interlisp,
by contrast, one of >50 error messages is printed, a break package window
opens up, a stack trace opens up (any frame can be selected and inspected
symbolically in its own window), and a menu of break package commands is
available (in addition to the entire programming language). If one invokes
the editor from the break package (picking the function from the stack trace
with the mouse), the source code is right there; the variables can be
evaluated in the stack context of the break; and the comments are still
there! I call that esteem, not contempt. Now an Interlisp break is not
a post mortem. Within the break package one can change the variable; rewrite
a function if desired and continue the program with the new definition,
which is now THE definition. Do fixes made in cdb get incorporated into
the original source automatically?
[...]
--Christopher
------------------------------
Date: Fri 5 Jul 85 18:01:35-PDT
From: Wade Hennessey <WADE@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: interlisp comments
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Chris' comments about the ease of debugging in INTERLISP are true of any
lisp system. They are not really relevant to greep's dislike of INTERLISP
or liking of UNIX. For example, ZETALISP uses a commenting style
similar to C, and yet it provides the same debugging functionality
of INTERLISP. There are several useful functions in ZETALISP which get
the system to find the source file where a function is defined, and then let
you start editing/examining the definition, comments and all. Thus, you
needn't make comments part of the code to make them easily accessible at
all times.
Wade
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Jul-85 2133 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #90
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jul 85 21:33:41 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Jul 1985 19:55-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #90
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 9 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 90
Today's Topics:
Query - Workstations for AI and Image Processing &
PSL Flavors Implementation & Representation of Knowledge,
New List - PARSYM for Parallel Symbolic Computing,
Psychology - Distributed Associative Memory Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 JUL 85 15:10-N
From: APPEL%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: QUERY ON WORKSTATIONS FOR AI AND IMAGE PROCESSING
AI on workstations
We are looking for a workstation for developping AI systems, mixed with an
image processing system. The workstation has to work under Unix (if possible
4.2).
We intend to buy a Sun-2, with floating-point accelerator and color graphic
system.
We heard that the SUN is slow for floating point operations. Does somebody
have informations on Franz LISP's performance on SUN, or other AI tools on SUN,
versus other similar workstations (in costs)?
We are interrested in positive and negative arguments to buy or NOT buy a
SUN.
Ron Appel
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 85 10:40:59 EST
From: munnari!elecadel.oz!alex@seismo
Subject: PSL Flavors Implementation.
The implementation of Flavors we received with our
PSL package from Utah does not permit the mixing of
Flavors (whats the point of calling it Flavors then
you might ask...). Can anyone tell me of a complete
version of Flavors that runs on PSL? I'm also
looking for a ZetaLisp compatability package that
implements the &.... function parameter conventions.
Thanks,
Alex Dickinson,
The University of Adelaide,
South Australia.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 85 00:00:19 cdt
From: Mark Turner <mark%gargoyle.uchicago.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: representation of knowledge
I am gathering for my students a bibligraphy
of works on representation
of knowledge. I am particularly concerned with
cognitive psychology, artificial intelligence,
philosophy, linguistics, and natural language processing.
I would appreciate receiving copies of bibliographies
others may already have on-line.
Mark Turner
Department of English
U Chicago 60637
>ihnp4!gargoyle!puck!mark
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1985 21:31 PDT
From: DAVIES@Sumex
Subject: PARSYM -- new mailing list for Parallel Symbolic Computing
PARSYM: A Netwide Mailing List for
Parallel Symbolic Computing
The PARSYM mailing list has been started to encourage communication
between individuals and groups involved in PARALLEL SYMBOLIC COMPUTING
(non-numeric computing using multiple processors). The moderator
encourages submissions relating either to parallelism in symbolic
computing or to the use of symbolic computing techniques (AI, objects,
logic programming, expert systems) in parallel computing. All manner
of communication is welcomed: project overviews, research results,
questions, answers, commentary, criticism, humor, opinions,
speculation, historical notes, or any combination thereof, as long as
it relates to the hardware, software, or application of parallel
symbolic computing.
To contribute, send mail to PARSYM@SUMEX (or PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, if
your mailer requires). To be added to the PARSYM distribution list,
or to make other editorial or administrative requests, send mail to
PARSYM-Request@SUMEX. When you are added to the PARSYM distribution
list, I will send you a welcoming message with additional information
about PARSYM and some necessary cautions about copyright and
technology export.
To get the list off the ground, I offer the following set of
discussion topics:
1. Will there be a general-purpose parallel symbolic processor, or
should parallel architectures always be specialized to particular
tasks?
2. The primary languages for sequential symbolic computing are Lisp,
Prolog, and SmallTalk. Which is a better basis for developing a
programming language for parallel computing? Do we need something
fundamentally different?
3. Sequential computing took about 30 years to reach its current
state. Thirty years ago, programming tools were nonexistent:
programmers spent their time cramming programs into a few hundred
memory cells, without programming languages or compilers or
symbolic debuggers. Now, sequential programming is in a highly
developed state: most programmers worry less about the
limitations of their hardware than about managing the
complexity of their applications and of their evolving computer
systems.
Today, parallel programming is where sequential programming was
thirty years ago: to optimize computation and communication,
programmers spend their time manually assigning processes to a few
processors, without benefit of programming languages or compilers
or symbolic debuggers that deal adequately with parallelism.
Will it take 30 years to bring parallel computing up to the current
level of serial computing?
Submissions, queries, and suggestions are equally welcome. Fire away!
PARSYM's Moderator,
Byron Davies (Davies@SUMEX)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 85 21:47:37 EST
From: munnari!psych.uq.oz!ross@seismo
Subject: instantiation in distributed associative memory systems
I was reading some papers by James A. Anderson the other day on the
psychological properties of distributed associative memory systems ("Cognitive
and psychological computation with neural models",IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man, and Cybernetics, Vol 13, pp 799-815, 1983; "Fun with parallel systems",
unpublished paper, 1984). His simulation model associates different features
with state vectors (patterns of activation of the neurons) instead of with
individual neurons. Orthogonality in this system is achieved in two ways.
Alternative values of the same variable (e.g. black-white, mortal-immortal)
use the same neurons but have orthogonal codings, whereas dissimilar things
(e.g. shoes-sealing wax, cabbages-kings)use entirely different sets of neurons.
He taught his system various associations such as Plato -> Man, Man -> Mortal,
Zeus -> God, God -> Immortal and the system was able to output triples such as
<Zeus,God,Immortal> from input of single components.
This system can be viewed as approximately equivalent to a production system
with rules such as "Man(X) -> Mortal(X)". In Anderson's simulation a better
pattern match leads to faster activation so conflict resolution uses a "best
match fires first" strategy. I think that his model also allows multiple rules
to fire simultaneously provided that they conclude about different attributes.
For example it would be possible to conclude simultaneously that Plato is
Greek and Mortal. However the superposition of the neural activation patterns
for Mortal and Immortal does not necessarily represent anything at all.
OK, so much for the rough sketch of Anderson's system. The questions which
interest me about it deal with instantiation. In a production system we can
arrange things so that values get bound to the variables in the rules. What is
the equivalent process in the neural network?
My guess is that the activation process is the closest equivalent. The total
activity pattern of the network represents the current entity being thought
about and it possesses some number of more or less independent attributes.
Thus the binding process is particularly simple because there is no choice of
entities to bind. There is only one value, the current state, and the choice
of attributes of the current state to bind is wired into the synapses of each
rule. So a rule looks more like "Big←animal(Current←state) & Teeth(Current←
state) -> Dangerous(Current←state)". You could say that all the rules are
permanently bound.
If this is a reasonable description of instantiation in neural nets, then the
next obvious question is "How the hell do you represent multiple entities?"
If multiple entities are represented by the current state of activity on the
network there is no way that the rules can decide which attributes go with
what entity. As far as they are concerned there is only one entity. So what
are the possibilities for keeping entities separate in the neural
representation?
1. Attribute separation. If two entities have no attributes in common then they
can be represented simultaneously. As noted above, the rules can't break them
apart but for some purposes this may not matter. If the entities have an
attribute in common then provided they have the same value on that attribute
no harm is done. If they have conflicting values on a shared attribute then the
representation of at least one of the entities will be distorted.
2. Temporal separation. If a pattern of neural activity causes a short term
increase in the ease with which that pattern can be re-triggered then several
entities could be juggled by time division multiplexing. Only one entity would
be actively represented at a single time, but the other recently represented
entities could be easily recalled. This scheme prevents entities interfering
and also seems to stop them usefully interacting. It is not clear how the rule
mechanism could be modified to allow references to multiple entities in the
pattern.
3. Spatial separation. Assume that instead of one neural population there are
several of them, all with identical knowledge bases, and communicating with
each other. These neural populations are not necessarily physically separate.
Each population would be capable of representing and manipulating an entity
without interference from the representations of the other entities.
Furthermore, because the populations are connected it would be possible for
rules to know about multiple entities. The difference between this scheme and
the attribute separation scheme is that for a given attribute there will be a
distinct group of neurons in each population rather than a single global group
of neurons. Any rule which is looking for a pattern involving multiple entities
will be able to see them as distinct because the information will come in over
distinct synaptic pathways.
This spatial separation scheme would be ideal for visual processing because the
populations could be arranged in a topographic mapping and allowed to
communicate only with their neighbours. This could deal with rules like, "If
the neighbour on my left sees an object moving right then I will see it soon
and it will still have the attributes my neighbour labelled it with."
This scheme could also be used for more cognitive calculations but obviously
there would need to be mechanisms for coordination to replace the simple
static coordination structure provided by topographic mapping and communication
with neighbours. Work done in cognitive psychology shows that children's
increasing ability to perform difficult tasks can be attributed to the
increasing number of concepts which can be simultaneously activated and
manipulated (Graeme S. Halford, "Can young children integrate premises in
transitivity and serial order tasks?", Cognitive Psychology, 1984, Vol 16,
pp 65-93). Perhaps the children are slowly learning the coordination rules
needed to stop the populations acting as one large population and allow them
to run as a coordinated group of entity processors.
That's my quota of armchair theorising for the week. Anyone got a comment?
Ross Gayler | ACSnet: ross@psych.uq.oz
Division of Research & Planning | ARPA: ross%psych.uq.oz@seismo.arpa
Queensland Department of Health | CSNET: ross@psych.uq.oz
GPO Box 48 | UUCP: seismo!munnari!psych.uq.oz!ross
Brisbane 4001 |
AUSTRALIA | Phone: +61 7 224 7060
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Jul-85 0028 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #91
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jul 85 00:27:58 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Jul 1985 22:43-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #91
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 10 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 91
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Shape from Function (GMR) [correction] &
A Mathematical Theory of Plan Synthesis (SU) &
Object Model of Information (SU) &
Expert Systems and Databases (CMU) &
Expert System for Grease Selection (CMU),
Conference - Canadian AI Conference
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 85 14:14 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Shape from Function (GMR) [correction]
SHAPE FROM FUNCTION VIA MOTION ANALYSIS
with Application to the Automatic Design of
Orienting Devices for Vibratory Part Feeders
Dr. Tomas Lozano-Perez
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Cambridge, MA. 02139
Wednesday, August 14, 1985, 11:00 a.m.
General Motors Research Laboratories
Computer Science Department
Warren, Michigan 48090-9057
[It seems I introduced a typo (GE) when I distributed this seminar notice.
Steve Holland informs me that this talk will be held at GMR and that Tomas
is reachable at tlp%mit-oz@mit-mc or via u.s. mail to MIT AI Lab. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue 9 Jul 85 17:41:40-PDT
From: Ed Pednault <PEDNAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: PhD Orals - A Mathematical Theory of Plan Synthesis (SU)
Toward a Mathematical Theory of Plan Synthesis
Edwin P.D. Pednault
Electrical Engineering
Thursday, July 18, 2:15pm
Margaret Jacks Hall, Room 146
Planning problems have the following form: given a set of goals, a set
of allowable actions and a description of the current state of the world,
find a sequence of actions that will transform the world from its current
state to a state in which all of the goals are satisfied. This talk is a
presentation of my thesis research which examines the question of how to
solve planning problems automatically. The question of plan synthesis will
be addressed from a rigorous, mathematical standpoint in contrast to the
informal and highly experimental treatments found in most previous works.
By introducing mathematical rigor, it has been possible to unify many
existing ideas in automatic planning, showing how they arise from first
principles and how they may be applied to solve a much broader class of
problems than had previously been considered. In addition, some entirely
new ideas have been developed and a number of theorems have been proved
that further our understanding of the synthesis problem. The talk will
concentrate on my techniques for plan synthesis with only a brief summary
of the other contributions of my research. A mathematical framework for
studying planning problems will be introduced and a number of theorems
will be presented that form the basis for the synthesis techniques.
These theorems will then be combined with a least-commitment search
strategy to obtain a solution method that unifies and generalizes
means-ends analysis, opportunistic planning, goal protection, goal
regression, constraint posting/propagation, hierarchical planning and
nonlinear planning.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 8 Jul 85 15:30:17-PDT
From: David Beech <BEECH@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - An Object Model of Information (SU)
The first Database Seminar of the summer quarter will be this Friday,
12th July, at 3:15 in MJH 352.
For information, please contact Beech@Score or call 497-9118.
TOWARDS AN OBJECT MODEL OF THE REPRESENTATION AND USE OF INFORMATION
David Beech
Stanford CIS and HP Laboratories
Future general-purpose information systems will need to deal with a
wide range of information, and offer flexible access to it, if they
are to appeal to the potential millions of non-specialist users.
For example, they should process pictures and sounds as naturally as
numbers and texts; they should answer questions which require some
deduction from the often incomplete information previously given to
the system; and they should move towards the support of natural
language interfaces, including spoken inputs.
An object-oriented model of the representation and use of information
is proposed, with the necessary generality for the description and
design of such systems. Fundamental concepts including those of
agent, object, type, action, formula, process, transaction, predicator
and generator are introduced. Recursive functions, predicate calculus,
and n-ary relations are brought together in a data abstraction framework,
with an emphasis on intensional definition of concepts and their
instantiation by means of predicators and generators.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jul 85 10:19:59 EDT
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Seminar - Expert Systems and Databases (CMU)
DESIGN RESEARCH CENTER BI-WEEKLY SEMINAR SERIES
Interfacing Expert Systems and Databases
for Structural Engineering Applications
by
Craig Howard
Wednesday, July 10 at 1:30 pm in the Adamson Wing, Baker Hall
******* Refreshments will be served at 1:15 *******
Artificial intelligence programming techniques, specifically expert systems
and knowledge-based systems (KBS), are being applied to a broad range of
engineering problems. However, most prototype expert system applications
are restricted to limited amounts of data and have no facility for
sophisticated data management. As expert systems are integrated into
engineering computing systems, the data management capabilities of these
systems must be adapted to serve these new components. The presentation
describes work underway to develop a flexible interface in which multiple
expert systems and multiple design databases communicate as independent,
self-descriptive components within an integrated structural engineering
computing environment.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jul 85 13:17:54 EDT
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Seminar - Expert System for Grease Selection (CMU)
Intelligent Systems Lab Seminar
Topic: Presentation of Grease Project
Speaker: Dr. Peter Spirtes
Place: DH3313
Date: Wednesday, July 10
Time: 10:00am - 11:00am
The Grease project is an expert system that is intended to aid in the
choice or design of a proper cutting fluid for a metal machining operation.
It is currently under development at the Intelligent Systems Lab in
cooperation with Gulf Oil Company. Cutting fluids can extend tool life and
improve finish by providing lubrication and cooling, and by preventing the
welding of the metal being machined to the machining tool. The goal is to
find a cutting fluid which will make a machining operation as economical as
possible by finding the best trade-off between the price of a cutting fluid
and the amount that it extends tool life.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 85 17:10:09 pdt
From: Bill Havens <havens%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Conference - Canadian AI Conference
C A L L F O R P A P E R S
Canadian Artificial Intelligence Conference
C S C S I - 8 6
Montreal, Canada
May 21 - 23, 1986
Sponsored by the
Canadian Society for
Computational Studies of Intelligence
The Sixth National Conference of the CSCSI invites sub-
mission of theoretical and applied research papers in all
areas of Artificial Intelligence research, particularly
those listed below:
o Knowledge Representation
o Computer Vision
o Natural Language Understanding
o Expert Systems and Applications
o Logic Programming and Formal Reasoning
o Robotics
o Planning, Problem Solving and Learning
o Cognitive Science
o Social Aspects of AI
o AI Architecture, Languages and Tools
All submissions will be fully refereed by the program
committee. Authors are requested to prepare full papers of
no more than 5000 words in length and specify in which area
they wish their papers reviewed. All papers should contain
concise clear descriptions of significant contributions to
Artificial Intelligence research with proper references to
the relevant literature. Figures and illustrations should
be professionally drawn.
Three copies of each submitted paper must be in the
hands of the Program Chairman by December 31, 1985. Elec-
tronic submissions are unfortunately not acceptable. All
accepted papers will be published in the conference proceed-
ings.
Correspondence should be addressed to either the Gen-
eral Chair or the Program Chair, as appropriate.
General Chair:
Renato De Mori
Department of Computer Science
Concordia University
Montreal, P.Q. H3G 1M8
CANADA
Program Chair:
Bill Havens
Department of Computer Science
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5
CANADA
Network Address: havens@ubc.CSNET
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂12-Jul-85 0036 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #92
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jul 85 00:36:40 PDT
Date: Thu 11 Jul 1985 22:43-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #92
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 12 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 92
Today's Topics:
News - Center for Machine Intelligence,
Journals -- IEEE Software & SPIE AI Issue,
Book - A Vision of Knowledge Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 11 Jul 85 22:39:16-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Center for Machine Intelligence
I have received an announcement of the formation of a new
Center for Machine Intelligence under the co-directorship
of Dr. Ashby Woolf and Prof. Lynn Conway (recently of DARPA).
The center is being formed by Electronic Data Systems Corporation
(subsidiary of GM) and the University of Michigan. Their address is
2001 Commonwealth Blvd., Ann Arbor, MI 48105, phone (313) 995-0900.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 10 July 1985 08:20:16 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Reminder -- IEEE Software
A reminder that the last date for the submission of papers for
the IEEE software special AI issue is July 15th. If anyone wants an
extension till August 1st, send mail to sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa.
Sriram
FOR YOUR INFORMATION:
The March 1986 issue of IEEE Software will address software aspects of
knowledge-based systems developed for engineering applications.
(IEEE Software is one of the prestigious magazines devoted to problems
in Software engineering).
------------------------------
Date: Thu 11 Jul 85 22:32:33-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SPIE AI Issue
Mohan Trivedi tells me that SPIE (Society of Photo and Instrumentation
Engineers) is planning a special AI issue of their journal early
next year. This seems to be a follow-on to their recent conference
on AI. Contact Dr. Trivedi at
Electrical Engineering Dept.
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Phone (504) 388-6826
soon if you are interested in contributing. Submitted papers need not
be about optics.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 85 14:36:30 edt
From: Tom Scott <scott%bgsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: A Vision of Knowledge Engineering
I'm writing a manuscript, "A Vision of Knowledge Engineering",
for Prentice-Hall. The intended audience of the textbook is
undergraduate students in philosophy, management information science,
and computer science.
The parts of the book correspond to the audience: Part I
(chapters 2-4) is concerned with the theoretical foundations of
knowledge engineering and will focus on symbolic logic and epistemology,
including both the empirical work of John Dewey, Rudolf Carnap, and
Isaac Levi as well as the transcendental work of Immanuel Kant and
Edmund Husserl. Part II (chapter 5) introduces topics from information
management such as managerial cybernetics, decision support systems, and
man/machine interaction (software engineering and human engineering).
Part III (chapter 6) outlines the techniques and concepts of artificial
intelligence that young knowledge engineers need to be on friendly terms
with in order to design and implement applications programs such as
knowledge-based expert systems. Here is an outline of the manuscipt:
A VISION OF KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING
1. Introduction
2. Intelligent Resources
2.1 The Age of Knowledge
2.2 The System of Intelligent Resources
2.3 Revision of Intelligent Resources
3. Deductive Knowledge
3.1 Logic Programming
3.2 Automated Reasoning
3.3 Deductive Systems
4. Deep Knowledge
4.1 Deliberate Expansion of Knowledge Bases
4.2 Structures of Consciousness
4.3 What Is Inductive Logic?
5. Information Management
5.1 Managerial Cybernetics
5.2 Decision Support Systems
5.3 The Unix Development Environment
6. AI Techniques
6.1 Concepts and Techniques
6.2 Applications
6.3 The AI Development Environment
7. Vision of Possibilities
As I begin to close off the theoretical part (chapters 2-4), I'm
looking for concrete systems and applications to write about in chapters
5 and 6. If anyone has suggestions about systems that I can review,
please contact me at the address listed at the end of this article.
* * *
Here are three diagrams that summarize the approach to knowledge
engineering that I've taken in the manuscript. The first diagram
(figure 1) shows a canonical or ideal form that seems to underlie most
(all?!) interactive knowledge systems. Figures 2 and 3 summarize the
literature that I have found to be a good basis for teaching the theory
and practice of knowledge systems and intelligent databases to young
knowledge engineers.
+---------+
←←←←←←←← |knowledge|←←←←←←←←←
| | base | |
| +---------+ |
| | |
| | |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| expert |←←←←| inter- |←←←←|inference|←←←←| inter- |←←←←| user |
| | | face | | engine | | face | | |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | |
| | |
| +---------+ |
←←←←←←←← | black- | ←←←←←←←←
| board |
+---------+
Figure 1. An interactive knowledge system. Without much
difficulty most block diagrams of knowledge systems can fit into
this framework.
5. Rule-Based Expert Systems (Buchanan & al. 1984)
=======================================================
4. Principles of Artificial Intelligence (Nilsson 1980)
3. Automated Reasoning (Wos & al. 1984)
2. Automated Theorem Proving (Loveland 1978)
=======================================================
1. Mathematical Logic (Shoenfield 1967)
Figure 2. The five levels of knowledge engineering as seen
from the theoretical perspective. The concept of a production
system and the concept of representation-inference-control can
be traced on each of the five levels.
5. Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema
and the Information Base (van Griethuysen 1982)
=====================================================
4. Advances in Data Base Theory (Gallaire & al. 1981)
3. Towards a Logical Reconstruction of Relational
Database Theory (Reiter 1984)
2. Automated Theorem Proving (Loveland 1978)
=====================================================
1. Mathematical Logic (Shoenfield 1967)
Figure 3. The five levels of knowledge engineering and automated
reasoning as seen from the practical perspective of deductively-
augmented (intelligent) relational databases. The diagram is
motivated by the practical need for intelligent deductions in
large commercial databases.
One more diagram, figure 4, helps round out this preliminary
Vision. I drew figure 4 after using Argonne's Interactive Theorem
Prover (ITP). ITP is a beautiful tool for giving young knowledge
engineers experience and understanding of how to build a production
system consisting of entities (the knowledge base of atomic and
molecular clauses), operators (rules of inference), and control
(strategies such as forward and backward demodulation and forward and
backward subsumption).
+------------+
----------->| Choice |------------
| | strategies | |
| +------------+ |
| || |
| || |
| +---------------+ V
+------------+ | | +------------+
| Backward |----| Knowledge |----| Inference |
| strategies |----| base |----| rules |
+------------+ | | +------------+
A +---------------+ |
| || |
| || |
| +------------+ |
| | Forward | |
------------| strategies |<-----------
+------------+
Figure 4. Argonne National Laboratory's Interactive Theorem
Prover (ITP). This diagram is adapted from Allen and Luckham
1970 and Wos et al. 1984 (section 4.4, "Order of Operations").
The flow of operations is clockwise, beginning with the choice
strategies. ITP stops when the knowledge base exhibits an appropriate
termination condition such as the null clause in refutation proofs. The
corrpesondonce between ITP and an abstract production system is:
ITP Production system
-------------- -----------------
knowledge base entities
inference rules operations
strategies control
That is why we ITP addicts are so excited about using ITP in knowledge
engineering. ITP serves as an example of a production system and a
production-system-building tool. If you've ever tried using Yaps in the
University of Maryland Lisp environment, I think you'll agree that ITP
is a lot simpler. I don't mean of course to tell people not to use the
Maryland systems or other production-system-building tools. My
intention here is only to recommend the Argonne system as the easiest
way that I know of for new knowledge engineers to effortlessly gain full
knowledge of production systems through ITP-based experience and
understanding.
Note the nice picture that results when we combine figure 1 (the
interactive knowledge system) and figure 4 (ITP). Simply replace the
middle section of figure 1 by figure 4. The knowledge bases in each
diagram correspond well; the inference engine and blackboard of the
interactive knowledge system correspond to the inference-rule module and
strategy modules of ITP. The resulting picture is clean and neat. What
more could a young knowledge engineer ask for?
* * *
I look forward to hearing your replies to these ideas. We are
children of the cybernetic revolution and we are witnessing the rising
sunshine of the Age of Enlightenment.
Jai Guru Dev,
Tom Scott
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green OH 43403-0221
Csnet: scott@bgsu
UUCP: ...!cbosgd!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!scott
Day phone: 419-372-2636
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂14-Jul-85 0026 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #93
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jul 85 00:26:09 PDT
Date: Sat 13 Jul 1985 22:53-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #93
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 14 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 93
Today's Topics:
Games - Progress in Chess,
Learning - Forgetting,
AI Tools - Interlisp Comments,
Natural Language - Aymara FAB Lab
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 5 Jul 85 19:28:02-EDT
From: Fred Hapgood <SIDNEY.G.HAPGOOD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Progress in Chess
It is my recollection that the first good chess program, Northwestern's
CHESS 3.0, had earned a USCF rating of about 2100 in 1973. In
the subsequent twelve years quite impressive advances have been
made both in chess programs and the hardware running them. Yet
apparently all that this progress has bought has been a measly
100 rating points. What conclusions might be drawn from these
facts? One, surely, is that it might take much longer than any
of us think to build a machine that plays even 2400 chess, let
alone at world champion level.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 85 16:03:56 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Falling Away; re Furth's message.
> From: "furth john%d.mfenet" >Subject: The Best Chess Program
> To attain an independent and useful intelligence, the learner
> must be able to discard significant portions of the means by which
> it has arrived at its present level of ability. The original hub
> of its actions must *fall away* and a new one be generated.
> So the adult forgets the involvements of childhood and the state
> the cares of its early days. With whatever vestiges remain, the
> organism must take on a whole new orientation to meet new
> needs with a closer approach to the optimum. It is better to
> forget the past than to live there. The best chess program
> will forget most everything its author ever told it to do.
This is certainly true for persons in general. The recent TV
series & book entitled 'The Brain' talked about people who didn't
seem to be able to forget very well, and the problems they had
in normal life.
Along these lines, it is possible to develop some rather interesting
perspectives 'on the meaning of it all'.
Suppose for a moment, one of the key features of our species is that
regardless of how important person an person thinks he or she is, they
'fall away' (read die) after a rather short period of time (on the
cosmic scale). If immortality could be achieved, this would not
occur and the 'intelligence' of the species by Furth's implicit
definition would be reduced. Consequently, the immortality quest is
ephemeral at best, and certainly not a quest that should be funded
by the entire race.
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 85 19:27:40 PDT
From: Steve Crocker <crocker@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Interlisp comments are first class citizens
I must have missed the first flame about comments in Interlisp, but I'll
jump in anyway. I have used Interlisp for a decade and it's a sheer
delight to see how many good ideas have been implemented and are just
sitting there waiting for the semi-experienced user to discover them.
The method of handling comments is one of the minor delights, but a delight
nonetheless.
As has been noted, comments in Interlisp are simply functions that don't
have any useful value. The "*" is used as the function symbol, and that
works fine, although any other symbol such as ";" or "comment" could have
been used as well. Once you get the idea that comments are simply "useless"
functions, I find it hard to understand why there's much trouble placing
them correctly. The prettyprinter always prints them out in an identifiable
way, and the compiler and/or DWIM package catch the majority of errors you
might make. No similar service exists is most other languages, including
most dialects of Lisp.
One of the neat things we were able to do with Interlisp comments is adopt a
convention that each function definition contain a comment that describes
its purpose, inputs and output as its first "action." (The compiler knows
enough to generate nothing when it sees a comment, so it doesn't take up
either time or space in the object code.) Using the Masterscope system, we
built some tools that generate documentation for a file full of functions.
This documentation includes all of the Masterscope goodies -- who calls the
function, what variables are referenced, etc. -- and the initial comment for
the function. All of this information is collected in a Scribe file and
turned into a substantial document. This kind of thing is not necessary for
the programmer who's debugging a couple of functions in a context he knows
intimately, but it sure does help the next programmer or the same programmer
a year later. This kind of tool was almost trivial to build because
comments are part of the code and not incidental frosting lost at the first
turn of the lexical analyzer. (Anybody who thinks he has a natural language
parser that handles metaphors is invited to try that last sentence!)
There are always alternative ways of doing things and differences and taste
and style, but most of the criticisms of Lisp in general and Interlisp in
particular come from people who grew up (?) with batch compilers of
line-oriented, statement-oriented languages. I think those are three of the
worst things that ever happened in computing, and will continue to haunt us
for another several decades.
Steve Crocker
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 85 09:50:16 edt
From: Eric Nyberg <ehn0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: Interlisp Comments
In reply to Steven Tepper's comments in AIList #86, I would
like to make the following points about commenting Interlisp
programs.
Placing a comment in the "wrong" place may result in a comment
value being used by a function in an undesirable way. During
compilation, the compiler issues a warning whenever this sort
of situation is noticed (VALUE OF COMMENT USED).
The printing of comments as "**COMMENT**" during pretty printing
is the system default. Mr. Tepper was too quick to flamethrow
before checking his Interlisp manual on this. There is a variable
called **COMMENT**FLG which controls this behaviour. If **COMMENT**FLG
is NIL, comments are printed. Otherwise, the value of **COMMENT**FLG
is printed (initially set to "**COMMENT**"). There is also a function
called PP* {nlambda*} which performs a PP with all comments expanded.
I refer Mr. Tepper and others interested in reading about the comment
facility to Sections 6.8.1 - 6.8.4 in the Interlisp-D manual (I'm
afraid my comments don't apply to older versions of Interlisp). For
info on how to change the font used for comments, see section 6.8.5.
The rest of Steven's complaints about the position and font used for
comments can all be remedied by resetting various parameters that
control the format of comments (see the above sections). If one takes
the extra time to set up his/her programming environment the way he/she
likes it, it is possible to have the comments just about anywhere (and any
size). It seems that there are many user "hooks" in Interlisp-D that
allow this sort of customization. It is too bad that the documentation
is sometimes very difficult to understand, even when tracked down.
I disagree with Steven's conclusion that Interlisp "discourages"
comments. The *default environment* handles comments in a discouraging
way, but a few lines of code in the init file can remedy the situation.
Eric Nyberg
GTE Laboratories
ehn0@gte-labs.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: Tue 9 Jul 85 02:51:46-CDT
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: A visit to the Aymara FAB Lab [DDJ July 85]
[ from Dr. Dobb's Journal, July 1985 - "Of Interest" by Michael Swaine]
A VISIT to the FAB Lab
=======================
--- A blip of 'deja vu' struck as I read in the March IEEE Software
about IVAN GUZMAN DE ROJAS and his plan for doing natural-language
translation via the peculiarly algebraic Andean Indean language Aymara.
Yes, trivial recall was working perfectly; halfway down the Andean peak
of press releases on my desk I found the announcement of the opening
of the AYAMARA FAB LAB in Sunnyvale.
A coincidence worthy of a drive down the peninsula.
DEAN NORMAN, director of the lab, ... explained that Guzman, discovering
the Aymara, lacking irregular verbs and gender, was an unprecedentedly
logical language (although its logic was not standard two-valued logic),
had succeeded in codifying the algorithmic structure of it syntax.
For the first time, someone had expressed a natural language in software.
Wasn't Guzman, I asked, considering the application of his achievement
in the design of translation machines, the notion being that computerized
Aymara could serve as the bridge in a multilanguage translation system?
Right, Norman answered, although at AFL they were taking the process in a
somewhat different direction. Did I recall the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis from
linguistics? I did, more or less: that language delimited the thinkable
thoughts, and thus our culture and perceptions. Under normal conditions
we see only those distinctions for which we have words. In cultures in
which green is not a major linguistic division of the spectrum, it is also
not a primary perceptual division.
Norman nodded. The principle can be applied to any language-processing
system, natural or artificial. Curious as it might sound, the Aymara-
speaking software would, to a certain extend, think like an Aymaran. With
it's multi-valued logic, it would make distinctions that would never occur
to a New York stock-broker; with its lack of grammatical gender, it would
fail to make distinctions the stockbroker would unconsciously make.
And Aymaran is only the easiest language, not the only one, to which
the principle can be applied. Employing Guzman's translation techniques,
it would be possible to develop front-end packages that, with the proper
filtering out of Aymaran values and perceptions, would embody pure
upper-class British perceptions or ancient Greek thought processes. We
could examine the way judges in ancient Sumeria examined evidence.
That, Norman explained, was what they were up to at AFL: just as the
developers of expert systems were trying to capture the knowledge of
selected individuals in software, AFL was trying to capture the style
of thinking, the intellectual spirit of whole cultures. I mulled that
over. Wouldn't there be a great advantage, I asked, in combining the two
approaches, developiong a system with a specifiable style of thinking?
Couldn't one develop, say, a machine with the knowledge of a high-energy
physicist and the spirit of a 12th-century Mandarin? Or the knowledge
of a modern statesman and the intellectual style of the first Continental
Congress? But Norman suddenly looked uncomfortable and said that he
couldn't discuss details of ongoing projects.
[given that I quote verbatim a large junk of text here, I feel it proper
to make a plug for DDJ, one of the very few worthwhile commercial
computer magazines: DDJ appears monthly, subscription is $25/year,
airmail Canada $46, other countries $62
and if your technical newsstand doesn't have it you should ask for it.
DDJ, PO Box 27809, Sand Diego, CA 92128
call (800)321-3333 and (619)485-9623 or 566-6947 for subscription
problems (not having one is a problem, right? ;-)
disclaimers galore - Werner ]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Jul-85 1354 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #94
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jul 85 13:53:48 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Jul 1985 11:09-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #94
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 16 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 94
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Temporal Reasoning (SRI) &
Geometric Reasoning (Penn) &
Electronic Encyclopedia (MIT),
Conferences - Aerospace Applications of AI &
Cognitive Science Society Annual Conference
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 10 Jul 85 12:22:15-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Temporal Reasoning (SRI)
Temporal Imagery:
An Approach to Reasoning about Time for Planning and Problem Solving
Thomas Dean
Yale University
11:00 AM, Monday, July 15
Room EJ232, SRI International
Reasoning about time typically involves drawing conclusions on the basis
of incomplete information. Uncertainty arises in the form of ignorance,
indeterminacy, and indecision. Despite the lack of complete information
a problem solver is continually forced to make predictions in order to
pursue hypotheses and plan for the future. Such predictions are
frequently contravened by subsequent evidence. The talk will describe
a computational approach to temporal reasoning that directly confronts
these issues. The approach relies upon a method for keeping track
of the dependency relations among assertions in a temporalized data base.
The resulting computational framework extends the functionality of
reason maintenance systems [Doyle 79] to handle assertions with a temporal
extent. The techniques developed extend the functionality of current
approaches to dealing with time in planning (e.g., [Sacerdoti 77], [Tate
77], [Vere 83], and [Allen 83]). Examples from robot problem solving
will be used to illustrate the techniques.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 85 12:25 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Geometric Reasoning (Penn)
A GEOMETRIC REASONING SYSTEM FOR MOVING AN OBJECT WHILE MAINTAINING
CONTACT WITH OTHERS
Anastasia Koutsou, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh
Thursday, 11 July 1985 3:00 pm 216 Moore
This paper concerns the problem of moving a polyhedral object while maintaining
contact with a set of stationary polyhedral objects. A method is developed for
deriving a sequence of compliant-guarded motions in order to move an object
from an initial configuration to a final configuration while it is in contact.
This sequence is derived from a sequence of spatial relationships among the
features of the objects. The construction of a graph of spatial relationships
representing the space where the object is in contact with its environment is
described. This is done using a geometric reasoning system which is able to
find a relationship equivalent to a conjunction of two relationships and to
construct the new features among which the new relationship holds.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Jul 1985 10:49 EDT (Fri)
From: Crisse Ciro <CRISSE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Electronic Encyclopedia (MIT)
Wednesday, July 17
8th Floor Playroom
NE43
3:00 PM
INTERACTIVE SIMULATIONS FOR AN ELECTRONIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
Alan Borning
Computer Science Department
University of Washington
In the first part of this seminar, I'll describe work on a prototype
electronic encyclopedia. The prototype makes use of the text from an
existing print encyclopedia, and employs a window-oriented browser on a
Symbolics 3600 computer. Selected articles in the prototype also include
some features that take advantage of the new medium, including interactive
simulations, links to a picture library stored on a videodisk, and active
text for browsing cross references, expanding abbreviations, and converting
from one measurement system to another.
The construction of a comprehensive electronic encyclopedia that takes
full advantage of the computer medium will be an enormous task, and will
require good computer-based tools to support the encyclopedia's authors.
The second part of the seminar will concern research on one such tool: a
kit for constructing interactive simulations. Using this kit, authors can
construct simulations of such things as manipulable diagrams illustrating
geometric theorems or simulations of physics experiments. The kit, an
extension of the ThingLab system, uses constraints to specify the relations
between parts of the simulations, and provides convenient graphical tools for
assembling and manipulating simulations.
As part of the talk two videoptapes will be shown: first, a brief demo of
the prototype electronic encyclopedia, and second, a demo of ThingLab,
including recent enhancements.
Refreshments will be served HOST: Randall Davis
------------------------------
Date: 12 Jul 1985 10:47-EDT
From: cross <cross@wpafb-afita>
Subject: Conference - Aerospace Applications of AI
AEROSPACE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
September 16-19, 1985
Dayton Convention Center, Dayton Ohio
The purpose of the conference is to establish the present state of the
art in AI in selected areas of importance to the aerospace community.
There will be session in avionics, manufacturing, maintenance, decision
support systems, expert system building tools, programming languages,
man-machine interfaces, and new architectures. Each session will be
keynoted by a prominent researcher who will differeniate between
present capabilities and research problems. Keynote speakers are:
B. Chandrasekaran, M. Fox, T. Garvey, V. Lesser, D. Michie, K. Bowen,
W. Rouse, E. Sacerdoti, M. Stefik, and E. Taylor. In addition, each
session will include presentation from industry and government labs.
Each session will conclude with a panel discussion. The conference will
also feature a session that explores senior management expectations.
Exhibits will be open to the public.
Conference fee: $225.00 (includes luncheon and banquet).
Registration: AAAIC'85, PO Box 31250, Dayton OH 45431-0250
send for a registration form or call (513) 426-8530 for
more information
Lodging: A Block of rooms is reserved at the Stouffer's Dayton Plaza.
Reseravations are preferably made with the conference
registration form. If necessary, reservations can be made
directly with Stouffer's, (513) 224-0800.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 85 05:46:02 pdt
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Cognitive Science Society Annual Conference: General Info
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SCHEDULE:
Thursday, August 15th, 8:30am - Saturday, August 17th, 5:00pm
AIRLINE TRANSPORTATION:
30-35% Discount on American Airlines, call 1-800-433-1790.
Conference code is: star file s7387. Closest airport is
Orange Country/John Wayne. Taxi to campus if $5.00.
DORMITORY ACCOMIDATIONS:
Double Rate: $38.00 per person per day
Single Rate: $45.00 per person per day
LOCATION:
At the campus of Univ. California, Irvine (also known as
U. Cal, Disney), which is about 40 miles south of LA and 5
miles from the beach.
REGISTRATION:
General: $65.00 Student: $45.00
MAJOR ADDRESSES:
Endel Tulving, Allen Newell, Shimon Ullman, Roger Schank
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂19-Jul-85 1405 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #95
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Jul 85 14:01:39 PDT
Date: Fri 19 Jul 1985 09:41-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #95
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 19 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 95
Today's Topics:
Queries - Prolog-Lisp Combinations & Scheme Benchmark Programs &
Graphic User Interfaces & AI Handbook & Machine Learning List,
Machine Learning - Mistakes,
AI Tools - LISP vs. C,
Publications - Announcement of IRList
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 15 Jul 85 11:51:05-PDT
From: Yigal Arens <ARENS@USC-ECLC.ARPA>
Subject: Request for Prolog-Lisp combinations
I'm interested in finding out about implementations of Prolog in Lisp or
Lisp in Prolog(?), or any other version of either that allows one to
program in both.
I'm also interested in hearing from people who have experience using
such a combination, and who can give me an idea how efficiently it works.
Please respond to ARENS@USC-ECLC.ARPA.
Thanks,
Yigal Arens
USC
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jul 1985 1649-CDT
From: Arthur <Altman%CSL60%ti-csl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Scheme Benchmark Programs Sought
I am beginning a Scheme performance evaluation project here at TI CSL,
an initial task being to build a suite of benchmark programs. Beyond the
Gabriel Lisp Benchmark Suite translated to Scheme and examples from
'Abelson & Sussman', most Scheme programs around these days seem to be
"systems" code such as compilers and editors.
I am soliciting Scheme "applications" code, especially programs that
show off **canonical Scheme programming style**, e.g., extensive use of
lexical scoping and first-class functions/environments/continuations in
solving a problem. Users of MIT Scheme, Scheme 84, Chez Scheme, and T,
let's see that simple, fast, elegant code you've been writing!
What's in it for you? Well, possible enshrinement of your name and all
or part of your favorite program in a "standard" benchmark suite for
Scheme. Also, the good feeling that comes with advancing the cause of
Lisp-Done-Right, since I hope to show off the performance advantages of
the Scheme runtime model.
Code that is as dialect-independent as possible (ideally conforms to the
Revised Revised Report) would be appreciated. The ultimate suite of
programs will be made available to interested parties, of course.
Thanks for your cooperation,
Arthur Altman
Texas Instruments
Computer Science Laboratory
(214) 995-0383
CSNET: altman@ti-csl
ARPANET: altman%ti-csl@csnet-relay
U.S. Postal Service: M.S. 238, P.O. Box 226015, Dallas, Texas, 75266
------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Jul 85 13:47:57-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: QUERY - references on graphic user interfaces
I am trying to collect references on the design, implementation and evaluation
of user interfaces, particularly interfaces that employ interactive graphics
(basically any bit-map display graphics), multiple windows, non-keyboard
input devices (e.g., mouse), etc. Basically what are the key articles
that have formed the core of conventional wisdom on workstation design and
user-interfaces.
Even more specifically, I want to get references on user-interface design in
knowledge-based systems, especially browsers. Besides STEAMER and
work I know of from Stanford (Mitch Model and ONCOCIN more recently),
I have come across very little in the AI literature on graphic
interfaces.
Perhaps, I have missed some key articles, even in IEEE Computer or
something.
If I get a good response I can make a bibliography available one way or
another on the net.
I really would like complete references to specific articles rather
than check out Englebart or Card&Moran. Though general pointers are
also welcome.
Thanks in advance to anyone that can contribute.
mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 85 23:19 EST
From: Bill Faulkner <puppy%clemson.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Review request for AI Handbook
I was recently thumbing through the July issue of Scientific
American when I came across a Computer Science book club offer. A
business reply card advertised a 3-volume Handbook of Artificial
Intelligence for $4.95 as an incentive to enter the bookclub (which
requires you to buy 3 more of their books during the next year). The
Handbook and the book club are being offered by the "Library of Computer
and Information Sciences" Riverside, NJ.
I have been considering taking the risk and as a precautionary
measure thought that I would ask if anybody out there has gotten a look
at this Handbook. If any of you have subscribed, I would appreciate any
comments you have about the Handbook, the company, and/or the quality and
type of books being offered.
Please send your replies directly to me at
puppy@clemson if you're on csnet
puppy.clemson@csnet-relay if you're on arpanet
William Faulkner
[This offer has been mentioned previously on AIList. The book club
is reputable and efficient, and offers substantial discounts and
rebates. Only about 5% of their offerings have any connection with AI,
however; the rest is slanted toward data processing people and micro
owners. Some of their currently-offered "past selections" are
Wilensky's LISPcraft; Abelson & Sussman's Structure and Interpretation
of Computer Programs; Schmucker's Fuzzy Sets, Natural Language
Computations, and Risk Analysis; and Pavlidis' Algorithms for Graphics
and Image Processing. I think they had Steele's book on CommonLisp,
but it's not advertised this month.
The Handbook of AI is an excellent introduction to major currents
in the field; read it cover to cover if you can find the time.
I have my doubts about whether people will consult this often
enough as a reference work to justify owning their own copies,
but having it on your shelf can give you a warm feeling. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 85 07:52:15 EDT (Thu)
From: schwamb@mitre.ARPA
Subject: Machine Learning List
Our group here at MITRE is starting a new machine learning project
oriented toward the improvement of expert system rule bases. Does
anyone know if there is a machine learning list like AIList? This
would certaintly be helpful for us, providing another outlet to
banter ideas around. If there isn't a list, perhaps someone might
be interested in starting one up. After all, with the coming
MACHINE LEARNING journal starting in '86, the field will now have a
better focus and more interest.
Karl Schwamb
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 85 10:18 pst
From: "furth john%c.mfenet"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: Mistakes
Perhaps the computer fails to beat the best human player for the reason
that "Computers don't make mistakes." This cliche does not hold up for
every use of term, "mistake" -- one could say that the computer has made
at least one mistake if it has lost. Let us define "error" as a certain
sort of mistake which might not be a mistake after all. An "error" will
occur when the response to an input is not "standard", a "standard"
response being a part of the structure which is the context
of the input. The computer program understands nothing but chess -- its
responses are all standard. The human player, on the other hand, has
experiences that differ in some or many respects from the experience of
playing chess. When he or she receives an input in a game of chess, one
which would elicit a standard response from the computer, a pattern there
may be matched to a pattern outside of chess altogether, with the result
that the human player responds with a non-standard move. Often this
"error" will truly be a mistake. If the error turns out be superior
to the standard move, then the player will profit by remembering and
repeating it.
The very attribute which gives the computer its power, the
ability to process ideas in an entirely discrete manner, will always
isolate it from the real world. Only with difficulty can a program
even approach human experience. How then can the chess program obtain the
breadth of experience which I am associating here with superior perform-
ance? I suggest that the chess program be taught other games, mostly
similar ones, say Checkers or Go, but also games of chance, Monopoly, for
instance, or card games. Any goal oriented activity should do, so long as
it can be discretized. We should shake the computer up a bit in hopes
that it will survive and gain some insights otherwise unattainable.
John Furth
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 85 14:56:21 BST
From: Fitch@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Re: LISP v C
Some of us can do useful work on a small LISP system. The whole of
the integration code for REDUCE was developed on a 400Kbyte usable
store machine. Not all LISPs are that big. I know I am now using 1Mb
virtual, but LISP provides a better environment in 512K than C.
John Fitch
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 85 14:47 EST
From: Ed Fox <fox%vpi.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Announcement of IRList
This is to announce a new list on information retrieval.
You may submit material for the digest to IRList%vpi@csnet-relay
from the Internet, IRList@vpi from CSNET, IRList@vpics1 from BITNET.
Administrative requests should be sent to IRList-Request. As you
might expect, archival copies of all digests will be kept; feel free
to ask IRList-Request for recent back issues. Note that FTP is not
possible, so all communication must be by EMAIL or phone or letter.
IRList is open to discussion of any topic related to information
retrieval. Certainly, any material relating to ACM SIGIR is of
interest. Our field has close ties to artificial intelligence,
database management, information and library science, linguistics, ...
A partial list of topics suitable are:
Information Management/Processing/Science/Technology
AI Applications to IR Indexing
Abstracting Information Display
Citations Information Theory
Cognitive Psychology Knowledge Representation
Communications Networks Language Understanding
Computational Linguistics Library Science
Computer Science NL Processing
Cybernetics Natural Languages
Data Abstraction Pattern Recognition
Document Representations Library Science
Electronic Books Probabilistic Techniques
Expert Systems for IR Speech Analysis
Full-Text Retrieval Statistical Techniques
Hardware aids for IR
Contributions may be anything from tutorials to rampant speculation.
In particular, the following are sought:
Abstracts Reviews
Lab Descriptions Research Overviews
Work Planned or in Progress Half-Baked Ideas
Conference Announcements Conference Reports
Bibliographies History of IR
Queries and Requests Address Changes
The only real boundaries to the discussion are defined by the topics
of other mailing lists. Please do not send communications to both
this list and AIList or the Prolog list, except in special cases.
I have no objection to distributing material that is destined for
conference proceedings or any other publication. I am involved in
SIGIR Forum and unless you request otherwise may include submissions
in whole or in part in future paper versions of the FORUM. Indeed,
this is one form of solicitation for FORUM contributions! Both
IRList and the FORUM are unrefereed. [...]
-- Ed Fox
Dr. Edward A. Fox, Asst. Prof., Dept. of Computer Science, 562 McBryde Hall,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VPI&SU or Virginia Tech),
Blacksburg, VA 24061; (703)961-5113 or 6931.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Jul-85 2219 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #96
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jul 85 22:18:54 PDT
Date: Sat 20 Jul 1985 20:23-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #96
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 21 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 96
Today's Topics:
Books - Library of Computer and Information Science & AI Handbook,
AI Tools - Lisp vs. C & Vaxy Lisps,
Survey - Spatial Reasoning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 20 Jul 85 18:38:17-PDT
From: Rich Alderson <ALDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: V3 #95--AI Handbook
I took this offer up several years ago. I have managed to pick up a few nice
items through the club, enough to justify the postage required to turn down
most of their monthly offerings. It has been handy to have my own AIHB around
when libraries had funny summer or between-quarter hours, for example.
They have NOT had Steele's Common Lisp as yet, or I would have gotten it
through them. Oh, well....
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 85 13:04 PDT
From: "Watson Mark%SAI"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: Lisp Vs C
I agree with John Fitch that both exploratory programming
and development work can be effectively done on a small memory
Lisp machine. I have found it convenient to work with a 5000 line
program (Charles Forgy's OPS5) on a 512K Macintosh using a commercially
available Lisp compiler and still have lots of room for anciliary
Lisp functions and hundreds of production rules. Programs written in
C certainly run much faster than those written in compiled Lisp, but
software development time is much greater.
Mark Watson
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 85 16:10:00 EDT
From: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Reply-to: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: Vaxy Lisps
About 2 weeks ago, I broadcast a request for information on the
availability of flavorful Lisps to run on a VAX. I got a few
responses and also some requests to be informed on the
responses, so herewith a condensation of the results:
********* begin Vaxy-Lisp references *********************
Local DEC rep for AI applications is:
Richard Brimer
8301 Professional Place
Landover MD 20785
ms: DC0-912
They (DEC) are developing a flavors system, called VAXFLAVORS,
much like Symbolics'.
********************************************************
From: MPW 26-JUN-1985 14:29:37
Return-Path: <MPW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
You probably should be aware of NIL, a lisp implementation for VMS
developed at MIT. NIL has a flavor system, and is available for a
nominal tape-copying/distribution charge. Contact Glenn Burke at
(617) 253-3546 for further information. He's hard to get by phone;
you may have better luck with net mail to GSB@MIT-MC.
Mike Wellman
********************************************************
From: CARR 26-JUN-1985 14:44:23
Subj: psl blurb
Please send a psl [portable standard lisp] blurb for psl/vax/vms
to CUGINI@NBS-VMS.
Thanks, Harold
[psl is available from University of Utah for $750]
********************************************************
From: chaowatkins 26-JUN-1985 15:56:06
Subj: lisp
Return-Path: <chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
John,
XLISP is a small, toy lisp. It is in public domain. The main
purpose is to allow users to play with `object oriented programming'
approach. The copy I have runs on the Z80. There must be a copy that
runs on the IBM-PC by now, i assume. i can get you the name of the
bulletin board to call for the Z80 copy, let me know.
VAX/VMS has Common Lisp running on it. The compiler is developed
at DEC.
For object-oriented programming purposes, try:
1) Symbolics lisp machine -- FLAVORS system
2) Xerox -- SMALLTALK
scw (my arpa address is : chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA)
********************************************************
From: FAHLMAN 27-JUN-1985 10:43:39
Return-Path: <FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
DEC has been selling a Common Lisp for the Vax (VMS only, though a unix
version is about to enter field test) for over a year, with
professional-level support. It is certainly the most solid and
well-supported Lisp available for VMS at this point, and because it is a
Common Lisp code can be ported to many other machines. There is no
object-oriented support available from DEC yet, but we at CMU are close
to releasing a portable Flavors package for Common Lisp.
-- Scott Fahlman
********************************************************
From: mcguire 28-JUN-1985 15:33:10
The best vax/lisp I've used is "T" which is a version of Scheme.
It has lexical scoping, closures, objects, and an optimizing compiler.
It was developed at the Yale C.S department and since you are at NBS
you can probably get it directly from them (there was company comercially
distributing it but I think no longer).
The contact point should still be John O'Donnel (? odonnel@yale.arpa).
If that address doesn't work, let me know and I'll try to hunt up the right
address.
********************************************************
There is CSI Lisp (Cognitive Systems, Inc) which
runs on top of VAX/LISP, but with object-oriented stuff.
cost $10K.
address: Cognitive Systems Inc.
234 Church St.
New Haven CT 06510
********************************************************
From: vasoll%okstate. 26-JUN-1985 11:29:59
Return-Path: <vasoll%okstate.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
John,
I have an old note from back in Dec. `84 that indicates a fellow named
David Betz wrote the original implementation of XLISP. Another person, John
Woods, picked that up and enhanced it, then posted it to net.sources on USENET.
I don't have an electronic address for Mr. Betz, but John Woods was reachable
back in December at mit-eddie!jfw.
Hope this helps,
Mark Vasoll
Department of Computing and Information Sciences
Oklahoma State University
UUCP: {cbosgd, ea, ihnp4, isucs1, mcvax, pesnta, uokvax}!okstate!vasoll
ARPA: vasoll%okstate.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
********************************************************
Return-Path: <diamant%case.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
I have been using VAXLISP for about six months now. I have implemented
an expert system to reason about grasping objects in it. It is truly
a full-fledged implementation of Common LISP. I generally use Guy Steele's
language specification instead of the user's manual for a reference. The
features that I have found lacking in it (not many) have been in the area
of problems with the specification, rather than the implementation. I
can't comment on price -- I don't know how much we paid for it. [I think
it costs $5K -- JC ] Performance
of the system when the VAX doesn't have loads of memory can be pretty bad.
However, the compiler is quite good. One grad student here implemented a
window system including a terminal driver in compiled LISP code, and it
ran quite rapidly. It all depends on how well you write the code (declares
can be very important to speeding up compiled code).
As far as xlisp goes, it can run on VAX/VMS if you have a C compiler.
It is a good language in which to learn LISP, but it is only on the verge
of being a useful language for real work. XLISP was written by David
Betz (I think his address is Betz@YALE, but I can't remember for sure).
XLISP is a public domain LISP which has some syntactic similarity to
Common LISP, but by no means is it Common LISP at present. For one thing,
Common LISP is lexically scoped except when told otherwise. XLISP is
dynamically scoped. XLISP contains a smalltalk-like object oriented
programming interface.
If you are interested in object oriented Common LISPs (that is one
of the drawbacks of the language specification -- they didn't include
object oriented programming), I suggest you consider a few possibilities:
HP has a specification for a flavors-like extension to the Common LISP
specification (contact snyder@hplabs.csnet or hplabs!snyder.UUCP). I'm
not sure if the implementation is complete or whether they sell it
independently of the LISP system itself. The same grad student I mentioned
above implemented a subset of flavors in Common LISP. Distribution of
this implementation has not been worked out yet, but I am sure it will
be possible to obtain it. If you are interested, I could check up on it for
you.
John Diamant Usenet: ...decvax!cwruecmp!diamant
Case Western Reserve University CSNet: diamant@Case
Cleveland, Ohio ARPA: diamant%Case@CSNet-Relay
********* end of Vaxy←Lisp references **************
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 85 15:43:00 EDT
From: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Reply-to: "!CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: Spatial reasoning
About 2 weeks ago, I broadcast a request for information on AI
work in the realm of spatial reasoning. I got a few responses
and also some requests to be informed on the responses, so
herewith a condensation of the results:
********* begin spatial-reasoning references *********************
Return-Path: <PARK@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by NBS-VMS.ARPA ; 8 Jul 85 02:36:36 EDT
From: Bill Park <PARK@SRI-AI.ARPA>
The big names in the field are Tomas Lozano-Perez and Rod Brooks at MIT,
and Sharir & Co. at Courant Inst., NYU.
***************************************************
[this one came, unbidden, from ailist, but I'm repeating it for
completeness - JC]
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 85 14:14 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Shape from Function (GMR)
SHAPE FROM FUNCTION VIA MOTION ANALYSIS
with Application to the Automatic Design of
Orienting Devices for Vibratory Part Feeders
Dr. Tomas Lozano-Perez
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Cambridge, MA. 02139
Wednesday, August 14, 1985, 11:00 a.m.
General Motors Research Laboratories
Computer Science Department
Warren, Michigan 48090-9057
This talk explores the premise that the function of many devices can be
characterized by how they interact with other objects....
.....
Dr. Lozano-Perez has authored technical articles in the areas of motion
planning, robot programming, and model-based object recognition. He has
been affiliated with the M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory since
1973.
Steve Holland informs me that this talk will be held at GMR and that Tomas
is reachable at tlp%mit-oz@mit-mc or via u.s. mail to MIT AI Lab. -- KIL
***************************************************
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1985 14:14 EDT
From: Juliana Kraft <ROBOT.JULIE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Spatial Reasoning Query
For 3D you must consider 6 degrees of freedom (3 translational and 3
rotational). I recommend "Motion Planning with Six Degrees of
Freedom," by Bruce Donald, (261 pp), MIT AI-TR 791, available from
Publications Office
MIT AI Laboratory
Room NE43-818
545 Tech Square
Cambridge, MA 02139
(617) 253-6773.
***************************************************
Return-Path: <dave@cmu-cs-cad.arpa>
Received: from CMU-CS-CAD.ARPA by NBS-VMS.ARPA ; 9 Jul 85 18:07:29 EDT
Date: 9 Jul 1985 18:01:34-EDT
From: Bharat.Dave@CMU-CS-CAD
To: cugini@nbs-vms
Subject: Re: Spatial reasoning
Does your query about "spatial reasoning" refer to the physical objects
(as in buildings) ? If so, then I don't know of any reference or work
that specifically addresses it. But you may try the following- it contains
a number of references which may be of interest to you.
DRC-12-23-84 A Bibliography on Knowledge-Based Expert Systems in Engineering,
D. Sriram
(can be obtained from) Design Research Center
Carnegie-Mellon University
Doherty Hall A219
Pittsburgh PA 15213
Dave
****************************************************
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 85 12:25 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Geometric Reasoning (Penn)
A GEOMETRIC REASONING SYSTEM FOR MOVING AN OBJECT WHILE MAINTAINING
CONTACT WITH OTHERS
Anastasia Koutsou, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh
Thursday, 11 July 1985 3:00 pm 216 Moore
[...]
********* end of spatial-reasoning references **************
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Thu 18 Jul 85 14:36:24-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: Spatial reasoning
Thanks for sharing your summaries with us.
Spatial reasoning is a lot harder than people realize. We had a
fellow here who started naively with the "logic" approach --
"It's easy, you just define an AT predicate and a MOVE predicate ..."
-- and then began to learn the real problems when he started
writing programs for a robot arm. A year later he said "You know,
I've almost finished developing an AT predicate!"
The problem he and others in the SRI Robotics Group have solved is
the transformation of spatial knowledge from one time and sensor
to knowledge relative to another [loosely-coupled] coordinate system
after an arbitrary sequence of arm motions and sensing steps. The AT
predicate must therefore be developed as a fuzzy specification of
[bent] error ellipses or probability distributions, and propagating
these spatial uncertainties through sequences of imprecise motions is
pretty hairy. (Contact Smith@SRI-AI if you want more details.)
Spatial (and temporal) reasoning has received quite a bit of attention
from the philosophers and linguists. Annette Herskovits of Stanford
has written several papers on the semantics and pragmatics of spatial
prepositions, and Lotfi Zadeh has developed fuzzy representations
of spatial language. I have a 1974 paper by Norman Sondheimer, UWashington
CSD Report 205, English as a Basis for Command Languages for Machines
and Some Problems of Spatial Reference; I'm sure there are many such papers.
The Commonsense Summer people at SRI (under Jerry Hobbs' leadership)
attempted to formalize spatial reasoning, but didn't come up with
much that wasn't already familiar to the robotics community (e.g.,
the Edinburgh RAPT system for constrained motion planning).
Mathematicians and computer scientists (and others) have worried about
traveling salesmen, bin-packing, spatial layout, tool motion, polygonal
decomposition, cartographic mapping, and many other problems. In the
architecture domain, I've seen papers by John Grason and Charles
Eastman of CMU (e.g., CACM 13/4, April 1970, and CACM 15/2, February
1972) on space planning.
Some of the most interesting recent work in spatial reasoning seems to
be that of Earnest Davis at Yale (the MERCATOR representation) and of
John Tsotsos at U. Toronto (combined spatial/temporal reasoning
in the ALVEN system for interpreting ultrasound heart images).
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂25-Jul-85 1445 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #97
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jul 85 14:39:22 PDT
Date: Thu 25 Jul 1985 11:57-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #97
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 25 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 97
Today's Topics:
News - SIGART Chapter Forming,
Seminars - Speech Acts and Rationality (SRI) &
Design Expert Systems (CMU) &
Typed Logical Calculus (SU) &
Correcting Misconceptions (Penn) &
Time and Causation (SRI) &
Realism in Cognitive AI (CSLI) &
Reformulation of Knowledge (Rutgers) &
Function from Form (Rutgers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 19 Jul 85 16:49:09-CDT
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: SIGART Chapter Forming
A SIGART chapter is forming for Austin, Texas. SIGART is part of
Association for Computing Machinery. It's the Special Interest Group on
Artificial Intelligence.
Monthly program and dinner meetings will start this fall. Each month an
invited speaker from industry or academia will talk on some aspect of AI in
Central Texas. Dr. Jonathan Slocum (MCC) will be our first dinner speaker.
He will talk on Machine Translation of Natural Languages. That meeting
will be Wed, Sept. 4th; the place has not yet been chosen.
We have already chosen a board: Drs. Elaine Rich (MCC), Woodrow Bledsoe
(MCC & UT), Doug Lenat (MCC), Harry Tennant (Texas Instruments) and Bruce
Porter (UT) will serve. I am responsible for the initial organization.
We are inviting strong participation from the several industrial AI
groups in the area. Austin SIGART will provide a common ground the
hardware people, the software people and the research people that are
making AI happen here.
If you want to help this organization get going, come to our business
meeting. Our first one will be a dinner meeting on Thur, July 25, at
6:30 pm, at
SIRLOIN STOCKADE
8828 Research Blvd
(between Ohlen and Burnett)
The dinner will be $8.00 for a full sirloin dinner. If you're coming,
inform
Rodney Lancaster, of TI Advanced Systems Software
250-6456
Dsg.Lancaster%CSL60%TI-CSL@CSnet-Relay.ARPA
We need a rough advance count.
The agenda will include:
Ratifying our initial bylaws and officers
Certifying ourselves as an active chapter to the national SIGART
Securing a place for our program meetings
Publicity and Membership
Speakers and Programs
We will also need assistance, as the time of our first program meeting
approaches, getting sign-up sheets for the dinner circulated at the AI
office sites in town.
Membership will be open to all people in the area with an interest in AI;
discounts will be available to those who have memberships in the ACM or the
national SIGART.
I'm looking forward to working with a strong SIGART program for Austin
soon.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 17 Jul 85 14:12:17-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Speech Acts and Rationality (SRI)
Speech Acts and Rationality
Phil Cohen
SRI AI Center
11:00 AM, Monday, July 22
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ232
This talk will describe how a theory of communication can be grounded in a
theory of rational interaction. I will present a formalism,
jointly developed with Hector Levesque, that characterizes how an agent's
beliefs and goals eventually lead to action, and how goals to affect the
beliefs and goals of other agents leads to communication.
Communicative acts will be modelled along the lines of Grice's account
of non-natural meaning. I will show how the speech acts of informing,
requesting, and questioning can be defined (rather than stipulated)
in this framework. Importantly, these definitions will allow one
to distinguish insincere imperatives from true requests, and
exam questions from real questions.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 85 11:54:18 EDT
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Seminar - Design Expert Systems (CMU)
The next DRC seminar on expert systems for design applications is
Tuesday July 23 in the Adamson Wing at 1:30. Refreshments will be served
at 1:15.
HYBRID KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS:
REQUIREMENTS AND ADVANTAGES
Rene Banares-Alcantara
Experiments with the application of knowledge-based systems to engineering
design have shown us that the use of hybrid systems is necessary. Hybrid
knowledge-based systems make it possible to take full advantage of the
existing programs, and also allow the automization of a larger portion of
the design process.
Hybridity is a concept that can be achieved in several dimensions: knowledge
representation and abstraction, implementation languages, problem solving
methods, etc. In order to construct hybrid systems it is necessary to be
able to mix different components (programming languages, modules, programs,
levels of abstraction, etc.) into a common working space. Although no
complete solution has been developed to accomplish this goal, the blackboard
model seems to be the ideal paradigm for this purpose.
DECADE (Design Expert for CAtalyst Development) will be presented as one
system that partially illustrates the above ideas.
[Automization? Hybridity? The latter >>is<< listed in the American
Heritage dictionary, but do we need it? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jul 85 1359 PDT
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Typed Logical Calculus (SU)
There will be as short series of talks given by visitors to the
computer science department from Japan. The seminars will occur on
Thursdays at 4pm. The announcement for the first seminar is below.
Speaker: Prof. Masahiko Sato, University of Tokyo
Title: Typed Logical Calculus
Time: Thursday, July 25, 4:00-5:00 pm
Place: Room 352 Margaret Jacks Hall
(Computer Science Department), Stanford
We present a typed formal system QJ which is
intended both as a logical system and a program-
ming system. QJ is a constructive system based on
free intuitionistic logic. QJ is a typed system
where forms play the roles of both formulas and
terms of conventional logical systems.
The logic of QJ is free in the sense that
forms (considered as terms) may fail to denote.
The type structure of QJ is rich enough to include
such data types as integers, lists, trees and
function spaces. A form of QJ, when considered as
a term, becomes a program in the usual sense. As
a programming language, QJ becomes a typed func-
tional language somewhat similar to ML. A form
of QJ, when viewed as a formula, may be used to
specify a program. We can also verify programs in
QJ. By implementing QJ on a computer, we will
have a uniform environment where we can specify,
execute and verify programs.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 21:56 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: dissertation defense - Correcting Misconceptions (Penn)
Dissertation Defense
CORRECTING OBJECT RELATED MISCONCEPTIONS
Kathleen Filliben McCoy
10:00 am, Monday July 29, 1985
554 Moore, University on Pennsylvania
Analysis of a corpus of naturally occurring data shows that users conversing
with a database or expert system are likely to reveal misconceptions about
the objects modelled by the system. Further analysis reveals that the sort
of responses given when such misconceptions are encountered depends greatly
on the discourse context. This work develops a context-sensitive method for
automatically generating responses to object-related misconceptions with the
goal of incorporating a correction module in the front-end of a database or
expert system. The method is demonstrated through the ROMPER system
(Responding to Object-related Misconceptions using PERspective) which is
able to generate responses to two classes of object-related misconceptions:
misclassifications and misattributions.
The transcript analysis reveals a number of specific strategies used by
human experts to correct misconceptions, where each different strategy
refutes a different kind of support for the misconception. In this work
each strategy is paired with a structural specification of the kind of
support it refutes. ROMPER uses this specification, and a model of the user,
to determine which kind of support is most likely. The corresponding
response strategy is then instantiated.
The above process is made context sensitive by a proposed addition to
standard knowledge-representation systems termed object perspective. Object
perspective is introduced as a method for augmenting a standard
knowledge-representation system to reflect the highlighting affects of
previous discourse. It is shown how this resulting highlighting can be used
to account for the context-sensitive requirements of the correction process.
Advisors: Aravind Joshi, Bonnie Webber
Committee: Tim Finin, Ellen Prince, Ralph Weischedel
------------------------------
Date: Wed 24 Jul 85 13:59:10-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Time and Causation (SRI)
Title: Time and Causation from the Standpoint of AI.
Nontitle: The Frame Problem is not.
Yoav Shoham
Yale University, SRI-AI
11:00 AM, Monday, July 29
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ232
Most tasks undertaken by AI researchers involve reasoning about
time in one way or another. In particular, the somewhat ill-defined
areas of planning and naive physics reasoning rely crucially on the
passage of time and the taking place of change. I am aiming at
a general and yet rigorous theory of time and change.
I am primarily interested in a useful notational device. Psychological
plausibility is only an added benefit, and philosophical truth
is something over which I lose little sleep.
The talk is structured as follows:
1. A first-order theory of time, which could be viewed as a generalization
of James Allen's theory.
2. A modal version of the same theory. Several interval-based modal logics
will be presented, along with the few of their theoretical properties
which I am beginning to understand.
3. The theory of causal counterfactuals, a particular theory of change
that relies on part 1. I will demonstrate how this theory appears
to avoid three major problems:
a. The cross-world identification problem for time tokens.
b. The frame problem.
c. A nameless problem encountered in the philosophy literature.
Also, in the spirit of recent "rigorous reconstructions" I will
reformulate Ken Forbus' Qualitative Process theory in terms of
causal counterfactuals.
In the unlikely event of our having time left over I'll discuss
Richard Waldinger's toy car.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 24 Jul 85 17:04:56-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Realism in Cognitive AI (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
David H. Helman, Department of Philosophy
Case Western Reserve University
``Realism and Antirealism in Cognitive Artificial Intelligence''
Ventura Conference Room, Thursday, August 1, 2:15 pm
In the philosophy of mind, one controversy between realists and
antirealists concerns the semantics of sentences embedded in attitude
reports. Antirealists believe that the interpretation or reference of
a sentence embedded in an attitude report is a psychological state of
the agent who is the subject of the attitude report. Realists believe
that the interpretation or reference of a sentence is a state of the
world and not a state of mind, whether or not the sentence is embedded
in an attitude report.
In this paper, I show how these two semantic analyses may be
associated with different theories of mental representation in
cognitive artificial intelligence. Realists in cognitive artificial
intelligence describe the mind by supposing that agents partially
represent objects' law-like interactions. Antirealism does not,
perhaps, constitute a single well-defined research strategy in
cognitive artificial intelligences. We may, however, certainly count
as antirealists those researchers in cognitive artificial intelligence
who attempt to simulate mental processes by means of procedures which
mirror tenets of associationist psychology. I argue that acurate
computational models of mind must contain elements from both realist
and antirealist research programs. --David Helman
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jul 85 18:52:40 EDT
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Reformulation of Knowledge (Rutgers)
REFORMULATION OF KNOWLEDGE
Erik Van Releghem.
AI Laboratory, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and
GTE Fundamental Research Laboratories
We describe a system for reformulation of knowledge as a
powerful extension of the knowledge representation system KRS. We
define reformulation operators that change the structure of knowledge.
A mathematical model describes the operators and shows their power and
limitations. We show applications of reformulation in matters of
defining analogies, definition of office procedures and computer
vision in order to demonstrate the use of reformulation as a
high-level AI tool.
Date: Thursday, July 25, 1985
Time: 10:30-11:30 AM
Place: Hill Center, Room 423
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jul 85 18:52:40 EDT
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Function from Form (Rutgers)
FUNCTION FROM FORM
David J. Braunegg
MIT AI Lab, and
GTE Fundamental Research Laboratories
I propose an approach to reasoning about the function of an
object based on its shape. A particular domain, hand tools, is chosen
to demonstrate this approach. The novelty of this approach is its
combination of reasoning by analogy to the shapes of known tools with
reasoning from the possible motions of tools. Each of these methods
compensates for the deficiencies of the other. When combined with the
use of domain heuristics, they form a powerful reasoning system for
determining function from form. (WARNING: This talk concerns research
which is in its early stages. No claims of results or working
programs are expressed or implied.)
Date: Thursday, July 25, 1985
Time: 11:30 AM-12:00 PM
Place: Hill Center, Room 423
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂25-Jul-85 2303 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #98
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jul 85 23:03:09 PDT
Date: Thu 25 Jul 1985 20:56-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #98
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 26 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 98
Today's Topics:
Queries - Lisp for Commodore 128 & AI Management & CS Taxonomy &
AI Databases & Geometry Survey & Space Planning,
AI Tools - ITP & Symbolics LISP/PROLOG,
Programming Languages - Interlisp Comments,
Games - Psychological Strategies
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Jul 85 10:42 EDT
From: Emanuel.henr@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Lisp for Commodore 128 machine.
I have been reading this list for some time, and have found it quite
informative. I have also been impressed by the informed level of the
discussion. I would like to draw upon this now.
I just purchased the new Commodore 128 machine. It can run CPM-80, and
read IBM System 34 format disks (& Kaypro, Osborn disks). I would like
to know which of the LISP Packages that are available in this format
are the best to get. There seems to be a wide spred of prices across
the offered LISPs. Are the expensive ones that much better ? Is one
Outstanding ? Is one a best compromise of price and power ?
I thank you in advance for your response.
Keith j. Emanuel
Xerox/Human Factors.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 11:11:07 edt
From: simmons@EDN-VAX (Bob Simmons)
Subject: DCA Query on AI Management
At the Defense Communications Agency, we have been laying the
groundwork for an in-house AI group, primarily to test and evaluate
emerging expert system technology. We are also considering the
possibility of expanding to in-house development within the next three
to five years. I'm interested in the issues and specific problems that
other organizations have faced or expect to face when forming an
in-house group. I expect that these problems are quite different from
the concerns of a corporation developing a commercial product. In
particular, other than questions about the best hardware/software
combination, our concerns center on careful selection of a problem
domain, management of AI pilot projects, and justification of the
effort to upper-level management. As an aside, I found David Prerau's
"Selection of an Appropriate Domain for an Expert System" in the latest
issue of AI Magazine to be a great springboard into a pool of important
questions. We plan on using that article as a guideline for our own
interviews with our technical managers.
I'd appreciate any input that you have on this matter. If you are going
to be at IJCAI, please drop me a quick note and I'll look you up sometime
during that week. If not, please respond via electronic mail. If the
response warrants a summary (hopefully it will), I'll send a synopsis of
the interesting/important observations to AILIST.
Bob Simmons
Automated Technologies Planning
DCA/DCEC Code R802
1860 Wiehle Avenue
Reston, VA 22090
ARPANET: simmons@edn-vax.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 85 16:37:54 EDT
From: "Dr. Ron Green" (ARO) <green@BRL.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Science Taxonomy
I would like to find out if there is a generally accepted taxonomy
for computer science. The first level of break out that I desire
is hardware, software, and AI. I feel that I would
like to see two or three levels of detail below this. If there
are some taxonomies like this I would appreciate being told about
them. The next phase will be soliciting names of persons and their
categories of expertise for review of proposals for basic research.
Thanks,
Ron
[There are several such taxonomies. One of the best is the
Computing Reviews classification system (published in CACM,
January 1982). The various online abstracting services,
including those of the defense department, have their own
taxonomies, as do the librarians and, no doubt, the NSF and
various government statistical agencies. Academics in CS often build
taxonomies in support of curriculum development; see, for instance,
Schenk and Pinkert's survey in the 1978 National Computer Conference,
pp. 1209-1212. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jul 85 10:15:27 EDT
From: Robert.Frederking@CMU-CS-CAD
Subject: AI databases?
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I'm looking for a declarative knowledge-base to use as a domain for
the NL parser I'm working on. It must be frame-oriented and rich in domain
knowledge, and preferably should contain intentional information (what the
defining features of a particular subset are, for instance) and "common
sense" knowledge. (I don't actually expect to find all this in one KB.)
Note that I am specifically looking for content, not an empty KR system.
I'm already aware of the NLM database. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jul 85 09:47:46 EDT
From: Rob.Woodbury@CMU-CS-CAD
Subject: geometry survey
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am doing a survey on computer based representations of geometry in
engineering and architecture. The intent of the survey is to collect in one
place an overview of all (or as close as possible to all) existing modelling
techniques and applications and all current areas of research. Of particular
interest is any work on spatial reasoning, motion planning and vision
systems. I will make results available. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks -rob-
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jul 1985 15:07:13-EDT
From: Bharat.Dave@CMU-CS-CAD
Subject: Re: Space Planning
Although this pertains to architecture, it would be interesting to hear
from others about issues of design and models of descriptions used.
Most of the work done in `space planning' in architecture, has concentrated
on geometric descriptions and manipulations (which is probably closer to
applications in robotics than architecture). Designers employ words, drawings
and perceptual notions which have not yet been fully investigated. To put
it differently, diagrams are used as a vehicle of statement as well as
interpretation of topological and semantic concepts.
To go beyond bin-packing spatial layouts, real world knowledge will have to
be built into the system (i.e. there are rules which are broadly observed,
some others come into play only in certain contexts; some of these are
stricter than the others and the rest are pure flights of fancy...).
Any of these rules or a combination of them, may be utilized for specifying
or evaluating given spatial configuration. And also, some mechanism for
alternating between various design-states will have to be built in.
Probably, what confuses the most about human designers is the kind of mental
representations they use. It seems more like abstract analog models of real
spaces and elements than simple surrogate verbal concepts.
`Mental Models' (ed.) by Gentner and Stevens has some interesting papers
on spatial models used by novices and experts in various domains.
--Bharat Dave
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 85 14:40:28 edt
From: Tom Scott <scott%bgsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: ITP, how to order it
According to Ross Overbeek (overbeek@anl-mcs), who is one of the
developers of Argonne's Logic Machine Architecture/Interactive Theorem
Prover (LMA/ITP) and a co-author of "Automated Reasoning" (Wos et al.
1984), you can obtain the software from Numerical Algorithms Group (NAG)
at the following address and telephone number:
Numerical Algorithms Group
1101 31st Street, Suite 100
Downers Grove, IL 60515
(312) 971-2337
If I remember correctly, the cost of LMA/ITP was $75.00
(seventy-five). One of our logicians, Charlie Applebaum
(applebau@bgsu), is working on LMA/ITP with some of the people at Mitre
and Argonne, so that may be the reason for the low price charged to
BGSU. But I think the $75.00 price is what NAG charges anyone for
LMA/ITP, simply to cover the distribution costs. The same software is
available from one of the innumerable departments at Argonne National
Laboratory for something in the neighborhood of $1050.00 (one thousand
fifty). I always thought the federal government was expensive; now I
know it is.
Jai Guru Dev,
Tom Scott UUCP: cbosgd!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!scott
Dept. of Math. & Stat. CSNET/ARPANET: scott@bgsu
Bowling Green State Univ. ATT: 419-372-2636
Bowling Green OH 43403-0221
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 09:16 EDT
From: Scott Garren <garren@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolics LISP/PROLOG
From: Yigal Arens <ARENS@USC-ECLC.ARPA>
I'm interested in finding out about implementations of Prolog in Lisp or
Lisp in Prolog(?), or any other version of either that allows one to
program in both. [...]
Symbolics has a Prolog written in Lisp. The 3600 architecture has been
expanded with additional instructions that implement backtracking,
unification, and cut. We have also extended Lisp with a logic variable
data type. The result is a well integrated environment where the user
can call back and forth between the languages. All the operating system
and networking functions are accessible from Prolog. Symbolics Prolog
also offers what we believe is the highest performance of any
commercially available Prolog.
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jul 85 11:15:36 EDT
From: Tim <WEINRICH@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: More Interlisp comments
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 85 09:50:16 edt
From: Eric Nyberg <ehn0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: Interlisp Comments
I disagree with Steven's conclusion that Interlisp "discourages"
comments. The *default environment* handles comments in a
discouraging way, but a few lines of code in the init file can remedy
the situation.
But all he said was that Interlisp "discourages" comments, not that it
prohibits them. The default Interlisp environment makes comments about as
inconvenient to use as it possibly can without actually prohibiting them.
Furthermore, as you yourself admit, the documentation which describes how to
change the environment is very difficult to find and use. And no matter how
you change the environment, you still have to be careful where you put your
comments. (The preferred place for documenting a variable would be right
where the variable is declared, which you can't do. My preferred place for
documenting a clause of a CONDition is at the beginning of the clause, which
you can't do. The nicest place to describe an argument which you're sending
to some function would be right after the argument itself, which you can't do.
Sometimes I like to include "afterthoughts" at the end of a function which
tell how that function might be improved or something, which you can't do.)
If this sort of thing does not "discourage" the use of comments, I
honestly don't know what it would take for a language to do so.
Twinerik
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 10:06 EDT
From: Jong@HIS-BILLERICA-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Re: Mistakes
The recent comment on "mistakes" in chess and the limitation of
expert systems to their (narrow) field of expertise brings up an
interesting point. Computer-science experts have been trying to
win chess championships for years; why aren't they trying to win
the World Series of Poker? The answer is simply that in poker,
you win or lose less on the basis of the cards in your hand and
more on the basis of the expression on your face and your
opponents'. The knowledge base for that game goes far beyond the
odds of filling an inside straight.
The great chess champion Emmanuel Lasker said that chess was
not simply a mathematical exercise but a fight, a fight between
two people. Lasker was a master of the psychological pressures
of the game. He knew when to make a deliberately inferior move
that rattled an opponent into thinking Lasker had a prepared
variation (one line of play exhaustively studied by one
opponent), when really Lasker had nothing planned but a head
game. Lasker knew which of his contemporaries to attack and
which to play defensively; which knew the openings well and which
were end-game masters; and which liked complications and which
shied away from them. With this knowledge he became champion.
A chess program is not likely to play based on its opponent,
because of the programming difficulties involved, and, I suspect,
because that is not an attractive line of research for its
programmers. Right now, though, human masters are beating chess
programs by playing to their weaknesses (for instance, when to
jump out of a book opening to the program's disadvantage). In a
larger sense, this is probably a discussion of "intuition" as it
applied to AI. Obviously, we have a long way to go before we
have an expert system that bases its conclusions based to any
degree on the fact that the inquiring human has grass on his
shoes.
[See Scientific American, July 1978, for an article on Nicholas
Findler's research into automating poker strategies. I seem to
recall that the project ended before a player was developed that
could detect and bluff the Mathematically Fair Player. -- KIL]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂28-Jul-85 0132 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #99
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jul 85 01:32:44 PDT
Date: Sat 27 Jul 1985 23:16-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #99
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 28 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 99
Today's Topics:
Query - Theorem Proving and Program Verification,
AI Tools - ITP & LMI Prolog,
Applications - Space Planning and Architecture,
Literature - Computational Intelligence & AI Report Vol. 2 No. 6 &
Byte AI Special Issue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 85 14:00:35 pdt
From: Jim Fehrle <hpda!hpindla!jef%hplabs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Theorem Proving and Program Verification
I'm looking for information on using theorem proving techniques to
prove assertions about programs, such as (for example):
o Data structure X is not modified unless the variable LOCK is true.
o The memory allocated by procedure X is always released before X
terminates.
o The variable POINTER always points to a data element of type T.
Any references to books or articles on this subject would be appreciated.
Jim Fehrle
Hewlett Packard
{ucbvax, hplabs, ihnp4!hpfcla} !hpda!jef
------------------------------
Date: 26 July 85 22:26-EDT
Date: 26 July 85 22:26-EDT
From: BYKAT%UTCVM.BITNET@Berkeley
Subject: Re: ITP, how to order it
Just to add a little to Tom Scott's note in AIList Digest V3 #98 (7/20/85):
Page 177 of the "Automated Reasoning" (Wos et al., 1984) states:
"Both LMA and ITP are in the public domain."
Yet, as Tom Scott points out, the Argonne National Lab charges $1050,
educational institution or not! (Rather a lot to cover distribution costs.)
Alex Bykat
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 85 21:25:06 EDT
From: George J. Carrette <GJC@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Info about Prolog for LMI-LAMBDA and 36xx
LM-Prolog is a LispMachine implementation of prolog that has been in
commercial and university distribution for both the LMI-LAMBDA and
Symbolics 36xx for over a year. The emphasis in the implementation is
on richness, maturity in datastructures (i.e. not just expressions or
lists but array's, multiple processes and other lispmachine
capabilities), the logically consistent implementation of NOT, the
error checking and handling capabilities such as occurs check and
circularity handling and performance in its database indexing and
ASSUME/RETRACT mechanism. The LMI-LAMBDA version includes a special
microcode-load. Both versions are distributed in SOURCE FORM and
require no additional hardware. The 36xx version is available for
release 5 or 6, and the LMI-LAMBDA version for release 1 or 2.
A brilliant hacker could possible port LM-PROLOG to an enviroment
such as VAX-NIL where he had sufficient lispmachine compatibility
and hooks into the compiler and kernel.
-gjc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 85 09:33 EDT
From: Seth Steinberg <sas@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Space Planning
I used to work for the old Architecture Machine Group at MIT and saw a
number of programming efforts which emulated or assisted architects and
urban planners. How the human mind deals with spatial reasoning is
still a mystery but architects are given specific training in how to
deal with architectural problems. This body of knowledge is the study
of design methodology. The department head, who was from Eindhoven, was
noted for developing the SAR design methodology which involved the use
of architectural grammars. One graduate student did his thesis
on the grammar of Mediterranean hill towns while another parsed the
layout of furniture in an apartment building full of cooperating
retired people.
The SAR method looked rather theoretical to me but it was very popular
in Holland and Latin American countries with left wing governments
(read "democracies"). They encouraged user involvement in the planning
process and would actually teach factory workers how to deal with
"basic variants" at their afterwork planning sessions.
A visit to a good architecture library (e.g. Roche at MIT) should turn
up a fair bit on this subject. Obviously, architects deviate from any
particular methodology, but the guidelines are often useful to help get
started.
Actually, doing architecture is a lot like doing programming from what
I have seen. Back when Babbage was trying to raise funds there were
architects charretting (pulling all nighters). Architectural problems
and programming problems have no one right answer or right approach.
Architects tend to approach a problem vaguely until they develop an
appropriate "vocabulary" (sets of subunits, useful relationships, ...)
for dealing with the problem before they start any serious drawing just
as most programmers tend to program "middle out". Most architects are
doing detail work for office remodelling jobs just as most programmers
are updating huge Cobol programs to take the new tax laws into account.
Finally, architects, like programmers often get carried away with the
elegance of a solution and implement a bathroom with no closet space to
store an extra roll of toilet paper. (I will mention no particular
piece of software here).
Seth Steinberg
SAS @ BBN-VAX
------------------------------
Date: Mon 22 Jul 85 11:50:40-PDT
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE--New Journal Received
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
We have received number one of volume one, February 1985 of Computational
Intelligence/Intelligence Informatique. [...]
The following articles are in the first issue of this new
quarterly journal:
Plan parsing for intended response recognition in discourse by Candace Sidner
On the adequacy of predicate circumscription for closed-world reasoning by
Etherington, Mercer and Reiter.
Knowledge organization and its role in representation and interpretation for
time-varying data: the ALVEN system by John Tsotsos
Recovering from execution errors in SIPE by David Wilkins.
-- Mathematical and Computer Sciences Library. H. Llull.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1985 21:20-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI Report Volume 2 No. 6
o - Discussion of Darpa's strategic computing program
driverless vehicle
gallium arsenide work
MOS implementation service
parallel architectures
naval battle management
Lisp Machine on a chip (TI)
speech recognition
dataflow
wafer scale integration
benchmarking lisp machines
o - DOD Optical computer effort
nine million dollars will be allocated over three years to develop
compact optical computer
o - military expert systems
Titan systems is developing Knowledge-Based engineering System
which is optimized for expert systems related to military command and
control (it has been translated from LISP into C).
Also, they are developing a system called a "space tree" to
determine how goals are met by decisions, allocations or maneuvers.
System to select path of travel based on maps
Air/land battle simulator
o - The French Scene
Laboratoires de Marcoussis (research labs for French corporation
Compagnie Generale d'Electricite)
o - expert systems
process control
diagnosis
computer aided design
scheduling in flexible manufacturing schedules
o - natural language
system to teach UNIX
data base query
o - language development
FROG (integrates LISP and prolog), LISP, PROLOG, common lisp
o - machine optimized for both lisp and prolog
o - speech recognition
system to recognize 35 words with 98 per cent accuracy
o - Carnegie Group has changed the name of SRL+ to Knowledge Prolog
o - Artificial Intelligence Corporation is dropping plans to develop
a microcomputer version of INtellect, its natural language data
base query facility
Microrim has lowered the price of its system CLOUT to $2 50.00
o - Turing Institute has been formed in Scotland
o - review of Texas Instruments activities
o - Arthur D. Little predicts in year 20000, AI market will be 50 to
120 billion dollars [That's quite a crystal ball! -- KIL]
o - The Aeronautical and Electronic Council of Japan has recommended
that Japan look at "the Sixth Generation Computer" which would have
computers similar to the human brain!
o - fifty Japanese companies are forming a research association to look
into AI applicatons to manufacturing
o - article on Lotus activities in AI
review of:
%A William B. Gevarter
%T Intelligent Machines: An Introductory Perspective
%I Prentice-Hall
%C Englewood Cliffs
%J Third Conference on Intelligent Robots and Computer Vision
%C Cambridge, Massachussetts
%D NOV 5-8 1984
%I Society of Photo Optical Instrumentation Engineers
%A Alick Elithorn
%A Ranan Banerji
%T Artificial and Human Intelligence
%I North-Holland
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jul 1985 22:48-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Byte AI Special Issue
definition:
D MAG1 BYTE\
%V 10\
%N 4\
%D APR 1985
citations:
%T TI's Arborist, Decision-Tree Analysis Software, Supports IBM
%J MAG1
%P 42
%X Announcement for decision-tree analyst for making decisions.
Cost is $595.00
%T Book Review
%J MAG1
%P 65
%X Reviews of Build Your Own Expert System Chris Naylor
Artificial Intelligence in Basic Mike James
The Cognitive Computer: On Language, Learning, and Artificial Intelligence
by Roger C. Schank and Peter C. Childrs
%A Roger Schank
%A Larry Hunter
%T The Quest to Understand Thinking
%J MAG1
%P 143
%K scripts natural language conceptual dependency
%X discusses natural language reading including the famous restaurant
script. Also discusses models of memory and "What is AI?"
%A John R. Anderson
%A Brian J. Reiser
%T The Lisp Tutor
%J MAG1
%P 159-175
%X discusses a tutor for people learning lisp. Uses the Goal-Restricted
Production System with 325 production rules. It is effective in
diagnosing between 45 and 80 percent of the student's errors.
They compared private human tutoring, the computer program and self-taught
methods. They compared at 11.4, 15 hours and 26.5 hours to get through
six lessons.
%A W. Lewis Johnson
%A Elliot Soloway
%T Proust
%J MAG1
%P 179-190
%K Pascal tutor frame debug T lisp
%X Describes a system for asisting beginners with debugging Pascal
programs. It is 15000 lines of T. In a set of 206 student solutions
to a small problem, PROUST understood completely 79 percent of the programs
and identified 94 percent of the bugs.
%A Michael F. Deering
%T Architectures for AI
%J MAG1
%P 193-206
%K FAIM1 lisp machine Zetalisp Franz lisp PSL hardware unification
machine vision
%X A machine coded unifier is two orders of magnitude faster than the LISP-
coded unifier.
Time for the aggregate function foo on six different processors (all times
in microseconds)
Machine Zetalisp Franz Lisp PSL
VAX 53.8 13.9 5.6
68000 65.2 43.6 5.8
68010 68.6 43.6 10.6
68020 16.1 19.9 3.1
MIT CADR 19.0
3600 6.4
It has been found that by adding features to emulate bit-field dispatch
instructions and stripping off tag bits to conventional micros, they
would be much faster for type-checking LISPS.
Parallel machines sharing a large common memory is bad because there
is not enough memory bandwidth to go around.
%A Patrick H. Winston
%T The Lisp Revolution
%J MAG1
%P 209-218
%X lisp tutorial
%A Carl Hewitt
%T The Challenge of Open Systems
%J MAG1
%P 223-242
%K parallel AI computation logic programming due process reasoning
%A Dana H. Ballard
%A Christopher M. Brown
%T Vision
%J MAG1
%P 245-261
%K MOSAIC Hough transform
%X work done by Larry Roberts on block world vision; optical flow,
vision and the abstraction hierarchy
MOSAIC that uses stereo to understand pictures of buildings,
the challenges of animal vision, Hough transformation
%A Geoffrey E. Hinton
%T Learning in Parallel Networks
%J MAG1
%P 265-273
%K Hopfield nets
%X networks that minimize their energy probablistic nets
%A Jerome A. Feldman
%T Connections
%J MAG1
%P 277-284
%K Necker cube semantic nets connectionist natural language
%A John K. Stevens
%T Reverse Egnineering the Brain
%J MAG1
%P 286-299
%X describes various neural circuit analogies with a few words about
adapting the brains circuitry for use in computers
%A Robert H. Michaelsen
%A Donald Michie
%A Albert Boulanger
%T The Technology of Expert Systems
%J MAG1
%P 303-312
%K tax advice
%X describes the basic concepts of expert systems in terms of a tax advice
system. Goes over some of the famous expert systems and expert system
shells. Also discusses the basic concepts of forward and backward chaining,
networks and frames
%A Beverly A. Thompson
%A William A. Thompson
%T Inside an Expert Systems
%J MAG1
%P 315-330
%K plant identification Pascal
%X describes the outline of a small expert system for plant identification
which could be written in Pascal
%T Artificial Intelligence at Home
%J MAG1
%P 445
%K Dynamic Master Systems TOPSI OPS-5
%X announcement for TOPSI, an OPS5 in.terpreter for Z80 based systems
%A Bruce D'Ambrosio
%T Insight - A Knowledge System
%J MAG1
%P 345-347
%X This is a 95 dollar system offering a backward-chaining inference
engine with confidence values for the IBM-PC. It is compiler based
and will handle up to 4000 rules. It does lack various debugging
facilities such as a display of the currently active rule chains.
%A William M. Raike
%T The Fifth Generation in Japan
%J MAG1
%P 401-406
%K Kazuhiro Fuchi ICOT MITI prolog ESP KL0 PSI S-810
%X discusses choice of kernel language for fifth generation effort;
decision as to whether research should be open or closed and their
supercomputers; apparently they do not know about advanced software
development tools like RATFOR and are doing their work in Fortran.
They have no optimizing FORTRAN for their supercomputer. If they
do not tweak existing code it runs no faster on the supercomputer than
on the conventional machine.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂28-Jul-85 1902 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #100
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jul 85 19:02:00 PDT
Date: Sun 28 Jul 1985 16:58-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #100
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 29 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 100
Today's Topics:
Literature - Recent Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Jul 1985 22:49-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles [long message]
%T Object's Shape digitized with Human-like Method
%J Electronics Week
%D JUN 3, 1985
%P 24
%K France Eurosoft laser 3-D digitization computer vision
%X Eurosoft Informatique SA is selling a system that digitizes
three dimensional objects using a laser beam. The object is rotated
on a turntable for the laser beam to look at it. An IBM-XT based
version is anticipated shortly.
%A John F. King
%T Fuzzy Logic Provides New Way to Deal with Uncertainty
%J Electronics Week
%D JUN 3, 1985
%P 40-41
%K Zadeh Maachen CMOS Kumamoto University train cardiology manufacturing
%X Describes fuzzy logic, work done using fuzzy logic in cardiology,
automatic train operation, loan applicants and stock portfolios.
Also describes Kumamoto Universities' efforts to develop a fuzzy logic
set in CMOS.
%T Elson Heads GM Move to Push Machine Vision
%J Electronics Week
%D JUN 3, 1985
%P 48
%K computer vision
%X gives short biography of Gerlad L. Ellson, the man who is directing the
Machine Intelligence Technology Implementation Section who is directing
GM efforts in computer vision. Also describes need for 44,000 vision
systems in GM plants, up from 500 systems in use.
%J CACM
%D JUN 1985
%V 28
%N 6
%P A-32
%K T CSI Lisp Scheme Cognitive Systems
%X ad for CSI Lisp, an implementation of T designed to run
on top of Common Lisp and LISP-VM
%A Karen A. Frenkel
%T Automating the Software-Development Cycle
%J CACM
%D JUN 1985
%V 28
%N 6
%P 578-589
%K software engineering PSI Kestrell space station KBSA Intermetrics PQCC
%X describes uses of computers in program and software development.
outlines PSI and Programmer's Apprentice projects, the system to diagnose
failures in the life support system for the space station.
There is a proposal from Rome Air Development Center to apply AI
to software over a fifteen year period, some steps of which are being
implemented by Reasoning Systems and the Kestrel Institute.
Intermetrics has developed a compiler code generator based on the ideas of
the Production Quality Compiler Compiler Project.
This work was also used by GTE in developing a digital telephone switch
using multiple microcomputers. Adequate code sequences are generated
with 200 rules and some additional optimization is provided with 500
sequences. Intermetrics is using this technique to build four compilers
for another company plus one for the Air Force.
Waterloo has developed a system to analyze Message traces for
debugging purposes in a real time telecommunication system.
This system can analyze bugs in 20 minutes that would have taken a human
about ten times as long.
This system includes tables of automated tools used in software, electronics
and telecommunications as well as a bunch of expert systems that have already
been impelmented.
They also include a breakdown of 138 expert systems by field of application:
computing 19.6%
electronics 6.5%
engineering 3.7%
financial services 3.6%
general 8.0%
medicine 15.9%
military 10.9%
oil and mineral 7.2%
professional services 3.6%
research 7.2%
other 13.8%
%T Light-Assembly Models Take Center Stage at Robots 9
%J Electronics
%D JUN 24, 1985
%P 71-74
%K semiconductor manufacturing market estimate Seiko
Microbot clean room Unimation Intelledex Hitachi Cincinnati Milacron
%X describes robots for use in light assembly such as computer manufacture
Halbrecht and Quist and the Robot Institute of America predict that
light-assembly robots will make up 40% of the market up from 3% in 1982.
The entire market which was $100 million in 1980 will leap to $2 billion in
1990. Describes robots from Microbot and Unimation (which have the
low particle shedding rates needed for clean rooms) as well as other
companies. Also describes a new sealant dispensing system.
%T IC-Design Tool Set is built on AI Foundation
%J Electronics
%D JUN 24, 1985
%P 63
%K Carnegie Group Silicon Design Labs VLSI DAS/LOGIC
%X Silicon Design Labs has developed a silicon compiler-compiler for
developing new silicon compilers for different technologies. Carnegie
Group has developed an alternate system for capturing VLSI design
knowledge based up expert-systems. The user enters timing requirements,
constraints and funcitonal specs for the circuit he wants. Using
SPICE-models, DAS/Signal anlysis creates the design rules for the
layout program. This is part of a much larger article on silicon compilers.
%T Gold Hill Computer Gives IBM PC's the Smarts
%J Electronics
%D JUN 24, 1985
%P 50-51
%K Lisp microcomputer
%X describes Gold HIll computer which has developed a subset of Common
Lisp for IBM PC's. Includes estimates of total dollar value for AI
software and PC-based AI software
year AI based software PC AI software
1984 90 10
1985 130 20
1986 60 300
1987 110 550
1988 230 730
1989 400 1090
1990 700 1550
(numbers in millions of dollars and were read off a bar graph)
%J InfoWorld
%D July 1, 1985
%P 55
%K Microcomputer Data Base Systems MDBS GURU natural language Knowledgeman
database systems
%X An ad which says "Isn't it time you had a Guru? Artificial
Intelligence From MDBS. Coming Soon. MDBS is the company which makes
knowledgeman, a relational data base management system for micros.
I would suspect this would be a product to compete with CLOUT from
RBASE.
%T Nanobytes
%J BYTE
%D JUL 1985
%P 10
%K franz lisp UNIX PC
%X Franz Inc. Berkeley, CA planned to begin shipping Franz Lisp for
AT&T's UNIX PC this month. Franz also expects to provide a complete
Common LISP for the UNIX PC by late August
%T Nanobytes
%J BYTE
%D JUL 1985
%P 10
%K natural language translation linguistic products English Spanish
%X "Lingusistic Products: The Woodslands, TX announced two
language-translation programs for the IBM PC. English/Spanish and
Spanish/English programs are $490 each or $790 together."
%A W. C. Kabat
%A A. S. Wojcik
%T Automated Synthesis of Combinational Logic Uisng Theorem-Proving
Techniques
%J IEEETC
%D JUL 1985
%V C-34
%N 7
%P 610-632
%K design automation multivalued logic hyperresolution
%A Tom Manuel
%T The Pell-mell Rush into Expert Systems Forces Integration Issue
%J Electronics
%D JUL 1, 1985
%P 54-59
%K Cognitech Harvey Newquist Human Edge HP Inference KEE Litton XCON
Expertelligence Experlisp OPS5 lisp machine arity Xsys Picon Texaco
%X General article on expert systems and expert system tools
%T Program gives AI capability to UNIX-based Computers
%J Electronics
%D JUL 1, 1985
%P 68
%K lisp Unilisp
%X announcement of of a new lisp for UNIX machines. Has optional
packages for math, statistical and graphics functions. Costs $895.00
%T Lotus Strikes a Deal with AI Pioneers
%J InfoWorld
%D JUN 3, 185
%P 15-16
%K Mitch Kapor Jerrold Kaplan Arity Dataspeed Teknowledge
%X describes Lotus activities in AI for microcomputers including deals
with Jerrald Kaplan, Teknowledge and Arity Corporation (a start up).
The company wants practical applications of AI to microcomputer software.
%A Ivars Peterson
%T Artificial Reality
%J Science News
%V 127
%D JUN 22, 1985
%N 25
%P 396-397
%K CRITTER VIDEOPLACE Myron Krueger computer graphic
%X describes a computer system that senses a person's movements
and changes a graphic display. The applications described are artistic
in nature but they pointed possible applications of AI and the use of
such systems in operator interface for nuclear power plants.
%A J. D. Yang
%A M. N. Huhns
%A L. M. Stephens
%T An Architecture for Control and Communications in Distributed Artificial
Intelligence Systems
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%P 316-326
%V SMC-15
%N 3
%D MAY/JUN 1985
%K PSC logic design
%X gives an application of the proposed architecture to logic design
%A Agata Muszycka
%A Rajjan Shinghal
%T An Empirical Comparison of Pruning Strategies in Game Trees
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%P 316-326
%V SMC-15
%N 3
%D MAY/JUN 1985
%A Yuzo Hiral
%T Mutually Linked HASPs: A Solution for Constraint Satisfaction
Problems by Associative Processing
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%P 316-326
%V SMC-15
%N 3
%D MAY/JUN 1985
%X HASP stands for Human Associative Processor
%T Expert Systems Tool Kit Available for UNIX-PCs
%J IEEE Micro
%D JUN 1985
%V 5
%N 3
%P 93
%K Radian expert system
%X announcement of expert system shell for UNIX PCs
%T Sperry to Market TI Symbolic Processors
%J Electronic News
%D JUL 8, 1985
%P 22
%X Sperry signed a three year marketing agreement for TI's explorer
with the Knowledge Engineering Environment Sofware developed by Intellicorp
%T AI brings smarts to PC-Board Assembly
%J Electronics
%D JUL 15, 1985
%P 17-18
%K Hughes industrial engineering
%X describes successful system by Hughes to set up the sequence of
hand assembly steps in PC-board layout
%T Says Fighter Pilots of Future will use AI
%J Electronic News
%D JUL 15, 1985
%K Wright Patterson Air Force Base
%A Tsukasa Furukawa
%T Symbolics Enters Japan AI Venture
%J Electronic News
%D JUL 15, 1985
%K Nichimen lisp machine Nihon
%X Symbolics is entering into a joint venture with Nichimen Co.
to help sell things to Japan. First year sales are projected to
be four million dollars. Already Symbolics has sold four million [?]
computers to Japan with 13 at Nippon Telephone and Telegraph and three
at Canon Inc.
%A Koji Kobayashi
%T Computers and Communcations: Toward Peace and Prosperity
%J High Technology
%D AUG 1985
%P 10-11
%K natural language machine translation voice recognition NEC
%X discusses activities of NEC in computers and communications including
a proposed system that will translate voice input from one language
to another in real time to be readied by year 2000.
%T Hitachi Technology 85
%J High Technology
%D AUG 1985
%P 42-45
%X corporate relations advertising showing work done on the robot hand,
process and assembly robots, image processing chips and systems
%A Robert Haavind
%T Playing to win a New Generation
%J High Technology
%D AUG 1985
%P 63-65
%K prolog lisp machine KL1 mandala ICOT
%X describes new parallel and other novel architectures being developed
in Japan including those for AI
%A David B. Macqueen
%A Donald T. Sannella
%T Completeness of proof systems for equational specifications
%J IEEE Software Engineering
%V SE-11
%N 5
%D MAY 1985
%P 454-460
%K clear algebraic specifications equational logic proof systems
induction ground equations
%X Contrary to popular belief, equational logic with induction is not
complete for initial models of equational specifications. Indeed, under
some regimes (the Clear specification language and most other algebraic
specification languages) no proof system exists which is complete even with
respect to ground equations. A collection of known results is presented
along with some new observations.
%A George J. Pothering
%T A Methodology for Conducting Advanced Undergraduate Computer Science
Courses
%J ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
%V 17
%N 1
%D MAR 1985
%P 130-134
%K AI courses
%X describes an AI course. The main purpose of this article is to show
how to get a course taught when there is no faculty available who knows
the subject to be covered. This is done by letting the students teach
the course.
%A Gadi Kaplan
%T Robots getting smarter, but slowly, say experts
%J The Institute
%D JULY 1985
%P 8
%K CMU Terrogator Aurthur C. Sanderson
%X summary of "New Direction in Robots" which was a session of the
1985 National Media Briefing. describes work on mobile robots and
applications to installing windshields in cars
%T Computer-assisted urological test facilitates diagnosis
%J IEEE Computer
%D APR 1985
%V 18
%N 4
%P 104
%K urology Froedtert Memorial Lutheran Hospital Russel Lawson
%X describes system to analyze urodynamic studies. They anticipate
developing an expert system to interface with same. Anyone interested
in expert systems applications to urology might want to contact Russel Lawson
at Froedtert memorial Lutheran Hospital
%A Alexander Borgida
%A Sol Greenspan
%A John Mylopoulos
%T Knowledge Representation as the Basis for Requirements Specifications
%J IEEE Computer
%V 18
%N 4
%D APR 1985
%P 82-90
%A Kevin Smith
%T Britain Promotes Open Architecture
%J Electronics Week
%D APR 29, 1985
%P 22
%K Alvey IKBS parallel architecture expert system Alice
%X discusses British efforts in expert systems and parallel architectures
%T LOOK AHEAD
%J Datamation
%P 14
%V 31
%N 12
%D JUN 15, 1985
%K Mitsubishi Japan prolog smalltalk
%X Mitsubishi Electric is due to announce a work station based on
artificial intelligence based on Prolog and Smalltalk
%A M. Shridhar
%A A. Baldreldin
%T A High-Accuracy Syntactic Recognition Algorithm for Handwritten Numerals
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%P 152-158
%V SMC-15
%N 1
%D JAN/FEB 1985
%A M. A. L. Thathachar
%A P. S. Sastry
%T A New Approach to the Design of Reinforcement Schemes for Learning
Automata
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%P 162-168
%V SMC-15
%N 1
%D JAN/FEB 1985
%A H. Niemann
%A H. Bunke
%A I. Hofmann
%A G. Sagerer
%A F. Wolf
%A H. Feistel
%T A Knowledge Based System for Analysis of Gated Blood Pool Studies
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 3
%D MAY 1985
%P 246-259
%K fuzzy membership function medical image analysis cardiology
%A Henri Prade
%T A Computational Approach to Approximate and Plausible Reasoning with
Applications to Expert Systems
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 3
%D MAY 1985
%K fuzzy logic
%X describes a relationship between possibility distributions and
fuzzy systems
%A David M. Weber
%T Navigation Systems: It's Academic
%J Electronics Week
%D APR 15, 1985
%P 24
%K Jean-Paul Laumond Laboratoire d'Automatique du CNRS
%X describes work done on the robot navigation problem with applications
to DARPA's autonomous vehicle program
%A John Malpas
%T Prolog as a Unix System Tool
%J UnixWorld
%D JUL 1985
%P 48-53
%V 2
%N 6
%K human engineering
%X describes the use of prolog to develop a filter for analyzing
performance of non-technical people in using PC work
%T Japanese firm gets AI expertise from U. S. Joint Venture
%J Electronics Week
%D MAY 6, 1985
%P 14
%K Carnegie Group Japan Artificial Intelligent Technology
%X Pittsburgh's Carnegie Group and Tokyo's Artificial Intelligent
Technology will be doing joint development with Artificial Intelligent
Technology marketing Carnegie Group's software in East Asia
%A Henry Beechold
%T File Gateway Adds to Clout
%J Infoworld
%D APR 22, 1985
%P 48-49
%K database query natural language microcomputer microrim rbase
%X review of Clout, a natural language interface to microcomputers
sold by Microrim for $249.00
two out of a possible four disks (due to overpriced support plan)
performance: excellence
documenation: good
ease of use: excellent
error handling: excellent
support: fair
%J CACM
%D MAY 1985
%P A-20
%K Levien Instrument Byso Lisp Franz
%X advertisement for Byslo Lisp, for the PC and costs $150.00
claims that benchmarks faster on the AT than Franz Lisp on a VAX
%A David M. Weber
%T Consumer-goods Giants aim at Robotics Market
%J Electronics
%D JUN 17, 1985
%P 23-24
%K Sony Telefunken Toshiba Panasonic
%X describes entries seen at Robotics 9 show
%A James Fallon
%T Solartron Receives $4.5M in Pacts from U.K.'s Alvey
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1548
%D MAY 6, 1985
%P E
%K Schlumberger Britain health monitoring expert system aerospace
%X describes grant to Solartron, a division of Schlumberger, for work
in aerospace and health-monitoring
%T Lisp Cuts Price of Systems 35%
%J Electronic News
%D JUN 10, 1985
%V 31
%N 1553
%P 27
%K Lisp Machine Lambda Aerospace David Carlton
%X new prices for Lisp Machine Inc. products: single user Lambda $65,000
2 x 2 unit: 110,000. Also all systems now include the standard configuration
to four Meg. Also LMI named David Carleton to manage its Aerospace division
%T Carnegie Markets AI in Far East
%J Electronic News
%D JUN 10, 1985
%V 31
%N 1553
%P 37
%K Intelligent Technology Japan
%X describes Carnegie Group's marketing efforts in Far East and Japan
%T See AI benefit for 32-bit CPU sales - If barriers are overcome
%J Electronic News
%D APR 15, 1985
%V 31
%N 1545
%P M
%K Raj Reddy Tom Knight Hewlett-Packard MIT L. J. Thomas
%X describes comments made about the future of AI at the International
Solid State Circuits Conference
%T DEC Group Names Head; Ex-Chief is Now Lisp CEO
%J Electronic News
%D MAY 27, 1985
%V 31
%N 1551
%P 20
%K DEC LMI Ward D. MacKenzie
%X Ward D. MacKenzie is leaving DEC to join LMI as chairman and chief executive
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂29-Jul-85 2203 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #101
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jul 85 22:03:38 PDT
Date: Mon 29 Jul 1985 20:37-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #101
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 30 Jul 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 101
Today's Topics:
Conferences - Knowledge Engineering/Expert Systems &
2nd ACM Northeast Regional Conference &
3rd Conference on Logic Programming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 16:52:19 cdt
From: porter@anl-mcs (Porter)
Subject: Workshop on Knowledge Engineering/Expert Systems
Below is the tentative program for the Workshop on Knowledge
Engineering/Expert Systems, At Lake Arrowhead, California,
September 4-6, 1985. For information regarding invitations
contact the General Chairman, Sig Porter (porter@anl-mcs
Merdan Group, Inc./PO Box 17098/San Diego, CA 92117).
Workshop on
Knowledge Engineering/Expert Systems
Tentative Program
(July 22, 1985)
Greg Kearsley, Courseware, Program Chairman
Wednesday, September 4, 1985, Afternoon
Knowledge Acquisition
Carlton B. Solloway, JPL, Chair
Knowledge Acquisition: Building the Oleophilic Advisor
Gloria Reiss, Rockwell International Corp
Automating Knowledge Acquisition: Eliminating Your Job
Jim Kornell, General Research Corp
Knowledge Engineering and the New Arcana
Lee Duke, Ames Dryden Flight Research Facility
Autonomous Vehicle Planning System: Development and Knowledge
Acquisition
David Tseng, Hughes Aircraft Co. AI Center
Building a Weather Forecasting Expert System From Examples
Charles Riese, Radian Corp
Thursday, September 5, 1985
Knowledge Representation/Tutoring
Paul Harmon, Harmon Associates, Chair
Achieving A General Intelligent Tutor Through a Flexible and
Extendible Knowledge Representation
Glen Silverstein, Lockheed Missiles and Space Corporation
Building Knowledge Representation Structures Via Intelligent
Authoring Systems
Bret Wallach, Advanced Processing Laboratories
Representation and Acquisition of Knowledge in Medical Expert
Systems
Klaus-Peter Adlassnig, University of Calif Berkeley
Intelligent Simulations for Navy Training
Jim Hollan, Institute for Cognitive Science, UCSD
Inference Strategies
Penny Nii, Stanford, Chair
Universal Weak Method
John Laird, Xerox PARC
High Level Control of Inferencing
Peter Hirsch, IBM
The Role of Frame Based Representation in Reasoning
Richard Fikes, Intellicorp
Using Logic as a basis of a Problem Solving Expert
Richard Weyhrauch, Stanford University
Friday, September 6, 1985
Knowledge System Programming Environments
Bruce Bullock, Teknowledge Federal Systems, Chair
Overview of STROBE
Read Smith, Schlumberger-Doll Research
Perspective on KEE
Mike Williams, Intellicorp
Directions for Future Environments
Mike Fehling, Teknowledge
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 85 18:05:33 edt
From: Alan Gunderson <asg0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Extended Deadline-2nd ACM Northeast Regional Conference
CALL FOR PAPERS
*** DEADLINE EXTENDED ***
SECOND ANNUAL ACM NORTHEAST REGIONAL CONFERENCE
Integrating the Information Workplace:
the Key to Productivity
28-30 October 1985
Sheraton-Tara Hotel
Framingham, Mass.
and
The Computer Museum
Boston, Mass.
The conference sessions are grouped into tracks corresponding to major areas
of interest in the computer field. Papers are solicited for the Conference's
Artificial Intelligence Track. The Track's program will emphasize "real
world" approaches and applications of A. I.
Topics of interest include:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Natural Language
Man-Machine Interface
A. I. Tools and Environments
A. I. Hardware
Expert Systems
Due to publication delays of the Call for Papers,
the paper deadline has been extended to: September 1, 1985
Please send three copies of your paper to:
Dr. David S. Prerau
Track Chairman
Artificial Intelligence Track
ACM Northeast Regional Conference
GTE Laboratories Inc.
40 Sylvan Road
Waltham MA 02254
For additional information on the Conference, write:
ACM Northeast Regional Conference
P.O. Box 499
Sharon MA 02067
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 85 19:05:39 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: call for papers - Logic Programming
CALL FOR PAPERS
Third International Conference on Logic Programming
Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, UK
July 14-18, 1986
In cooperation with:
Association for Computing Machinery
British Computer Society
IEEE Computer Society
Japan Society for Software Science and Technology
The conference will consider all aspects of logic programming,
including, but not limited to:
Theory and foundations
Architectures and Implementations
Methodology
Programming Languages and Environments
Applications
Relations to other computation models, programming
languages, and programming methodologies.
Of special interest are papers related to parallel processing,
papers discussing novel applications and applications that address the
unique character of logic programming, and papers
which constitute a contribution
to computer science at large.
Papers can be submitted under two categories, short --
up to 2000 words, and long -- up to 6000 words. Submissions will be
considered on the basis of appropriateness, clarity, originality,
significance, and overall quality.
Authors should send eight copies of their manuscript, plus an
extra copy of the abstract, to:
Ehud Shapiro
ICLP Program Chairman
The Weizmann Institute of Science
Rehovot 76100, Israel.
Deadline for submission of papers is December 1, 1985.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection
by February 28, 1986.
Camera ready copies are due April 1st, 1986.
General Chairman
Keith Clark
Imperial College of Science and Technology
180 Queen's Gate
London SW7 2BZ, United Kingdom
Local Arrangements and Exhibition Chairman
Richard Ennals
Imperial College of Science and Technology
180 Queen's Gate
London SW7 2BZ, United Kingdom
Program Committee
Martin van Caneghem, University of Marseille, France
Veronica Dahl, Simon Fraser University, Canada
Maarten van Emden, University of Waterloo, Canada
Kazuhiro Fuchi, ICOT, Japan
Koichi Furukawa, ICOT, Japan
Ake Hanssen, Uppsala University, Sweden
Kenneth M. Kahn, Xerox PARC, USA
Peter Koves, Logicware Inc., Canada
Giorgio Levi, University of Pisa, Italy
John Lloyd, University of Melbourne, Australia
Frank G. McCabe, Imperial College, UK
Jack Minker, Maryland University, USA
Fernando Pereira, SRI International, USA
Luis M. Pereira, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Antonio Porto, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Ehud Shapiro, Chairman, Weizmann Institute, Israel
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Aug-85 0041 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #102
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Aug 85 00:41:29 PDT
Date: Wed 31 Jul 1985 22:58-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #102
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 1 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 102
Today's Topics:
Queries - PRESS & Loglan,
Linguistics - Aymara,
Expert Systems - Definition,
Games - Chess Programs and Cheating,
AI Tools - POPLOG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 85 10:08 EST
From: D E Stevenson <dsteven%clemson.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Information on PRESS
I would like to get a copy of PRESS. Can anyone tell me
how to obtain one?
PRESS is the name of the symbolic algebra system that he developed
at Edinburgh. I have read spots here and there about it, mostly in
the applied math literature. It is written in PROLOG and is
reputed to be very fast. I asked for PROLOG-based systems on the
symalg net; PRESS was the only system identified.
I am interested in functional/logic programming and numerical analysis;
I thought I might get a copy and see what I could do with it.
Steve Stevenson
(803) 656-5880
------------------------------
Date: Sun 28 Jul 85 18:11:09-PDT
From: FIRSCHEIN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Loglan
LOGLAN was (is?) a language designed to test the Sapir-Whorf
hypothesis that the natural languages limit human thought.
The Loglan Institute was set up to publish books on the
subject and to carry out investigations in loglan.
Does anyone know whether the Loglan Institute still exists
and what has been done with loglan? Does anyone have a current
address for them?
[The most recent address I have is The Loglan Institute, Inc.,
2261 Soledad Rancho Road, San Diego, CA 92109. -- KIL ]
------------------------------
Date: Mon 29 Jul 85 10:59:04-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Aymara
Robert Van Valin ("ucdavis!harpo!lakhota"@BERKELEY) sent me a clipping
from the SSILA Newsletter. It's a letter from Dr. M.J. Hardman-de-Bautista,
Director of the Aymara Language Materials Program, stressing that
Ivan Guzman de Rojas is not associated with the ALMP, does not himself
speak Aymara, and bases his work in machine translation on a grammar
and dictionary written over 400 years ago by a Jesuit priest. He claims
that Mr. Guzman's published examples of Aymara are nearly all grammatically
incorrect and that the stated meanings for acceptable sentences are
often wildly inaccurate. "His poor understanding of Aymara word and
sentence structure results in forms that are simply unintelligible to
the Aymara." Which is not to say that Guzman's translation program
can't work, but it does cast a suspicious light on the matter.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 85 15:38 PDT
From: Miller.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Defining the Expert System
I am spending this summer as an intern for Xerox AI Systems group where
part of my task is to come up with a working definition of what
constitutes an "Expert System." Having done some rather extensive
reading on AI in general and expert systems in particular throughout the
past month, I have come to two conclusions:
First, due perhaps to media hype, the term "expert system" tends to get
bantered about extremely loosely and broadly and is applied to a wide
variety of programs and packages.
Second, the only definitions which seem to exist in testbooks,
articles, or company literature all seem to go something like this: "An
expert system is a computer program which does what an expert does."
While this definition is basic, I would like some more detail. So
here's the question: What do you, as a knowledgeable person in the field
of AI, consider to be the necessary minimum attributes for an "Expert
System?" Is it fair to give the same title to both CADUCEUS and to
'Tell Me Doctor' from Apple? Why or why not? Can you build an "Expert
System" with ART? How about TOPSI from Dynamic Master Systems (1000
rules maximum, forward-chaining, $75) ? How many rules does it take to
make a system 'expert'? What kind (and how large) of a domain must an
"expert system" address? Etc.
If you've got (or would care to write) a working definition of your own,
I'd love to hear it. Otherwise, I'd really appreciate your thoughts on
any of the above questions or any others that may come to mind.
Pointers towards reading sources probably wouldn't hurt. Look at this
as a very informal survey of the field-- linguistically speaking, a term
can only be defined by those who use it.
If anybody's interested, I'll be glad to compile the results and send a
copy.
Please reply to me at
Miller.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
--Chris Miller
[Alex Goodall supplies the following definitions in The Guide to
Expert Systems (published by Learned Information):
An expert system is a computer system that performs functions
similar to those normally performed by a human expert.
An expert system is a computer system that uses a representation
of human expertise in a specialist domain in order to perform
functions similar to those normally performed by a human expert
in that domain.
An expert system is a computer system that operates by applying
an inference mechanism to a body of specialist expertise
represented in the form of 'knowledge'.
He prefers the latter, but discusses all three in his first chapter.
Feigenbaum, in Knowledge Engineering for the 1980's (quoted by
Gevarter in An Overview of Expert Systems and by Kolbus and Mazzetti
in Artificial Intelligence Emerges) says:
An 'expert system' is an intelligent computer program that uses
knowledge and inference procedures to solve problems that are
difficult enough to require significant human expertise for their
solution. The knowledge necessary to perform at such a level,
plus the inference procedures used, can be thought of as a model
of the expertise of the best practitioners of the field.
The knowledge of an expert system consists of facts and heuristics.
The 'facts' constitute a body of information that is widely shared,
publicly available, and generally agreed upon by experts in a
field. The 'heuristics' are mostly private, little-discussed
rules of good judgement (rules of plausible reasoning, rules of
good guessing) that characterize expert-level decision making
in the field. The performance level of an expert system is
primarily a function of the size and quality of the knowledge base
that it possesses.
I don't care for the words "intelligent" and "difficult" in the first
paragraph, but the intention is clear.
As for size, expert systems for process control (e.g., using fuzzy
logic or qualitative "derivatives") can be quite small. I remember
a news note in Expert Systems (a journal from Learned Information)
about a system with 7 rules that was said to function well. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Sun 28 Jul 85 15:11:41-EDT
From: Oolong <WESALUM.A-LIAO-85@KLA.WESLYN>
Reply-to: LIAO%Weslyn.Bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: More on Chess Programs and Cheating
In reading Dr. Laws objection, let me begin by saying that I
certainly agree that programs are better chess machines than
people are. Further, I agree that superior memory and speed in a
computer does NOT give a program an unfair advantage.
But perhaps I should clarify my position a bit more: I
believe that chess programs with moves written INTO the program
cheat in the sense that they will ALWAYS carry around ENCODED
(and thus represented) moves. Human players do not, on the whole,
do any such thing. Perhaps it would be best to try a Searleian
approach to the problem. In particular, you might be right about
the way humans play chess...we may have some moves memorized and
yet not always have them actively represented. Perhaps to some
extent, these might one of (or at least part of) Searle's
unconcious Intentional states. However, I'm not convinced of
that this position completely accounts for the way we play.
Consider players who are familiar with each other's form of
play. One cannot store every move made in every game played and
associate each game with the correct player (that goes for
programs as well). Still one recognizes particular COMBINATIONS
of moves ("chunking" a la Hofstadter) through experience of
following the other player's games and, moreover, direct play
reinforces those experiences. As Searle would put it - these
experiences/practices create capacities presumably realized as
neural pathways (a sort of learning, if you will). So in effect,
the "practiced moves" become part of the background and never
become embedded/encoded representations. This background only
creates the capacity to create the representations needed to
decide what move to make (i.e. to recognize a pattern of moves
made and then decide what moves are needed thwart such a
strategy). Certainly, if one chooses to memorize particular
moves, that is one's perogative, but on a whole, we don't do
that. If you will notice, this is the reason I argued for the
notion of "playing from our own experiences". This position that
I hold has the implication that we recognize strategies by the
results of our experience and so it is actually a part of us. I
think the interpretation of "run what ya brung" does not escape
the problem of the program playing by its author's experiences
and not its own.
Now let's consider the situation where two players
are not familiar with each other's form of play. Certainly,
there can be no pre-memorized set of optimal opening moves since
you have no experience with this player's strategic tendancies.
Yet, how is it that you open with your favorite move when you do
not know what else to do. Do you do it thinking "This is the
right move to make", or do you just move from experience?
How is it then you decide on what strategy to use? Presumably,
it makes more sense, perhaps, to say that we use memorized moves
going into such a game but use our background (thus experience)
to recognize what the other person is doing. In this way a human
player can "probe" the other player's strategy, though this
probing technique may be an inefficient way of deciding the
optimal strategy. However, this relies on experience and again,
a computer with built in moves cannot "probe" if it MUST to rely
on built-in moves (i.e. experiences not its own). In fact, this
is a form of learning and the acquirement of experience (a la
Searle). Personally, I do not see how my position differs from
Mr. Jennings - I too believe that a computer should "learn how to
play chess" before it is allowed to play in a tournament rather
than rely on moves ENCODED into the program. I see one major
problem however - one may keep entire games on disk/tape for use
later on in other tournaments with other players but after a
while you may exceed disk/tape memory. One may object by saying,
"Well, we could get a program to convenietly forget certain moves
(etc) and install the better ones." My problem with that
response is the question "What constitutes moves to be
forgotten?" Presumably, all this is a question of
Intentionality. After reading Searle's chapter on the
"Background" (from "Intentionality") I am beginning to suspect
that we may just forget the details of particular capacities and
retain some sort of skeletal structure of that capacity (whatever
that maybe). Just what is forgotten and how it is forgotten is
a question I offer to the forum for consideration.
- drew liao
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jul 1985 23:58:11-BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%svgv@ucl-cs>
Subject: POPLOG - A mixed language development system.
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Poplog is available on VAX and DEC 8600 computers.
It includes Prolog (compiled to machine code), Common Lisp (large
subset ready now, remainder available early 1986), POP-11
(comparable in power to Common Lisp, but uses a PASCAL-like syntax),
VED an integrated multi-window multi-buffer screen editor, which can
be used for all interactions with programs, operating system
utilities, online help, program libraries, teaching libraries, etc.
VED includes 'compile this procedure' 'compile from here to here'
'splice output into current file' etc.)
Incremental compilers are provided for Prolog, Lisp, and
POP-11. All the languages compile to the same intermediate
POPLOG 'Virtual machine' language, which is then compiled
to machine code. The 'syscompile' facilities make it easy
to add new front end compilers for additional languages,
which all share the same back-end compiler, editor and
environmental facilities. Mixed language facilities allow
sharing of libraries without re-coding and also allow
portions of a program to be written in the language which
is most suitable.
Approximate recent Prolog benchmarks, for naive reverse test,
without mode declarations:
VAX/780 + VMS 4.2 KLIPS
VAX/750 + Unix 4.2 2.4 KLIPS (750+Systime accelerator)
DEC 8600 13.0 KLIPS
SUN2 + Unix 4.2 2.5 KLIPS (also HP 9000/200)
GEC-63 + Unix V approx 6 KLIPS
The Prolog is being substantially re-written, for greater
modularity and improved efficiency. Mode declarations should
be available late 1985, giving substantial speed increase.
POP-11 and Common Lisp include both dynamic and lexical scoping,
a wide range of data-types, strings, arrays, infinite precision
arithmetic, hashed 'properties', etc. (Not yet packages, rationals
or complex numbers.) POP-11 includes a pattern-matcher (one-way
unification) with segment variables and pattern-restrictors.
External←load now allows 'external' modules to be linked in and
unlinked dynamically (e.g. programs written in C, Fortran, Pascal,
etc.). This almost amounts to a 'rapid prototyping' incremental
compiler for such languages.
A considerable number of AI-projects funded by the UK Alvey
Programme in universities and industry now use a mixture of
Prolog and POP-11, within Poplog.
Enquiries:
UK Educational institutions:
Alison Mudd,
Cognitive Studies Programme,
Sussex University,
Brighton, England. 0273 606755
-- Aaron Sloman
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Aug-85 1229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #103
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Aug 85 12:29:13 PDT
Date: Wed 7 Aug 1985 09:38-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #103
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 7 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 103
Today's Topics:
Queries - Zetalisp Menu and Mouse Functions, Networking &
Company Projects & Parallel Processing and Economics &
Theorem Proving,
Education - Architecture and Programming,
Linguistics - Loglan,
Games - Poker,
Expert Systems - Knowledge Bases & Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 01 Aug 85 13:50:38 CDT (Thu)
From: ihnp4!mmm!rouner@mmm.ARPA
Subject: Query - Zetalisp Menu and Mouse Functions, Networking
We are developing expert systems on both the XEROX 1108 (Dandelion Interlisp-D)
and the SYMBOLICS 3640. For a variety of reasons, we would like to develop a
system that runs without modification on both the Symbolics and Dandelion. It
would be great if we could find Zetalisp implementation of the Interlisp-D menu
and mouse functions. Our goal is to emulate the Macintosh interface and its
appearance on both machines, as that is what our users want.
We are aware that KEE which runs on both SYMBOLICS and XEROX has implemented
some of the Interlisp functions in the SYMBOLICS version, but unfortunately the
implementation is incomplete and does not yield equivalent visual display. The
Interlisp Compatibility Package from SYMBOLICS does not support either the menu
or mouse functions.
Has any of this already been done and are there any significant problems in
trying to create a package that will run without modifications on both
machines?
A second need is to develop a password controlled access to the Symbolics
both from the terminal and over TCP/IP network. Additionally, we need to
provide password controlled access to selected files. Has any work been done
in this area? What are the loopholes?
Finally, has anyone developed an Imagen 8/300 printer support package that
works with the Symbolics Hardcopy System over TCP/IP to either UNIX 4.2 VAX
or an IMAGEN host? I wish to have services that are provided by Symbolics
over CHAOSNET with the now-discontinued LGP, including font changes and
screen dumps.
Thanks for your help. If there are sufficient requests, I will post a
summary.
Bill Rouner, USENET address: ihnp4!mmm!rouner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 85 20:00:33 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: query about company projects...
I was reading the recent issue of AI Magazine (Summer 1985) and
saw a few ads of Companies (ads placed by respective Personnel
Departments), that got me interested.
For example, OLIVETTI's ad said that they are doing work in :
- ICAI
- Inexact Knowledge
- Non-Monotonic Logics.
INFERENCE CORP's ad said they are consultants on projects such as:
- Scheduling & Planning Missions
PERCEPTRONICS ads said that they are working on:
- Planning Aids
- Training Systems & intelligent CAI
- Robotics & Remote Systems.
I want to know more about these projects/oppurtunites. (I did not
want to write to personel for this).
I was wondering if some technical person(s) at the above mentioned
companies, would like to communicate with me ????????
Thanks in advance.
- raj doshi
------------------------------
Date: 02 Aug 85 15:31:01 EDT (Fri)
From: "Emil J. Volcheck" <volcheck@UDel-Dewey.ARPA>
Subject: Parallel Processing and Economics & Theorem Proving
Economists use mathematical models to analyze the behavior of
large systems, in fact some of these models are basically simulations
of an open system in which many individuals are making economic decisions.
If someone can prove theorems pertaining to parallel processing on
distributed systems, these results may carry over to economics, and
vice-versa. Does anyone know of research pertaining to this idea, or
does anyone have thoughts about this?
Also -- Does anyone know of a place in the literature about
theorem-proving where proving a theorem is defined as "The unification of
necessary (given) with sufficient (goal) conditions" ? I'd appreciate
your thoughts on this too.
--Emil Volcheck
------------------------------
Date: 6 Aug 85 14:11:42 PDT (Tuesday)
From: Hoffman.ES@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: Architecture and Programming
Seth Steinberg outlined some intriguing similarities between the
practice of architecture and the practice of programming. The teaching
of both disciplines can also be strikingly similar: architecture
students get about as much structural engineering as programmers get
mathematics or electrical engineering, both are given numerous "toy"
problems as examples and exercises, most learning occurs in the lab
rather than from lecture, no one has a good way to test for natural
talent, and some people can be quite good with little formal training.
--Rodney Hoffman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 85 11:06:42 PDT
From: Hibbert.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: Loglan
The Loglan Institute's current address is:
The Loglan Institute, Inc.
Route 10, Box 260
Gainesville, FL 32601
The language is undergoing continual revision, and a push is currently
on to scale up a project to increase the vocabulary considerably. There
are plans to Go Public Again sometime in the next year or two. This
means publishing something like the June 1960 Scientific American
article, which would require some major progress on the state of the
languge to be worthwhile.
I can answer questions about the language if anyone is interested. (I'm
not sure AIList is the right place for a long summary of the current
state of the language and the institute. A year ago, when I was on
Usenet, I sent them to net.nlang.)
The editor of the member's newsletter has a uucp address if you want to
talk to someone who's deeply involved in the work: John Lees is
addressible as "ihnp4!umich!cosivax!bugs!jrl"@DECVAX or UCBVAX.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 85 10:24:25 edt
From: "Col. G. L. Sicherman" <colonel%buffalo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Poker
[See Scientific American, July 1978, for an article on Nicholas
Findler's research into automating poker strategies. I seem to
recall that the project ended before a player was developed that
could detect and bluff the Mathematically Fair Player. -- KIL]
This is correct but misleading. Due to a misconception, we stated in
the article that the Mathematically Fair Player's weakness was that it
could be bluffed out of any hand. Later we realized that this could
not be true, because the M.F.P. decides whether to stay or fold without
considering its opponents' bets! The M.F.P. cannot be bluffed - a clear
sign of weakness to any experienced player.
Of course, the weakness consisted precisely of ignoring the opponents'
behavior. The M.F.P. consistently came out on top in tests where this
flaw did not matter.
Further details appear in M. A. Bramer's recent compilation, ←Computer
Game-Playing: Theory and Practice← (1983).
--G. L. S.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 1985 09:31-EDT
From: Robert.Frederking@CMU-CS-CAD.ARPA
Subject: No Knowledge Bases?
My earlier request for sample AI knowledge bases turned up
exactly zero responses. Does this perhaps confirm what I've suspected
for a while? That people like to build all kinds of fancy KR systems,
with various kinds of inheritance, topologies, etc., but nobody is
interested in "populating" these systems with real AI-type knowledge?
The k-bases I'm familiar with all generally consist of fairly mundane
database information, stuck into fancy AI mechanisms, where the Lisp
code actually contains all the interesting AI-type knowledge
(especially, knowledge of what the nodes in the network mean).
Some might speculate that this implies that the right way to
build AI systems is like any other software system: lots of meticulous
work on normal procedural code. I'd prefer to think that either:
(1) nobody has really put a lot of effort into building a
"real" knowledge base yet, because it wouldn't be at all
enjoyable, or
(2) we still don't have a proper understanding of how to
represent intentional and control knowledge in a declarative
way, not to mention trying to represent domain knowledge in a
declarative way.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 1 Aug 85 08:53:13-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: What is an "expert system"
What is the nature of human expertise? In what sense are current programs
"expert?" Are they "expert" in a sufficiently rich enough sense that they
warrant the usage of this term? Saying a program does something that
requires intelligence or expertise opens one up to including all programs
that do this including ones that use numerical and other techniques that
are not normally associated with AI .. how about a graphics program being
an expert system because it can create a picture that would otherwise
require human expertise.
I prefer the term "knowledge based system," perhaps because it doesn't
imply as much and is more general (e.g., simulations, data bases, etc. can
use AI techniques of KR and inference without solving problems).
I have heard the Flores and Winograd's new book (in press?) has an
interesting discussion on expert systems.
mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu 1 Aug 85 09:58:29-PDT
From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA
Subject: Expert System Definition
I offer the following candidate definition for expert system
programs, which attempts to differentiate expert system programs
from conventional decision making programs (i.e., any program
with an IF THEN statement.):
An expert system is a computer program that makes decisions
(and/or judgements) according to a set of rules that operate
on a set of facts, and can explain each decision (or
judgement) by giving the sequence of rules and the facts used
to make that decision.
This is different from the concept that an expert system "does
what an expert does", since a conventional FORTRAN program can be
written do do what an expert does, but cannot explain why the
decision was made. For example, an expert may
have a rule that says IF(there is a fire) THEN(turn on the fire
sprinklers). This kind of decision making is done in
conventional programs all the time. The thing that
differentiates expert systems is the possibility of asking for an
explanation of a decision: why a decision is made (or proposed).
Decision explanation is done in conventional expert systems by
using a rule based system design and using the rules and facts
invoked in a decision to "explain" the decision. The rule based
system design consists of rules, facts, and a logic engine that
applies the rules to the facts to make decisions. In its
simplest form, the rules are decision making algorithms with a
specified form, and the facts are input or derived data elements
used by the rules in making decisions. Explanation consists of
listing the rules and facts (in some form) that were used to
reach a given decision (or are being used in an interactive
process of making a decision).
Not all expert systems explain their decisions, but it is the
ability to explain the decisions that is important. A rule based
decision system can have this ability, even though the
explanation mechanism is not built in to the product.
Dave Wyland
WYLAND@SRI-KL
------------------------------
Date: Fri 2 Aug 85 10:25:02-PDT
From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA
Subject: Expert System Definition
Thanks for the note. I'll try to answer the points you
raised in order.
"If we take that FORTRAN program and add a few steps which
will take an input of "WHY?" after the sprinklers have been
turned on and respond with the string "←←BECAUSE THERE WAS A
FIRE" does that then make it an expert system? Why or why not?"
"Is this a dumb question?"
No, it's a SIMPLE question: generally the nastiest, most
difficult, and most interesting kind. (i.e., What is energy?)
If my definition is accurately descriptive, that does
make the FORTRAN program an expert system, since it can explain
its decision. It is a good example because it represents a
marginal case. The problem with the FORTRAN expert system
program you have described is that it doesn't appear to work for
nested rules. Nested rules are where you have more than one rule
invoked in a chain of logic to reach a decision. For example:
IF(the smoke alarm is on) THEN(there is a fire)
IF(the alarm lever is pulled) THEN(there is a fire)
IF(there is a fire) THEN(turn on the sprinklers)
IF(sprinkler test switch is on) THEN(turn on the sprinklers)
The (turn on the sprinklers) decision must be explainable
in terms of the rules actually used in making the decision, and
the explanation must be able to cover all the rules that were
invoked. The first answer to why the sprinklers went off may be
that (there is a fire). The next answer to the repeated question
"why" can be either that (the smoke alarm is on) or (the alarm
lever is pulled) depending on which rule was activated. (The
third answer to "why" is "because!", since there is no prior
rule.)
"(Let me ramble for a minute and correct me where I'm wrong.)
Is the difference between this approach and the more
conventional expert system design the fact that an expert
system can trace back through its decision making process?"
Yes, I think this is the essential feature of expert systems.
"Perhaps I am missing the qualitative difference between an
expert system design and the design of the FORTRAN program.
Does it lie in the fact that the logic engine views rules and
facts SEPERATELY and attempts to apply the one to the other."
No, I think this is a practical requirement of the
explanation process. For example, if you try to do nested rule
explanations in conventional IF THEN format FORTRAN, I think it
will get very messy because you will probably wind up with
indexed arrays, pointers, and variables to tie everything
together. A "rule based" approach to the same program might
start by replacing the IF THEN statements with calls to a
subroutine with the components of the IF THEN statement passed as
parameters and the subroutine performing the IF THEN evaluation.
If the parameters for the various IF THEN rules are arranged in a
list (or FORTRAN array), you now have a simpler structure for
evaluating the rules and keeping track of the results. Further
work in this direction will make it easier to enter the rules and
their explanations, etc. The practical purpose of this exercise
is to make it easier to design the expert system by handling the
rules, their processing, and their explanations in simpler, more
regular fashion.
I hope this helps. Keep asking the simple questions:
they're the ones with the important answers.
Good luck,
Dave Wyland
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Aug-85 1647 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #104
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Aug 85 16:47:22 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Aug 1985 13:07-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #104
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 8 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 104
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Flexible Planning (SRI) &
KADS Methodology for Knowledge Acquisition (BBN) &
Parallelism in Logic Programs (SU) &
Expert System Toolkit (SU) &
Experiments with Belief Resolution (SRI) &
Purpose-Directed Analogy (Rutgers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 31 Jul 85 16:55:51-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Flexible Planning (SRI)
How to Plan an Action When You Don't Know What to Do:
A Logic of Knowledge, Action, and Communication
Leora Morgenstern
New York University, SRI-AIC
11:00 AM, Monday, August 5
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ232
Most AI planners work on the assumption that they have complete knowledge
of their problem domain and situation, so that formulating a plan really
consists of searching through some pre-packaged list of action operators
for an action sequence that achieves some desired goal. Real life planning
rarely works this way, because we usually don't have enough information to
map out a detailed plan of action when we start out. Instead, we initially
draw up a sketchy plan and fill in details as we proceed and gain more
exact information about the world. This talk will present a formalism
that is expressive enough to describe this flexible planning process.
The talk will consist of 5 (hopefully short) parts:
1. Motivation for a flexible logic of knowledge, action, and communication,
2. Discussion of Bob Moore's modal logic of knowledge and action,
its advantages, and its limitations with respect to a robust theory
of planning,
3. A move towards a syntactic theory of knowledge, and a discussion of the
resulting paradoxes (esp. the Knower Paradox),
4. A solution to the Knower Paradox based on Kripke's solution to the
Liar Paradox,
5. A solution to the problem of knowledge preconditions.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Aug 1985 11:09-EDT
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - KADS Methodology for Knowledge Acquisition (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN-AI Seminar, 9 August 1985, 10.30 a.m. 10 Moulton St.,
Large Conference Room 2nd floor
KADS: a structured methodology for knowledge acquisition
Bob Wielinga University of Amsterdam
Current Expert System technology lacks a methodology and tools
which support a structured development of commercial Expert
Systems. This is particularly the case for the knowledge
acquisition stage in E.S. development. KADS is the result of an
attempt to develop a structured methodology for knowledge
acquisition for E.S., and includes some preliminary support
tools. The KADS methodology is based on the following
principles: 1) a decomposition of the knowledge acquisition task,
2) the use of a number of techniques for elicitation and
interpretation of verbal data, 3) the formalization of verbal
data in terms of epistemological models, independent of
implementation details, and 4) the use of generic models for
expert problem solving behaviour to guide the knowledge analysis.
The KADS methodology is being implemented in a system that will
support the knowledge engineer, both in performing the analysis
task and in the production of documentation. In a number of case
studies KADS has been used in designing and implementing expert
systems. A qualitative evaluation of these studies will be
presented.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 85 16:33:25 pdt
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@diablo>
Subject: Seminar - Parallelism in Logic Programs (SU)
AND/OR PARALLELISM IN LOGIC PROGRAMS
by
Simon Kasif
Department of Computer Science
University of Maryland, College Park
MJH 352
Aug. 14, 1:00pm
The separation of logic and control in logic programs
has been shown to allow the programmer to write declara-
tively lucid programs whose execution is determined by the
interpreter. This appealing characteristic of logic program-
ming spurred research directed towards diversifying the
means for controlling the execution of logic programs. In
particular, parallelism in logic programs may be exploited
even when it is impossible to state a priori that two goals
may be executed concurrently, but such an opportunity may be
detected during the course of the execution.
This talk will address the problem of AND/OR parallel-
ism in logic programming. We describe a computational model
for AND/OR parallel execution of logic programs. The model
provides the primitives to describe and analyze parallel
interpreters, emphasizing the data-flow among conjunctive
goals. The effectiveness of our computational model is esta-
blished through its ability to support both old and new com-
munication paradigms for the parallel interpretation of
logic programs.
Several methods to implement AND/OR parallelism in
logic programs are investigated based on notation developed
in the model. The methods are shown to define a spectrum of
communication schemes, ranging from the set intersection
method where communication is eliminated altogether,
through methods based on producers-consumers, where communi-
cation is uni-directional and finally ending at a flexible
bi-directional scheme introduced in the paper, called the
Intelligent Channel.
The primitives that comprise the model are used to syn-
thesize two new parallel interpreters: Disjunctive System
(DS) interpreters and Intelligent Channel Interpreters. The
Intelligent Channel is a scheme we propose to constrain the
combinatorial explosion of active processes, and to elim-
inate the need to maintain a separate binding environment
for every active OR-branch.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Aug 85 16:07:30-PDT
From: Carol Wright/Susie Barnes <SBARNES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Expert System Toolkit (SU)
SIGLUNCH
DATE: Friday, August 9, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, betweeen Physical and
Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
SPEAKER: Peter Jackson,
Department of Artificial Intelligence,
University of Edinburgh
TITLE: A Flexible Toolkit for Building Expert Systems.
This presentation describes the progress to date of a three-year
Alvey-funded project to study, design and implement tools for building
knowledge-based systems. The parties involved are Edinburgh University's
Department of Artificial Intelligence and GEC's Artificial Intelligence
Group at Great Baddow. The aim of the seminar is not to present finished
work (the project is only six months old!), but rather to air our ideas and
prejudices in the hope of attracting criticism and other kinds of feedback
from the expert systems community.
Our survey of current expert systems technology has led us to believe that
neither shells such as EMYCIN (and derivatives) nor high-level programming
languages (such as LOOPS) represent the last word in expert system building
tools. The former are generally restrictive with respect to both the
representation of knowledge and the specification of control, while the
latter present the average programmer with a bewildering array of
possibilities with little indication of how one combines different
programming styles in the construction of an expert systems architecture.
Thus, although there are groups of users for whom shells and AI programming
languages are well-suited, we feel that there is a substantial gap in the
market between the relative beginner or non-programmer, for whom the
majority of commercial shells are intended, and the veteran hacker, for and
by whom systems like LOOPS were developed.
The alternative approach that we are currently exploring can be summed up by
a number of slogans:
(1) The process of choosing a logically adequate representation language and
a heuristically adequate control regime and embedding these into a suitable
architecture should be guided by some analysis of the task one wants one's
system to perform.
(2) It is worth attempting to establish a correlation between a taxonomy of
expert systems tasks and representational schemes based on logical
languages, with respect to both the expressiveness required by the task
(e.g. modal and temporal notions, fuzziness, etc) and the control of
inference (e.g. different problem solving strategies).
(3) It is worth attempting to establish a similar correlation between tasks
and problem solving paradigms (such as ends-means analysis, hypothesize and
test, etc), with a view to helping the user decide on an architecture within
which he can embed the interpretation of this chosen logical language.
The problems we are currently considering include the following:
(1) Is it possible to provide, along with the toolkit, an abstract
architecture that can be instantiated in different ways to implement
different problem solving paradigms?
(2) Could one then embed different interpretations of different logics in
this architecture as part of the instantiation process?
(3) Could one get the behaviour associated with different problem solving
paradigms from this instantiated architecture by running the logical
language under different meta-level regimes?
(4) Will knowledge bases created for use with one instantiation of the
architecture have to be 'recompiled' for use with another instantiation?
(5) How can we help a user to make the 'right' design decisions (assuming we
know what these are)?
We feel that this research program raises a number of very difficult issues,
many of which will not be solved within the scope of the present project.
Nevertheless, we also feel that practical advances in expert systems
development ultimately depend upon theoretical issues of this kind being
addressed, however inadequately. We still have open minds with regard to
the kinds of utility that a toolkit should provide, and are always ready to
talk to both the builders and users of tools in order to try and gain new
insights into the problem.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 7 Aug 85 11:26:38-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Experiments with Belief Resolution (SRI)
Experiments with Belief Resolution
Kurt Konolige and Christophe Geissler
SRI AI Center
11:00 AM, Monday, August 12
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ232
In recent work, Konolige developed a resolution rule for a quantified
modal logic of belief. However, the rule is difficult to apply in
practice, because it takes an arbitrary number of input clauses, and
some instances of the rule may subsume others. In this talk we
describe a solution to this problem based on a generalization of
semantic attachment, that controls the growth of the search space. We
have implemented the resulting version of belief resolution with
Stickel's first-order connection-graph theorem prover. We present
several examples of automatic reasoning about belief using this
system, including a solution to the wise man problem.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Aug 85 09:37:41 EDT
From: PRASAD@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Purpose-Directed Analogy (Rutgers)
MACHINE LEARNING SEMINAR
Title: Purpose-Directed Analogy**
Speaker: Smadar Kedar-Cabelli
Date: Monday, August 12, 11:00 AM
Place: Hill Center, room 423
Recent artificial intelligence models of analogical reasoning
are based on mapping some underlying causal network of relations
between analogous situations. However, causal relations relevant for
the purpose of one analogy may be irrelevant for another. In this
talk, I will introduce a technique which uses an explicit
representation of the purpose of the analogy to automatically create
the relevant causal network. I will illustrate the technique with two
case studies in which concepts of everyday artifacts are learned by
analogy.
** This is a dry-run for a talk being presented at the Cognitive
Science Society Conference in Irvine, CA, August 15-17.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Aug-85 1839 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #105
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Aug 85 18:39:45 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Aug 1985 13:15-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #105
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 9 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 105
Today's Topics:
Reports - Semantic Automata & AI Newsletter from TI,
Call for Papers - Expert Systems for Engineering,
Conferences - AI in Engineering Conference &
Aerospace Applications of AI & Office Information Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 31 Jul 85 16:53:17-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Semantic Automata
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORT
Report No. CSLI-85-27, ``Semantic Automata'' by Johan van Benthem,
has just been published. This report may be obtained by writing to
David Brown, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or Brown@su-csli.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 7 Aug 85 13:16:35-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: AI Newsletter from TI
IEEE Computer reports that:
Texas Instruments has launched the Artificial Intelligence Newsletter
to communicate the potentials, limitations, and progress of AI to
nonspecialists. First issue presents the menu-based approach to
natural languages and AI briefs. Available as a public service from
TI Data Systems Group, PO Box 2909, MS 2222, Austin, TX 78769;
(512) 250-6314.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 85 16:23:17 EDT
From: John Kastner <kastner.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Call for Papers - Expert Systems for Engineering
CALL FOR PAPERS
IEEE COMPUTER MAGAZINE
SPECIAL ISSUE ON
EXPERT SYSTEMS FOR ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS
Contributions are hereby solicited for this special issue.
To be considered, 5 copies of a manuscript must be sent, no
later than October 1, 1985, addressed to:
Se June Hong, Guest Editor
IEEE Computer Magazine Special Issue
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
31-206
P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Any paper that is postmarked after the date will be returned
to the author, unprocessed.
Further information may be obtained by contacting the guest
editor.
Se June Hong
ARPAnet: HONG.YKTVMX.IBM-SJ@CSnet-Relay
914/945-2265
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 4 August 1985 20:55:27 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Two slots available in AI in Engg. Conf.
There are a couple of slots open in the TOOLS session of the First
International Conference on AI in Engineering, to be held in UK next
April. If your company's framework was used for an engineering application,
here is a good chance to present your product. Interested parties
should send mail to me at sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa.
Sriram
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 85 13:28 PDT
From: halko.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Conference : Aerospace Applications of AI
ACM/SIGART (Dayton, Ohio, Chapter) will hold an AI Conference Sept 16 -
19 (Registration Sept 16, Sessions 17-19) 1985. Registration fee $225.
Address is
AAAIC '85, Box 31250, Dayton, Ohio, 45431-0250.
Phone 513-426-8530
While the name says "aerospace", this is because of the proximity of the
big air base there and because one or two of the sessions deals with
avionics. Most of the sessions are applicable to AI in general:
Avionics, manufacturing, maintenance, decision support systems, expert
system building tools, programming languages, man-machine interfaces,
and new architectures. World famous speakers are coming, such as Dr. M.
Stefik, XEROX PARC; Dr. Earl Sacerdoti, Teknowledge, Dr. M. Fox, CMU,
Prof. D. Michie, Univ of Edinburgh, and many more.
Attendance is limited to 700 people.
Direct inquiries by mail or phone to the address above, or contact
Gerald Matthews, NCR R&D WHQ-5E, Dayton, Ohio, 45479, Phone
513-445-6054.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 85 02:48 EDT
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: Call for papers: OIS-86
******************************************************
* CALL FOR PAPERS *
* *
* THIRD ACM CONFERENCE ON *
* OFFICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS: OIS-86 *
* *
* October 6-8, 1986 *
* Biltmore Plaza Hotel *
* Providence, RI *
******************************************************
General Chair: Carl Hewitt, Program Chair: Stanley Zdonik,
MIT Brown University
Treasurer: Gerald Barber, Local Arrangements: Andrea Skarra,
Gold Hill Computers Brown University
An interdisciplinary conference on issues relating to office
information systems sponsored by ACM/SIGOA in cooperation with Brown
University and the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
Submissions from the following fields are solicited:
Anthropology Artificial Intelligence
Cognitive Science Computer Science
Economics Management Science
Psychology Sociology
Topics appropriate for this conference include (but are not restricted
to) the following:
Technologies including Display, Voice, Telecommunications, Print, etc.
Human Interfaces
Deployment and Evaluation
System Design and Construction
Goals and Values
Knowledge Bases and Reasoning
Distributed Services and Applications
Indicators and Models
Needs and Organizational Factors
Impact of Computer Integrated Manufacturing
Unpublished papers of up to 5000 words (20 double-spaced pages) are
sought. The first page of each paper must include the following
information: title, the author's name, affiliations, complete mailing
address, telephone number and electronic mail address where
applicable, a maximum 150-words abstract of the paper, and up to five
keywords (important for the correct classification of the paper). If
there are multiple authors, please indicate who will present the paper
at OIS-86 if the paper is accepted. Proceeedings will be distributed
at the conference and will later be available from ACM. Selected
papers will be published in the ACM Transactions on Office Information
Systems.
Please send eight (8) copies of the paper to:
Prof. Stan Zdonick
OIS-86 Program Chair
Computer Science Department
Brown University
P.O. Box 1910
Providence, RI 02912
DIRECT INQUIRIES TO: Rita Desormeau (401) 863-3302
******************************************************************************
IMPORTANT DATES
Deadline for Paper Submission: February 1, 1986
Notification of Acceptance: April 30, 1986
Deadline for Final Camera-Ready Copy: July 1, 1986
Conference Dates: October 6-8, 1986
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Aug-85 1554 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #106
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Aug 85 15:54:21 PDT
Date: Fri 9 Aug 1985 13:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #106
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 10 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 106
Today's Topics:
Journal - Machine Learning,
Expert Systems - Knowledge-Based Spelling Corrector &
Expert System Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 85 01:22:57 pdt
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: A new journal: MACHINE LEARNING
Machine Learning will publish papers on the processes through which
intelligent systems improve their performance over time, and will
cover ares such as: concept acquisition, strategy learning, language
development, reasoning by analogy, and scientific discovery.
Machine Learning will be published four times a year. Individual Rate:
$35.00, Institution Rate: $78.00.
Executive Editor: Pat Langley
Editors: Jaime Carbonell, Ryszard Michalski, Tom Mitchell
Orders to: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 190 Old Derby Street, Hingham, MA 02043
or call 617-749-5262.
First Issue: January, 1986
------------------------------
Date: Wed 7 Aug 85 14:41:38-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Knowledge-Based Spelling Corrector
Those who objected to Bob Amsler's suggestion that all spelling correctors
are "knowledge-based" may be happier with Dr. Dave Fawthrop's Expert Speller.
There's a 2-page article on it in Vol. 1, No. 1, of Expert Systems User,
April 1985. (The article is rather superficial and contains some editing
blunders, so interested readers should probably track down the true story
in "The Rules of Spelling Error" and "An Intelligent Spelling Error
Corrector" by E.J. Yannakoudakis and D. Fawthrop, Int. J. of Information
Processing and Management, 1983.)
The spelling program uses a bit-vector hash table and two slower dictionary
structures to detect misspelled words, then invokes a rule base of about
3,000 rules to predict the correct spelling. The system contains some
knowledge of parts of speech, but bases most of its guesses on commonly-
occurring transformations of letter patterns. I assume that suggested
corrections are looked up in the dictionaries before being offered to
the user (although I can imagine wanting to see all its hypotheses).
New words can be provided (or confirmed) during a session, so that
the program adapts itself to the specific document during the editing
session and to the user across sessions -- AI learning in the best tradition.
The probabilities of different transformations were adaptively
adjusted (at a cost of 250,000 pounds in computer time) for the best
correction performance, and Dr. Fawthrop makes the point that the
system now knows more than he does about correction probabilities.
(The system cannot "explain its reasoning", since no human is able
to "understand" the true explanation.)
The program is written in Fortran77, and runs mainly on Unix systems.
The article didn't supply an address.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 7 Aug 85 15:11 PDT
From: Ghenis.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: Expert System definition
I think it was Roger Schank that said "If it can't learn, it isn't AI".
In a nutshell, I think the main thing that distinguishes a true ES from
the hypothetical FORTRAN program mentioned earlier is that knowledge
isn't hard-coded and can be added at run time, becoming immediately
useful both for inferences and explanations.
This highlights the difference in architectures: separation of inference
engine and knowledge base (knowledge=rules+facts) should be considered
an essential part of the definition of ES or KBS, so add "DYNAMIC
KNOWLEDGE BASE" to "perform tasks requiring expertise" and "ability to
explain". By the way, the ability to gracefully expose and resolve
knowledge base inconsistencies is also highly desirable in any system
with a dynamic KB, hopefully with a precedence mechanism and/or
weighting and/or consulting a human being when all else fails.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Aug 85 15:12 PDT
From: masinter.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Expert System Definition
I believe that the term "expert system" is best thought of as a process,
rather than a thing; that is, it is a way of building programs rather
than something that a program can be. In this light, most of the thorny
issues that arise in trying to decide whether a program is or is not an
"expert system" become much clearer.
The "expert system" programming methodolgy has some simple
characteristics:
* An expert is involved in the construction of the program.
* The knowledge of the expert is couched within a representation
framework in which the objects of the domain and the relations between
them are explicitly represented.
* The expert is involved in refinement of the program after its initial
construction.
To answer the question "is this FORTRAN program an expert system", you
have to know "how did it get built?" and "how would you add more
knowledge to it?"
The various AI languages and systems make writing expert systems much
easier; that's their advantage. However, their use is not criterial:
writing it in OPS-5 doesn't make it an expert system, and not all expert
systems are written using "expert system tools."
Rule-based programming is one mechanism for encoding knowledge, but its
use isn't criterial either: there are rule-based programs that are
trivial (the microprocessors that control traffic lights, for example),
and there are "expert systems" that do not use a rule-based paradigm for
performing inference.
Generally, experts aren't programmers, and their knowledge of their
field isn't explicit. The process of producing domain-descriptions and
rules usually involves running the system against test cases and
debugging the results. "Explaination facilities" are very helpful in
that debugging process, in localizing where the procedure has gone
wrong. It seems to be an important part of the development tools for the
expert-system methodology, even if it plays no part in final application.
------------------------------
Date: 07 Aug 85 18:01:34 PDT (Wed)
From: Sanjai Narain <narain@rand-unix.ARPA>
Subject: What is an expert system
Wyland is absolutely right in encouraging the asking of simple questions.
I think many more simple questions need to be asked in AI.
According to him an expert system is a program which can not only do
reasoning but also explanation. I believe this definition is a special
case of a more general one:
Given some fixed amount of knowledge think of the various ways in
which an (intelligent) human could use it. If a program
possessing the same knowledge could also use it in similar ways
then it could be said to behave intelligently.
For example, when a human has medical knowledge, his intelligence allows
him to do diagnosis, to explain his diagnosis as well as to determine
whether a new piece of knowledge conflicts with something he already
knows. So, if a program which has medical knowledge can also do
diagnosis, explanation and integrity checking, it could reasonably be
regarded as intelligent.
Conversely, even though common word processing software allegedly "knows"
about letters, words, sentences, lines, paragraphs it could hardly be
expected to determine whether a sentence is well formed, or whether the
numbering scheme for sections is consistent throughout the text. Such
functions are normally associated with a competent copy editor.
It is quite hard to obtain flexibility of use of knowledge in procedural
languages. So, most software written in such languages can only be used
in a rigidly defined set of ways, and so is not considered intelligent.
Not surprisingly then, a central concern of AI is developing maximally
flexible representations of knowledge so it can be used in a great
diversity of ways.
-- Sanjai Narain
------------------------------
Date: 8 Aug 1985 07:50-PDT
From: JWOLFE@USC-ECLB
Subject: KNOWLEDGE SYSTEM DEFINITION
I read your comments on a definition of expert systems.
I think the views you express are useful and sorely needed.
If AI is to succeed, then it is necessary to precisely define
the terms used within the discipline.
However, I do have one comment. The discussion I read
differentiated between a "true" expert system and a simple
FORTRAN program with a sequence of IF...THEN statements by
asserting that the expert system could explain its conclusions
in terms of the rules used to derive those conclusions.
Furthermore, there was a qualification that the expert system
merely had to have the potential of explaining itself and that
it was not necessary that the explanation mechanism be
implemented. I submit that the distinction is artificial in that
the FORTRAN program could easily implement an explanation
mechanism via a stack. In my opinion, the definition of
expert system should require that the explanation mechanism
be implemented or drop the requirement altogether.
Perhaps another distinction would be the degree of
separation between the knowledge specific data and the
reasoning mechanism. This would exclude programs in which
the knowledge was totally embedded in the program code. I
don't believe the distinction is wholy satisfactory since all
but the most trivial systems have some knowledge embedded
in the program in order to gain performance. The line at
which a system is or is not an expert system becomes fuzzy.
Thank you again for sharing your views with the community.
I hope to hear from you.
Jim Wolfe
JWOLFE@USC-ECLB.ARPA
(usual disclaimers apply)
------------------------------
Date: Thu 8 Aug 85 09:53:53-PDT
From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA
Subject: Expert System Definition
Thank you for your comments. I should have been more
precise when I said that it was not necessary to implement the
explanation mechanism, since I used it as the essential
ingredient of the definition of an expert system.
I agree with you that for a program to be an expert
system, the explanation mechanism is required. There is a
marginal case of an expert system where the explanation mechanism
has been implemented but is removed or disabled in the
application environment, as in a real-time pilot advisor or
process control program. However, the clearest definition of an
expert system would allow only systems that had the explanation
mechanism implemented, but not necessarily used (i.e., it could
be disabled). Otherwise, the definition is void since "any" rule
based system has the "potential" for the addition of an
explanation mechanism - i.e., "....the FORTRAN program could
easily implement an explanation mechanism via a stack."
I like the definition of an expert system as a "decision
system which can explain its decisions" because it is functional
and objective. Using this definition, other characteristics
associated with expert systems - such as the degree of separation
between the knowledge data and the reasoning mechanism and/or the
amount of knowledge embedded in the code - become design topics
on how to implement a system that meets the definition rather
than part of the definition itself. This is good because - as
you pointed out - topics like "separation between the knowledge
base and the reasoning mechanism" are a matter of degree and are
subjective in that design/artistic judgement is involved in their
evaluation.
Thank you again for helping to further clarify the
discussion. I hope we can keep in touch.
Dave Wyland
WYLAND@SRI-KL
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 9 August 1985 03:39:57 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
Subject: Discussion on Expert Systems Definition
Although the ability to explain things is one of the characteristics
of an Expert, only classification-type expert systems (ES) have this
feature. These systems explain their actions by providing the rules
that have been used or being used in that context. However, a majority
of ES (or the so-called ES), such as R1, in the market do not have
this feature.
The main difference (with conventional languages) I see is the ease of
programming with rules. Try implementing the code provided by Wyland
in a conventional programming language. It may take you at least 1 to
2 hrs, while one could do the same in a rule-based framework in 10-15
minutes, assuming familiarity with the tool. The ES frameworks provide
a neat programming methodology for incorporating heuristic knowledge.
Also, the completeness, uniqueness, and proper sequencing criteria,
required of many conventional languages can be relaxed in an ES envir-
onment.
Any Comments ==> AILIST
Sriram
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Aug-85 1544 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #107
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Aug 85 15:44:21 PDT
Date: Sun 11 Aug 1985 14:13-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #107
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 11 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 107
Today's Topics:
Seminar - Expert System for Statistical Application (SU) &
Prolog (Rand) &
The PRISM Expert System (IBM-SJ) &
Parallelism in Logic Programs (IBM-SJ) &
Computer Music Expert System (CMU),
Conference - Foundations of AI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 85 22:54:01 pdt
From: naomi@playfair (naomi altman)
Subject: Seminar - Expert System for Statistical Application (SU)
Laboratory for Computational Statistics Seminar
3:15pm, Friday Aug 9, 1985
in Sequoia 114
AN EXPERT SYSTEM OF STATISTICAL APPLICATION
Knut M. Wittkowski
University of Tubingen, Department of Medical Biometry
Most structural information on statistical data (number and hierarchy of
factors, sampling strategy, scale types) are neglected by common statistical
data base management systems. The wealth of methods currently available
in modern statistical program packages, consequently, often leads to
erroneous applications of statistical methods.
It is demonstrated, how an expert system can facilitate the use
of statistical analysis systems by means of intelligent dialogue
techniques based on knowledge of structural information and help to avoid
erroneous applications of statistical (graphical or analytical) methods.
------------------------------
Date: 09 Aug 85 10:14:08 PDT (Fri)
From: Sanjai Narain <narain@rand-unix.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Prolog (Rand)
THE EXPRESSIVE POWER OF PROLOG
Peter Schmitt
IBM, Heidelberg, West Germany
2:00 p.m.
Tuesday, August 13, 1985
Rand Corporation, Room 2760
This talk is concerned with the foundations of logic programming. In
particular, completeness results and insufficiencies of PROLOG are
discussed including questions of search strategy, occur check and
negation.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 85 10:47:14 PDT
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - The PRISM Expert System (IBM-SJ)
[Excerpted from the IBM-SJ Calendar by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Thur., Aug. 15 Computer Science Seminar
10:00 A.M. PRISM - AN EXPERT SYSTEM
Auditorium While the expert system has been developed as a
knowledge acquisition and delivery vehicle by
the AI researchers, it has evolved to be a
practical software development productivity
tool. PRISM is an expert system prototype
developed at the Palo Alto Scientific Center and
has been available for application development
for more than a year to internal users and
university study partners. Recently, IBM
announced its first expert system product,
Expert System Environment/VM, based on PRISM.
This talk will begin with an introduction to the
expert system technology: its basic
architecture, knowledge representation and
inferencing, the interrelationship among the
application domain expert, the knowledge
engineer, and the client. The difference
between the traditional application programming
and the expert system approach will be
emphasized. The second half of the talk will
describe the product and some projects and
applications using the PRISM technology.
F. C. Tung, IBM Palo Alto Scientific Center
Host: K. Wong
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 85 10:47:14 PDT
From: IBM San Jose Research Laboratory Calendar
<calendar%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Parallelism in Logic Programs (IBM-SJ)
[Excerpted from the IBM-SJ Calendar by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Fri., Aug. 16 Computer Science Seminar
2:00 P.M. PARALLELISM IN LOGIC PROGRAMS
Aud. A The separation of logic and control in logic
programs has been shown to allow the programmer
to write declaratively lucid programs whose
execution is determined by the interpreter.
This appealing characteristic of logic
programming spurred research directed towards
diversifying the means for controlling the
execution of logic programs. In particular,
parallelism in logic programs may be exploited
even when it is impossible to state a priori
that two goals may be executed concurrently, but
such an opportunity may be detected during the
course of the execution. This talk will address
the problem of and/or parallelism in logic
programming. We describe a computational model
for and/or parallel execution of logic programs.
The model provides the primitives to describe
and analyze parallel interpreters, emphasizing
the data-flow among conjunctive goals. The
effectiveness of our computational model is
established through its ability to support both
old and new communication paradigms for the
parallel interpretation of logic programs.
Prof. S. Kasif, Department of Computer Science,
University of Maryland, College Park
Host: P. Lucas
------------------------------
Date: 7 August 1985 1700-EDT
From: Roger Dannenberg@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - Computer Music Expert System (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Marilyn Taft Thomas (Music Department) and I will each present a
short talk on Monday, August 12, from 3:30PM to 4:30PM in WeH 4623.
Dr. Thomas's talk is: "Vivace: A Rule-Based AI System for
Composition". Vivace composes 4-part chorales in the style of Bach.
Sound examples of Vivace compositions will be performed.
My talk is "Real-Time Computer Accompaniment of Keyboard
Performance" and is based on a paper co-authored with Joshua Bloch.
The talk will cover the application of dynamic programming to on-line
pattern matching of polyphonic music, and heuristics for musical
accompaniment. A video-tape of our system will be shown.
Both talks will be presented in a few weeks at the 1985
International Computer Music Conference. We hope to receive
constructive criticism on our presentations as well as to share our
latest results.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 9 Aug 85 13:39:33-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Foundations of AI
From CACM, August 1985:
The AAAI and the Computing Research Laboratory, New Mexico State University,
are sponsoring a Workshop on the Foundations of AI, February 6-8, 1986,
in Las Cruces, NM. Papers dealing with the following three topics are
sought: relationships between foundations and working programs;
relationships between AI and other disciplines; and philosophical, logical,
and theoretical foundations of AI. Three copies of a paper (maximum
2000 words) should be submitted by September 1 to Derek Partridge,
Computing Research Laboratory, NMSU, Las Cruces, NM 88003. Authors are
to be notified by November 1.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂12-Aug-85 2343 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #108
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Aug 85 23:43:26 PDT
Date: Mon 12 Aug 1985 21:51-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #108
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 13 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 108
Today's Topics:
Conference - Cognitive Science Society
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 Aug 1985 1811-PDT
From: GRANGER%UCI-20A@UCI-ICSA
Subject: 7th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society,
15-17 Aug.
Though it's the last minute, I'm sending a copy of the program for
the upcoming seventh annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
The conference runs 15-17 August (immediately before ijcai), and
contains much that may be of interest to the Artificial Intelligentsia.
Anyone who is interested in coming down for this conference, can show
up and register at the door; dorm rooms are available on the campus,
and hotel rooms are available at the Sheraton Hotel in Newport Beach.
The conference is being held on the campus of the University of
California, Irvine, which is about 40 miles south of Los Angeles,
adjoining Newport Beach. There are currently about 400 preregistered
participants.
-Rick Granger (Granger@UCI)
========================================================================
Thursday 15 August 1985
7:30am-8:45am Breakfast [Mesa Court Cafeteria]
8:45am-10:15am Invited Address
Shimon Ullman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:15am-10:30am Break
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session I [Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:30am-10:55am
Symmetry Detection and the Perceived Orientation of Simple Plane
Polygons
Paul Kube, University of California, Berkeley
10:55am-11:20am
Variations on Parts and Wholes: Information Precedence vs. Global
Precedence
Marc M. Sebrechts, Wesleyan University
John J. Fragala, Wesleyan University
11:20am-11:45am
The Neural Locus of Mental Image Generation: Converging Evidence
from Brain-Damaged and
Normal Subjects
Martha J. Farah, Carnegie-Mellon University
11:45am-12:10pm
A Developmental Neural Model of Word Perception
Richard M. Golden, Brown University
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session II [Concert Hall]
10:30am-10:55am
A Computer Model of the Neural Substrates
of Classical Conditioning in the Aplysia
Mark A. Gluck, Stanford University
Richard F. Thompson, Stanford University
10:55am-11:20am
Structural Learning in Connectionist Systems
Andrew G. Barto, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Charles W. Anderson, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
11:20am-11:45am
The Learning of World Models by Connectionist Networks
Richard S. Sutton, GTE Laboratories
Brian Pinette, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
11:45am-12:10pm
Learning Salience Among Features Through Contingency in the
CEL Framework
Richard H. Granger, University of California, Irvine
Jeffrey C. Schlimmer, University of California, Irvine
12:10pm-2:00pm Lunch Break [Mesa Court]
2:00pm-4:45pm Invited Symposium I
Attention in Early Visual Processing
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
Anne Treisman, University of British Columbia
Michael Posner, University of Oregon
David LaBerge, University of California, Irvine
Francis Crick, The Salk Institute
Daniel Kahneman, University of British Columbia
Shimon Ullman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4:45pm-7:00pm Dinner Break [Mesa Court]
7:00pm-11:00pm Poster Session and Reception
[University Club]
(List of poster presentations at end of program)
Friday 16 August 1985
8:45am-10:15am Invited Address:
Allen Newell, Carnegie-Mellon University
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:15am-10:30am Break
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session III [Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:30am-11:20am
Bounded Irrationality: The Psychology of Incoherence
(paper not published in the proceedings)
Daniel Kahneman, University of British Columbia
11:20am-11:45am
Component Models of Physical Systems
Allan Collins, Bolt Beranek and Newman
11:45am-12:10pm
Temporal Notation and Causal Terminology
Yoav Shoham, Yale University
Thomas Dean, Yale University
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session IV [Concert Hall]
10:30am-10:55am
Story Telling and Generalization
Michael Lebowitz, Columbia University
10:55am-11:20am
MULTIPAR: A Robust Entity-Oriented Parser
Jill Fain, Carnegie-Mellon University
Jaime G. Carbonell, Carnegie-Mellon University
Philip J. Hayes, Carnegie-Mellon University
Steven N. Minton, Carnegie-Mellon University
11:20am-11:45am
Towards a Computational Theory of Human Daydreaming
Erik T. Mueller, University of California, Los Angeles
Michael G. Dyer, University of California, Los Angeles
11:45am-12:10pm
Integrating Marker-Passing and Problem Solving
James A. Hendler, Brown University
12:10pm-2:00pm Lunch Break [Mesa Court]
2:00pm-4:45pm Invited Symposium II
Integrated Empirical Models of Learning and Memory
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
Paul Rosenbloom, Stanford University
Gary Lynch, University of California, Irvine
Pat Langley, University of California, Irvine
Jaime Carbonell, Carnegie-Mellon University
David Rumelhart, University of California, San Diego
4:45pm-5:30pm Reception [University Club]
5:30pm-7:30pm Banquet [University Club]
7:30pm-9:00pm Invited Address
Endel Tulving, University of Toronto
[University Club]
9:00pm-12:00mid Reception [University Club]
Saturday 17 August 1985
8:45am-10:15am Invited Address:
Roger Schank, Yale University
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:15am-10:30am Break
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session V [Fine Arts Village Theater]
10:30am-10:55am
The Evolution of Knowledge Representations with Increasing
Expertise in Using Systems
Dana S. Kay, Yale University
John B. Black, Teachers College, Columbia University
10:55am-11:20am
Purpose-Directed Analogy
Smadar Kedar-Cabelli, Rutgers University
11:20am-11:45am
Learning Concrete Strategies Through Interaction
R.W. Lawler, GTE Laboratories
Oliver G. Selfridge, GTE Laboratories
11:45am-12:10pm
Failure-Driven Acquisition of Figurative Phrases by Second
Language Speakers
Uri Zernik, University of California, Los Angeles
Michael G. Dyer, University of California, Los Angeles
10:30am-12:10pm Paper Session VI [Concert Hall]
10:30am-10:55am
Two Kinds of Feature? A Test of Two Theories of Typicality Effects
in Natural Language
Categories
Robin A. Barr, Ball State University
Leslie J. Caplan, Ball State University
10:55am-11:20am
Empirical Evidence for a Global Workspace Theory of Voluntary Control
Bernard J. Baars, University of California, San Francisco
11:20am-11:45am
Connectionist Parsing
Garrison W. Cottrell, University of Rochester
11:45am-12:10pm
A Rule-Based Connectionist Parsing System
Bart Selman, University of Toronto
Graeme Hirst, University of Toronto
12:10pm-2:00pm Lunch Break [Mesa Court]
1:00pm-2:00pm Business Meeting of the Society [Mesa Court]
2:00pm-4:45pm Invited Symposium III
Syntactic Language Processing
[Fine Arts Village Theater]
Robert Berwick, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lyn Frazier, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Howard Kurtzman, University of California, Irvine
Eric Wehrli, University of California, Los Angeles
Ken Wexler, University of California, Irvine
4:45pm-5:30pm Farewell Reception [Mesa Court]
Poster Presentations
7:00pm-11:00pm
Thursday, 15 August
[University Club]
Adaptive Planning: Refitting Old Plans to New Situations,
Richard Alterman, University of California, Berkeley
Memory Representation and Retrieval for Editorial Comprehension,
Sergio J. Alvarado, Michael G. Dyer, and Margot Flowers,
University of California, Los
Angeles
Analogy Recognition and Comprehension in Editorials,
Stephanie E. August and
Michael G. Dyer, University of California, Los Angeles
Investigations of Information Utilization during Fixations in
Reading,
Harry E. Blanchard, University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign
Two Endorsement-based Approaches to Reasoning About Uncertainty,
Paul R. Cohen, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Teleology + Bugs = Explanations,
Gregg C. Collins, Yale University
A Model for Understanding the Points of Stories,
Marcy Dorfman, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
A Framework for Concept Formation,
J. Daniel Easterlin and Pat
Langley, University of California, Irvine
The Problem of Existence,
Kenneth D. Forbus,
University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign
Cross-Mapped Analogies: Pitting Systematiciy Aganist Spurious
Similarity,
Dedre Gentner, University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign;
Cecile Toupin, University
of
California, Berkeley
Information, Uncertainty, and the Utility of Categories,
Mark A. Gluck,
Stanford University; James E. Corter, Columbia University
A Model of Question Answering,
Arthur C. Graesser, Memphis State University;
George Vamos, University of Southern
California; David Koizumi, C. Scott
Elofson,
California State University, Fullerton
The Time Course of Anaphora Resolution,
Raymonde Guindon, Microelectronics
and Computer Technology Corporation
Using a Computational Model of Language Acquisition to Address
Questions in Linguistic
Inquiry,
Jane Hill, Smith College
A Model of Acquiring Problem Solving Expertise,
Dennis Kibler and
Rogers P. Hall, University of California, Irvine
Creating and Comprehending Arguments,
Stuart M. McGuigan,
Yale University; John B. Black, Teachers College, Columbia University
Levels of Goal Direction and the Causes of Learning,
Dale M. McNulty,
University of California, Irvine
Connectionist Learning in Real Time: Sutton-Barto Adaptive Element
and Classical
Conditioning of the Nictitating Membrane Response,
J.W. Moore, J.E. Desmond, N.E. Berthier, D.E.J. Blazis, R.S. Sutton,
A.G. Barto,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Explanation and Generalization Based Memory,
Michael J. Pazzani,
University of California, Los Angeles and The Aerospace Corporation
Bayesian Networks: A Model of Self-Activated Memory for Evidential
Reasoning,
Judea Pearl, University of California, Los Angeles
Expert Variance: Differences in Solving a Dynamic Engineering
Problem,
Michael Prietula and Frank Marchak, Dartmouth College
Machine Understanding and Data Abstraction in Searle's Chinese Room,
William J. Rapaport, University of Buffalo
Toward a Unified Model of Deception,
Donald D. Rose, University
of California, Irvine
Building a Computer Model of Learning Classical Mechanics,
Jude W. Shavlik and Gerald F. DeJong, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
Persuasive Argumentation in Resolution of Collective Bargaining
Impasses,
Katia Sycara-Cyranski, Georgia Institute of Technology
The Interaction of Lexical Expectation and Pragmatics in
Parsing Filler-Gap Constructions,
Michael K. Tanenhaus and
Laurie A. Stowe,
University of Rochester; Greg Carlson,
Wayne State University
Predicting Conversational Reports of a Personal Event,
Yvette
J. Tenney, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc.
Thematic Knowledge, Episodic Memory and Analogy in MINSTREL, A
Story Invention
System,
Scott R. Turner and Michael G. Dyer,
University of California, Los Angeles
Spatial Inferences and Discourse Comprehension,
Karl F. Wender and
Monika Wagener, Technische Universitat Braunschweig
Cognitive Processing Strategies for Complex Addition,
Keith F. Widaman, David C. Geary, Pierre Cormier, Todd D. Little,
University of California,
Riverside
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Aug-85 0127 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #109
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Aug 85 01:27:18 PDT
Date: Mon 12 Aug 1985 23:02-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #109
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 13 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 109
Today's Topics:
Queries - Phone Numbers & AI Workstations,
Review - AI Report Aug 1985,
Literature - Recent Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 85 10:53:02 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: need phone numbers...
Could some one please give me the PHONE-NUMBERS and E←MAIL←ADDRESSes
of: ============= ================
1. Dr. Elliot Solloway, YALE
2. Dr. Michalski (machine Learning book)
3. Dr. Lewis Johnson, (author of PROUST, ICAI-system
Ph.D. Thesis at YALE.)
Thanks very very much in advance.
- Raj Doshi
Grad Student, University Of Minnesota.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1985 18:04 EDT
From: JIN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AI Workstations
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
A friend of mine at Stanford CAD group is trying to choose a lisp machine
for his lab. The candidates are: 3600, TI, Dandelion, and Tektronix.
If you know any pros and cons or any literature comparing these machines,
let me know. I would appreciate it.
------------------------------
Date: 9 Aug 1985 01:43-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI Report Aug 1985
Summary of Artificial Intelligence Report, Volume 2, No. 8
August 1985
o - Evaluation of Five Commercial Expert Systems Tools
related to "Evaluating the Existing Tools for Developing
Knowledge-Based Systems: by Mark H. Richer, Knowledge Systems
Laboratory, Stanford University, Report NO. KSL 85-19
o - General Motors and the Unversity of Michigan have formed
a Center for Machine Intelligence headed by Lynn Conway
o - Proctor and Gamble and NYNEX have invested 3 million and 4
million in Teknowledge respectively
o - Ted Harnett is now President and CEO of Quintus. He was
previously at Micro Focus
o - announcement of MacKit for writing expert systems on
Macintoshes
o - Kurzweill has announced production and marketing of a speech
recognizer with a vocabulary of 1000 words
o - Sperry - TI deal
o - The Geneval Laboratories of Battelle Memorial Institute
have completed a 2000 page survey of computer vision
hardware
o - Announcement of index to Scientific Data Link's
AI memos
o - bibliography by Harry Llull
Review of:
%A Paul Harmon
%A David King
%T Expert Systems: Artificial Intelligence in Business
%I John Wiley & Sons
------------------------------
Date: 10 Aug 1985 02:25-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
%A Christine McGeever
%T Symantec Ships Its First Product
%J InfoWorld
%D JUL 22, 1985
%V 7
%N 29
%P 20
%K Gary Hendrix Symantec
%X Symantec, a company promising a significant AI product and which
has hired Gary Hendrix, has shipped its first product. That product
is a Lotus 1-2-3 which has nothing to do with AI. The "blockbuster"
AI product is still planned.
%T Teknowledge Gets $4M Cash Infusion
%J Electronic News
%D JUL 22, 1985
%V 31
%N 1559
%P 31
%K Proctor and Gamble
%X Proctor and Gamble has invested 4 million dollars for Teknowledge in
exchange for slightly more than 10 per cent ownership.
%A Barbara Kellam-Scott
%T Harvard Law School Computerizes the Paper Chase
%J Hardcopy
%D JUL 1985
%P 19
%V 14
%N 7
%K DEC
%X Harvard Law School is automating their Legal Services Clinics.
They have plans to include an expert system to assist lawyers in
handling these cases. Digital Equipment has contributed to this program.
%A Clara Y. Cuadrado
%A John L. Cuadrado
%T Prolog Goes to Work
%J MAG4
%P 151-159
%K Symbolics Al Despain Yale Patt Berkely
%X Al Despain and Yale Patt of Berkeley have achieved 425,000 LIPS using
a custom designed processor. Symbolics has achieved 100,000 LIPS using
custom microcode. Discusses general issues of Prolog in the contex of
a maze traversing system. Also discusses the Japanese Fifth Generation
project.
%T Book Reviews
%J MAG4
%X reviews of J. R. Ennals, Beginning Micro-Prolog and K. L. Clark and
F. G. McCabe's Micro-Prolog Programming
%P 49-60
%A Robert Kowalski
%T Logic Programming
%J MAG4
%P 161-177
%K Prolog
%X general article on prolog, similar to other articles on the same
subject by the same author appearing in other publications.
%T Programming Environment with AI Module
%J MAG1
%P 386
%X Commodore 64 Superforth Parsec Research
%K Describes Superforth 64 + AI, a system to allow you to write expert
systems on the Commordore 64. It supports antecedent and consequent
reasoning
------------------------------
Date: 10 Aug 1985 02:20-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: bibliography
These definitions are used for this AI bibliography and for
the next submission which covers computer vision/ robotics
articles.
[I have passed the vision bibliography on to
Vision-List@AIDS-UNIX. AIList readers can get a
copy from AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA, or by FTPing
file <ailist>vision.bib on SRI-AI. -- KIL]
D MAG2 International Journal of Robotics Research\
%V 3\
%N 4\
%D Winter 1984
D MAG3 Journal of Mechanism, Transmission and Automation in Design\
%V 107\
%N 1 Special Issue\
%D MAR 1985
D BOOK14 Intelligent Robots and Computer Vision: Proceedings of the
Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers\
%D NOV 5-8 1984\
%E D. P. Casasent\
%E E. L. Hall
D MAG3X Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing\
%V 2\
%N 1\
%D FEB 1985
D MAG4 Byte\
%V 10\
%N 8\
%D AUG 1985
D MAG5 Industrial and Process Control Magazine\
%V 58\
%N 3\
%D MAR 1985
D MAG6 Aerospace America\
%V 23\
%N 4\
%D APR 1985
D MAG7 Computer Design\
%V 24\
%N 3\
%D MAR 1985
D MAG8 Manufacturing Engineering\
%V 94\
%N 4\
%D APR 1985
bib bibliography entries:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
%A J. A. Reggia
%A B. T. Pericone
%A D. S. Nau
%A Y. Peng
%T Answer Justification in Diagnostic Systems 1. Abductive Inference and its
Justification
%J IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
%V 32
%N 4
%D 85
%P 263
%A J. A. Reggia
%A B. T. Pericone
%A D. S. Nau
%A Y. Peng
%T Answer Justification in Diagnostic Systems 2. Supporting Plausible
Justifications
%J IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
%V 32
%N 4
%D 85
%P 268
%A K. Marik
%T Customers Requirements of Natural Language Systems
%J International Journal of Man-Machine Stuides
%V 21
%N 5
%D NOV 84
%P 401
%A Stephen W. Oxman
%T Expert Systems Represent Ultimate Goal of Strategic Decision Making
%J Data Management
%V 23
%N 4
%D APR 1985
%P 36
%A J. R. Ennals
%T Beginning Micro-Prolog
%I Harper & Row
%C New York
%D 1984
%X $15.95
%A K. L. Clark
%T Micro-Prolog: Programming in Logic
%I Prentice-Hall
%C Englewood Cliffs, NJ
%D 1984
%X $18.95
%A Tim Johnson
%T Natural Language Computing: The Commercial Applications
%I Ovum Ltd
%C London
%X Price $395.00
%A Ahrens, U.
%A Schmidt, U.
%T Advanced Programming Process for Industrial Robots
%J Industrie-Anzeiger
%V 106
%N 103/104
%D Dec. 28, 1984
%P 42-43
%A F. Bouille
%T The 'HBDS' Database Model Kernel of a Structured Data
Base System. Making Databases Work
%J IEEE Proceedings of Trends and Applications
%D 1984
%P 324-331
%A M. B. Cooper
%A A. L. Kidd
%T A Man-Machine Interface for an Expert System
%J British Telecom Technology Journal
%V 3
%N 1
%D JAN 1984
%P 112-115
%T Development Tool Debuts
%J Computer World
%V 19
%N 11
%D MAR 18, 1985
%P 49
%A R. Goering
%T Do-It-Yourself Development Tools Speed AI Applications
%J Computer Design
%V 23
%N 14
%D DEC 1984
%P 29-32+
%A T. Huggins
%T AI Systems Made Simple
%J Informatics
%V 6
%N 1
%D JAN 1984
%P 11-13
%A P. Hunter
%T User Shells Sets Experts Wrangling
%J ComputerWeekly
%N 949
%D FEB 7, 1985
%P 28
%A V. P. Kobler
%T Overview of Tools For Knowledge Base Construction
%J International Conference on Data Engineering
%I IEEE
%C Los Angeles, Ca
%D 1984
%P 282-285
%A J. R. Lineback
%T Lisp Machine Provides a Shell for Industrial AI Applicaitgons In One of
First Expert Systems To Go To Work
%J Electronics Week
%V 57
%N 2
%D 1984
%P 33
%A C. Maioli et al.
%T Prototypes of Expert Systems for a Friendly Man Machine Interaction.
User Termianls for Information/Communication Systems
%J 31st International Congress on Electronics. Proceedings
%D 1984
%P 35-42
%A A. Mehta
%T ICL Claims Its Shell Cracks Expert Problem
%J ComputerWeekly
%N 943
%D DEC 13, 1984
%P 10
%A M. Merry
%T Apex-3: An Expert System Shell for Fault-Diagnosis
%J GEC Journal of Research
%V 1
%N 1
%D 1983
%P 39-47
%A W. Rauch-Hindin
%T AI Tool on PC bridges Expert to Novice Gap
%J Systems and Software
%V 3
%N 7
%D JUL 1984
%P 42+
%A S. E. Savory
%T An Introduction to Artificial Intelligence with a Description
of the Tool System, 'Twice'
%J COMPAS 1984 Software as a Prduct
%P 1057-1064
%A M. Schindler
%T PC Software Tool Designs Small Expert Systems for Any Field
%J Electronic Design
%V 32
%N 12
%D JUN 14, 1984
%P 42-44
%A M. Schindler
%T Expert Systems
%J Electronic Design
%V 33
%N 1
%D JAN 10, 1985
%P 112-114
%A M. STephens
%A K. Whitehead
%T The 'Analyst,' An Expert Systems Approach to Requirements
Analyst
%J European Seminar on Industrial Software Engineering and the European
Workshop on Industrial Computer Systems. Proceedings
%
D 1984
%P 189-206
%T TI announces Expert System Software Tool
%J Computerworld
%V 18
%N 32
%D AUG 6, 1984
%P 59+
%A R. S. Wall
%T Industrial Strength Knowledge Representation
%J Third Annual International Phoenix Conference on Computers and
Communications Proceedings
%I IEEE
%C Phoenix
%D 1984
%P 6-10
%A R. C. Waters
%T The Programmer's Apprentice: Knowledge-Based Program Editor
%J Mini/Micro Northeast Computer Conference and exhibition
%D 1984
%A Anthony J. Frisai
%T AI Market Prospects are Good
%J MAG5
%P 41
%A Dr. Richard A. Herrod
%A Barbara Papas
%T Artificial Intelligence Moves Into Industrial and Process Control
%J MAG5
%P 45
%T I&CS Guide to AI Products
%J MAG5
%P 50
%A Thomas E. Murphy
%T Setting Up an Expert System
%J MAG5
%P 54
%A A. C. Buffalano
%T Expert Systems for the Military
%J MAG6
%P 40
%A P. G. Freck
%A R. P. Bonasso
%T Drawing a Clear Picture of the Battlefield
%J MAG6
%P 46
%A S. A. Vere
%T Deviser- An AI Planner for Spacecraft Operations
%J MAG6
%P 50
%A D. I. Smith
%T CATS Precursor to Aerospace Expert Systems
%J MAG6
%P 54
%A L. V. Filosofov
%T Dynamic Recognition with Internal Instruction
%J Engineering Cybernetics
%V 22
%N 3
%D MAY-JUN 1984
%P 134
%A N. Mokhoff
%T AI Techniques Aim to Ease VLSI Design
%J MAG7
%P 33
%K AIENG
%A H. J. HIndin
%A S. F. Shapiro
%T Speech Recognition Produces Natural Interface
%J MAG7
%P 59
%A Z. L. Rabinovich
%T Machine Intelligence and Fifth Generation Computer Structures
%J Cybernetics
%V 20
%N 3
%D MAY-JUN 1985
%P 426
%A W. Dilger
%A W. Womannn
%T The METANET: A Means for the Specification of Semantic Networks as
Abstract Datatypes
%J International Journal of Man-Machine Studies
%V 21
%N 6
%D DEC 1984
%P 463
%A Michael B. First
%A Lynn J. Soffer
%A Randolph A. Miher
%T QUICK (quick Index to Caduceus Knowledge) Using the
Internish/Cadaceus Knowledge Base as an Electronic Textbook of
Medicine
%J Computers and Biomedical Research
%V 18
%N 2
%D APR 1985
%P 137
%A Bernard Huet
%T Semantic Modelling of Biological Sub-Systems by a Multilevel Control
Structure Concept
%J Kybernetes
%V 14
%N 2
%D 1985
%P 93
%A J. A. Chester
%T Artificial Intelligence-Is MIS Ready for the Explosion
%J Infosystems
%V 32
%N 4
%D APR 1985
%P 74
%A R. K. MIller
%T Artificial Intelligence - A New Tool for Manufacturing
%J MAG8
%P 56
%K AIENG
%A R. P. Bergstrom
%T AI - Fad with a Future
%J MAG8
%P 65
%A Susan Walton
%T Fighting Fire with Computers
%T Technology Review
%V 88
%N 6
%P 68-69
%D AUG/SEP 1985
%K forestry forest fires
%X describes an expert system in a portable computer which is used
to help fire fighters in determining how to fight forest fires.
This system has been used to settle a law suit in Australia, to
determine the appropriate amount of staffing for fire
systems and has successfully predicted the area where a fire
will occur and its path and duration of travel.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Aug-85 2344 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #110
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Aug 85 23:44:28 PDT
Date: Wed 14 Aug 1985 21:46-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #110
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 15 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 110
Today's Topics:
Queries- Master Bibliography & OPS5 for Symbolics,
Bindings - Friedman & Johnson,
AI Tools - IBM Prolog and Expert Systems Development,
Logic Programming - Opinion,
Expert Systems - Definition & Database Systems & Rule Induction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 13 Aug 85 09:28:58-PDT
From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
Subject: Master Bibliography
I suspect that I am not the only one reading this BB who finds some
of the submissions less than completely understandable due to lacunae in my
own background. Hence a suggestion: Would it make sense to establish and
maintain a bibliography (hopefully annotated), whose existence and address
would be mentioned in the header of the AIList Digest? Then when someone
like myself wanted to understand more, he or she could FTP a copy of the
bibliography and with a little study, at least understand the terminology.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 85 07:59:12 edt
From: Martin Lee Schoffstall
<schoff%rpics-zen%rpi.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: ops5 for symbolics
does anyone have any pointers to an OPS5 for the symbolics3600?
thanks,
marty schoffstall
schoff%rpics.csnet@csnet-relay ARPA
schoff@rpics CSNET
seismo!rpics!schoff UUCP
martin←schoffstall@TROY.NY.USA.NA.EARTH.SOL UNIVERSENET
RPI
Computer Science Department
Troy, NY 12180
(518) 271-2654
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 85 15:28:07 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: want address of JPL...
Hi, would anyone know the address of
a Dr. LEN FRIEDMAN who used to (or still is) with
(JPL) Jet Propulsion Laboratory ??
I have the old address. I sent a letter, but it was returned to me
by U.S.Mail authorities.
I know for sure that this was his address in June 1983.
The old address was : Dr. Len Friedman
=========== Automated Problem Solving
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute Of Technology
4800 Oak Grove Drive
SUITE # 278
Pasedena, CA 91109
Would anyone know his PHONE-Number ?????
Would anyone know his new address (surface or email) ??
Thanks very very much in advance. Please respond directly to me.
Thanks again.
--- raj doshi, University of Minnesota
doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 1985 0855-PDT (Tuesday)
From: Johnson@ISI-VAXA
Subject: binding and request
I am told that a request for my current address appeared on ailist
recently. My arpanet address is johnson@isi-vaxa; my mailing address is
W. Lewis Johnson
USC / Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
Also, could you please add my name to the recipients of ailist? Thanks.
Lewis
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 85 10:22 P
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: IBM announces Prolog and Expert Systems Development
VM Programming in Logic 5785-ABH One Time Charge Lang: Assem, REXX
"VM Programming in Logic is an IBM implementation of the PROLOG programming
language. It is suited for the research and development of applications in
artificial intelligence including: expert systems, automated deduction,..."
"VM Programming in Logic provides the following features:
- Debugging Facilities
- Communication with VM/SP ..., SQL/DS ..., and LISP/VM... (Note: the
use of SQL/DS and LISP/VM are optional.)"
The Availability is Sept. 6, 1985.
Documentation: PDOM SH20-6541
Expert System Consultation Environment/VM 5798-RWP OTC or Monthly
Expert System Development Environment/VM 5798-RWQ OTC or Monthly
Language: PASCAL/VS
"These two complementary program offerings provide the facilities
for developing and executing expert systems. Expert System
Development Environment/VM is used to 'build' knowledge bases. Expert
System Consultation Env./VM is used to 'consult' those knowledge
bases. ..."
"These program offerings provide the following features:
- English-like rules
- Specialized editors with automatic checking to facilitate the entry and
modification of knowledge base objects.
- Explanation during consultation: 'Why?' provides a logical explanation
for a certain request; 'What?' provides a more detailed explanation of
the question being asked.
- Debugging support.
- Two inference processes: forward chaining, backward chainging.
- Online help."
"The Expert System Development Environment/VM requires the Expert System
Consultation Environment/VM. Once the knowledge base (set of rules) has been
developed, it can be replicated and used by the Expert System Consultation
Environment/VM without the presence of the Expert System Development Env./VM."
Availability: Sept. 6, 1985
Documentation: Gen. Info. Man. GH20-9597, ESDE Install: SH20-9607,
ESDE User Guide SH20-9608, ESDE Ref. Man. SH20-9609.
ESCE Install: SH20-9605, ESCE User Guide SH20-9606.
These are supported out of Irving Texas. From Announcement Letter 285-284,
August 6, 1985.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 85 00:40:17 EDT
From: Carl E. Hewitt <HEWITT@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Prolog will fail as the foundation for AI; so will LOGIC as
a PROGRAMMING Language
Prolog (like APL before it) will fail as the foundation for Artificial
Intelligence because of competition with Lisp. There are commercially
viable Prolog implementations written in Lisp but not conversely.
LOGIC as a PROGRAMMING Language will fail as the foundation for AI because:
1. Logical inference cannot be used to infer the decisions that need to be
taken in open systems because the decisions are not determined by
system inputs.
2. Logic does not cope well with the contradictory knowledge bases inherent
in open systems. It leaves out counterarguments and debate.
3. Taking action does not fit within the logic paradigm.
[Carl also sent this message to the philosophy of science mailing
list (Phil-Sci-Request%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC), and it has triggered several
responses about Prolog/Logic Programming/AI. I am happy to let
Phil-Sci carry the discussion, although it could just as easily
have fit within AIList or the Prolog digest. For a good elaboration
of Carl's thesis on open systems (networks, banking systems,
nondeterministic distributed systems, etc.), see his article in
the April '85 issue of BYTE. It's interesting reading, as are most
of the articles in this special issue on AI. (The April Fool's
What's Not column on pp. 96-97 is fun too.) -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 85 10:07 P
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Expert System definition vs Database Systems
I have been reading over the definitions of what an expert system is and
isn't and I have seen in many of the comments that an expert system needs
to be able to learn as it continues. Somehow, I have always felt Expert
Systems to be glorified database systems. A database system gains more
information as you add data to it. Th common example of Expert Systems
(in my opinion) is the DOCTOR program:
1) Does the patient have a fever? Y
2) Has the patient vomitted in the past 24 hours? Y
3) Are the pupils dilated? N
4) etc...
The AI program asks questions and based on the answers, determines what
future questions to ask. In the end it narrows it down and comes up with
a diagnoses based on the results of the questions.
But I know of many database packages where a question in the form of:
FIND FEVER > 100 & VOMIT = YES & DILATED = NO
DISPLAY ALL
My question is: What distinguishes the database search and display interface
from an AI Expert System?
Hank
------------------------------
Date: Fri 9 Aug 85 18:27:09-EDT
From: SRIDHARAN@BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Rule Induction and Expert Systems
Masinter narrows it too far, making it anthropocentric.
During the Machine Learning workshop at Allerton, IL, I heard Don Michie
talk about the efforts of one of his friends. This effort involved building
an ES to analyze EKG charts. They built two systems, one pretty closely
following the Expert System methodology that Larry talked about. The other
system was constructed by using a rule-induction technique, giving it
a set of input charts and their analyses. The induction technique was
biased toward a set of useful features for rule formation. The comparison
of the two systems, yielded the conclusion that the induced-rule set
outperformed the other in terms of both speed of execution and quality of
results.
One might admit so called expertise may be included in such weak forms
as the bias given to the induction technique. Nature provides constraints
for scientific theories. Some of us would like to tap into this ultimate
source of "expertise" rather than stick to the derived expertise of humans.
Masinter's description could be broadened to include this, if each
occurrence of "expert" is not necessarily viewed as a human expert.
P.S. Note that with the induced rule-set the system might be capable of
explaining the rules themselves, by refering back to the cases.
Another case serves as reference example. Larry and I both particpated in
the Dendral and Meta-Dendral efforts at Stanford. The latter effort was
aimed at rule formation for a class organic molecules; rules to characterize
how bonds break in a mass spectrometer. Validated rules for several class
of molecules were formed and incorporated into Dendral. Here both
nature and human experts participated, but the human experts did not
construct the rules.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂17-Aug-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #111
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Aug 85 02:29:03 PDT
Date: Fri 16 Aug 1985 10:29-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #111
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 16 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 111
Today's Topics:
Symbolic Computing - Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1985 21:55 PDT
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: What is symbolic computing?
PARSYM is the new netwide mailing list for parallel symbolic
computing. One of the first messages to PARSYM asked just what is
symbolic computing anyway. I thought the readers of AIList might be
interested to see what PARSYM came up with.
-- Byron Davies (PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 85 09:15:00 pdt
From: coraki!pratt@Navajo (Vaughan Pratt)
Subject: What is symbolic computing?
I suppose with quarter of a century of Lisp experience we should
understand by now what symbolic computing is. Indeed everyone appears
to be quite happy to talk about symbolic computing as though the
concept had the unanimous blessing of the last three centuries of
mathematics.
Yet I have been unable to find in the literature a definition of the
concept that matches the facts.
Discussion based on the premise that the topic is well-defined when it
isn't is apt to run at cross-purposes.
I therefore challenge this list to agree on a definition of symbolic
computing.
Even if this challenge cannot be met (as I expect will be the case), at
least people will have been made aware of the variety of definitions
and will know to make allowance for this variety.
-v
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 85 15:34:33 EST
From: munnari!dmtadel.oz!crw@seismo.CSS.GOV (charles watson)
Subject: Applicative Symbolic Programming
Firstly I consider symbolic computing, to be abstract and non-numeric, dealing
with structured objects that match human concepts and images.
Secondly, I'd like to argue the case for side-effect free programming.
I feel that the side-effects of much real-world software are the
result of poor programming practice. John McCarthy's (1959) LISP is
sufficient. All the features added in the name of efficiency have
encumbered their compilers and interpreters. Except for debugging,
side effects have been tolerable in the past. For highly concurrent
systems of the future, side-effects would be catastrophic. I accept
that the cost of re-writing software is a strong reason for downward
compatability to existing non-applicative code, but redesign in a
sound paradigm would take less effort than conversion. The machine
architecture I'm working on will allow setq to avoid re-evaluating
S-exprs but not for explicit register assignment; it will allow
replac* to append non-circular lists, but not to point back to any
object in the ancestral tree. There are those who still believe that
the shortest distance between two pieces of software is a GOTO
statement. In my experience real-world software is easier to develop
and maintain in the structured paradigm. The last project I was
involved in used an applicative hierarchical specification of IC
designs to drive a silicon compiler. The problem would have otherwise
been intractable. Also, processors can be custom designed for
symbolic processing and replicated for the cost of about $10 each
(ignoring the development cost). A system with thousands of these
processors, could cost the same as a Symbolics 3600. Arguments such
as "this side-effect riddled feature gives a 20% performance
improvement" would be irrelevent to the cost-effectiveness of such a
system.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 85 07:46:47 pdt
From: coraki!pratt@Navajo (Vaughan Pratt)
Subject: Definitional Issues
From: munnari!dmtadel.oz!crw@seismo.CSS.GOV (charles watson)
Firstly I consider symbolic computing, to be abstract and non-numeric,
dealing with structured objects that match human concepts and images.
Excellent! A first attempt (on PARSYM) to define symbolic computing.
Let's try it out.
1. What does "abstract" mean? One definition I like a lot is
"authorized." Computation is abstract when it depends only on what
is authorized by the documentation. Is that what you meant? If so,
why is that in the definition of "symbolic" computing, as opposed to
other kinds of computing? If not, then what do you mean?
2. Lisp has numbers. Does this rule out Lisp as a symbolic language?
3. In PROLOG without equality an inefficient but convenient way to
represent natural numbers is symbolically: 3 = (S (S (S 0))) and so
on. How do you reconcile "symbolic" and "nonnumeric" for such a case?
4. What is an example of a structured object *not* matching human
concepts and images? I find it hard to conceive of or imagine such a
thing. This requirement is surely more appropriate for a definition of
AI computing than symbolic computing.
In short, I see neither neither the rationale for nor the application
of any part of this definition.
Secondly, I'd like to argue the case for side-effect free programming.
... For highly concurrent systems
of the future, side-effects would be catastrophic.
Speaking as one highly concurrent system trying to side effect another,
I hope I haven't thereby caused a catastrophe. And on behalf of human
society, another highly concurrent system, it would certainly be
interesting, and surely catastrophic in some sense, if we ceased to
have side effects on each other.
Whether you have, or for that matter can identify, side effects is very
dependent on your particular computational paradigm, e.g. the
distinction between functional and imperative programming. As soon as
one starts to explore other paradigms appropriate for concurrency,
e.g. dataflow (of particular interest to me), the concept of
side-effect free programming becomes either irrelevant or meaningless.
About the only sense one could make of it in dataflow would be if one
introduced ESP for processes, i.e. communication by unseen channels.
Sorry not to be more constructive here. For more constructive remarks
in the above spirit see my POPL-83 paper "Five Paradigm Shifts in
Programming Language Design and their Application to Viron, a Dataflow
Programming Language" After having taken off a couple of years helping
out with getting workstations out to people I am just now returning to
academia to continue the design and implementation of Viron, or
something resembling it (in addition to continuing my work on fonts, a
side-effect (hak coff) of my working at Sun). If people would be
interested I'd be happy to make occasional short contributions to this
column expressing the general philosophy behind Viron, which is very
much a parallel and abstract programming language. Since Viron
processes don't have a notion of internal state (how do you define "the
state" of a process consisting of an ocean of ships each loaded with
microprocessors with cycle times measured in nanoseconds, where
"simultaneous" is both physically and practically undefined?) one has
to define "side effect" in a way that does not depend on the notion of
state - in this sense Viron is free of any state-based notion of side
effect. Whether Viron could be called "symbolic" depends on whether we
ever find a workable definition of "symbolic," but it should pass
almost any plausible definition that does not rule out numeric
computation and that does not specify implementation or representation
details.
-v
------------------------------
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Date: 16 Jul 1985 1736-PDT (Tuesday)
Subject: Re: PARSYM Digest V1 #1: RE: What is symbolic computing?
> From: coraki!pratt@Navajo (Vaughan Pratt)
> Indeed everyone appears
> to be quite happy to talk about symbolic computing as though the
> concept had the unanimous blessing of the last three centuries of
> mathematics.
I work with people who crunch numbers, permit me to play devils advocate
(I do support research on symbolic processing): the only people
who have given their blessing is the LISP community. Let's not
close our eyes to that fact.
> I therefore challenge this list to agree on a definition of symbolic
> computing.
I realize this is rehashing hallway arguments we have all had:
please define that which is "not" symbolic computing and why we should
make a distinction in these two types of parallel computing. After all
isn't crunching a number the same as manipulating a symbol, and aren't
we possibly creating artificial distinctions of computing types (symbolic
and numeric)?
I like the idea of academic discussions of this nature. Work can get too
serious at times. I also would like to point out that I just returned from SU
and I have seen copies of Dr. Pratt's TRs on new thoughts for concurrency
models.
--eugene miya
NASA
------------------------------
Date: Fri 19 Jul 85 21:25:35-CDT
From: Mayank Prakash <AI.Mayank@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: What is symbolic computing?
Here's another attempt at it. First of all, I think that the terms
symbolic computing and numerical computing are different modes of
computing rather than mutually exclusive taxonomical categories.
Then, numerical computing is the mode when the major data elements are
numerical and one is interested in changing the numerical values of
these data elements. That is, both the input to and the output from
the program are mainly numerical. In symbolic computing, one is
interested mainly in manipulating structures. That is, both the input
and the output to the program are structures. Note that in this
definiton one mode of computing does not exclude the other. In fact,
most programs do some of each. It is the predominant activity of the
program that determines it's mode.
One could look at it from a lower level as well. The memory cells in
the computer's data memory (as opposed to the instruction memory)
contain binary values. If they are mostly interpreted as representing
numbers, and the majority of operations that are carried out on them
are numerical, i.e., add, subtract, multiply, shift etc. their values,
then the program is a numerical mode program. If they are mostly
pointers to other cells in memory, and the operations on them are
mainly follow the pointers along, modify them to point to some other
cells etc., then the program is a symbolic mode program.
A characteristic that generally distinguishes the languages for the
two kinds of programs is memory allocation. The languages developed
for numerical processing have mostly static memory allocation schemes.
By that I mean that the data memory is allocated to a procedure (or a
function, or block, whatever you want to call it) upon entry, and
released upon exit. Generally, though not always, the procedure does
not (and in most cases, can not) change its data memory. In contrast,
symbolic processing languages have dynamic memory allocation with
attendant garbage collection. This is necessary for symbolic
computing since in this case one is dealing with structures, which are
essentially pointers pointing at each other in various ways, and since
the main activity here is manipulating these structures, i.e.,
releasing and allocating pointers.
Admittedly these are somewhat vague definitions, but I hope that this
posting will at least spur a discussion on the subject.
- mayank.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 85 22:43:43 edt
From: Tom Blenko <blenko@rochester.arpa>
Subject: What is symbolic computation?
Vaughn's question is an interesting one. My proposal is that
numerical computation is performed over a flat domain, while symbolic
computing permits computation over terms which are partially bound or
instantiated. Binding is used in a broad sense here, and subsumes
type declaration and generic instantiation, as well as the
conventional notion of variable binding.
According to this scheme, FORTRAN is almost purely numerical because it
allows variables to be bound only to constants (although a form of
compile-time co-referential binding is possible using EQUIVALENCE).
FORTRAN is not purely numerical because variables are typed. Type
declaration is a form of binding under the notion of binding described
above, although an especially weak one because all type declarations
must be made at compile time. The class of nearly-numerical languages
(those with flat domains plus some support for typed variables) can be
expanded somewhat by including languages with slightly more powerful
type mechanisms, i.e., those which support discriminated unions or
procedure name overloading. For the purposes of discussion, I'd be
willing to refer to all of these as languages which support numerical
computation exclusively. This seems like a reasonable approximation
because their competence as symbolic languages is both weak and well
known.
Languages which permit various forms of abstract data type or generic
procedure definition would be classified as partially-symbolic because
they each support some form of run-time partial binding of variables.
Representative examples in this class are CLU, ADA, and SMALLTALK-80.
This is the class currently of greatest interest to the imperative
language people, and certainly there needs to be more work on what
abstraction and type mechanisms are useful and can be implemented
efficiently.
My two choices to represent (nearly) fully-symbolic languages are
PROLOG and LISP. In PROLOG, the binding mechanism, unification, can
also be viewed as a type restriction mechanism, so that a variable
becomes bound to a grounded term by successive application of type
restrictions to (variable) subterms of intermediate bindings as the
computation proceeds (reference for related work is Hassan Ait-Kaci's
thesis, A New Model of Computation based on a Calculus of Type
Subsumption). This identification of variable typing with more
traditional notions of variable binding is precisely what I propose
permits one to view symbolic computation in a coherent way.
LISP is well-known, and it would be quite a task to persuade some that
it is anything except the ultimate symbolic language. Clearly its
binding mechanism allows the kind of partial binding which occurs
naturally in PROLOG (although, of course, this could be said to be
only one consequence of its excessive permissiveness). Let me mention
two ways in which it differs from PROLOG, however, and might be viewed
as a more powerful symbolic language.
First, it allows variables to be bound as pointers to other variables.
This is undeniably a powerful mechanism, although it makes for more
complicated language semantics. It is also not a particularly good
substitute for what is (arguably) the corresponding mechanism in
PROLOG, specifically the co-referential binding resulting from the
unification of variables. I say the two mechanisms correspond because
the only way to do equivalencing in LISP is for variables A and B to
both point to C, and for C to store the equivalenced value of A and B,
which may be accessed by a dereference followed by an evaluation --
which leads to the second point.
Many LISPs implement what might be termed a first-class recursive call
to the interpreter. INTERLISP's evala, for example, allows any
procedure to call the interpreter recursively on a LISP data structure
with the binding environment of the computation completely specified
in an argument to evala. Intuitively, this is a powerful mechanism
for symbolic computation, and is moreover necessary for the rather
awkward implementation of LISP equivalencing described above, since
dereferencing is indistinguishable from evaluation (although Brian
Smith has succeeded in separating the two in his definition of
3-LISP). The (second-class) recursive call implemented in most
PROLOGs is more restricted because the environment of the calling
procedure is unconditionally inherited by the called procedure
(although proposals for more general approaches have been made). Many
partially- and non-symbolic languages do not provide any recursive
call.
These are admittedly incomplete thoughts, and I'd be interested in any
responses. I have not specifically addressed binding of parameters
across procedure calls -- call-by-value and call-by-reference can be
understood rather easily once the notion of variable creation is
included, I think. I haven't though about the symbolic power of
exotica such as thunks, and I suspect that macro expansion doesn't add
much in the way of symbolic power.
I'd be particularly interested in a coherent exposition of the
relationships between what I've been proposing as the primary
characteristic of symbolic computation (partial binding) and
mechanisms such as pointer creation and dereferencing, and lazy or
eager evaluation. For example, one might interpret PROLOG unification
of variables as a lazy assignment of the source variable to the target
variable, with evaluation of the source variable binding delayed
indefinitely (this is correct because PROLOG variables are
write-once). The obvious way to do dereferencing in PROLOG is through
a "procedure call" or recursive call to the interpreter, except that
the PROLOG interpreter treats bound and unbound variables differently,
so that unbound variables "evaluate" to themselves both during
unification and when used as parameters to recursive function calls
(under what interpretation is this eager evaluation?).
Another question is why one is normally tempted to categorize a
language like C as non-symbolic, since it allows liberal pointer
creation/dereferencing and thereby allows the same binding of
variables to variables as LISP to be performed in a fairly direct
fashion. (Note, however, that no recursive call to the interpreter is
permitted).
I'd be interested in any thoughts or comments the list might have.
Tom
BLENKO@ROCHESTER
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 85 10:04 EDT
From: Seth Steinberg <sas@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolic vs Numerical Computing
We had better be careful here. Programs, not languages are either
symbolic or numerical. If I write a numerical matrix inverter in LISP
it is still a numerical program while if I write a MACSYMA-like
symbolic algebra matrix inverter in Fortran it is a symbolic program.
(Never mind why I would want to do the latter).
Numerical programs make the vast majority of their decisions based on
the values of terminal values which are stored in relatively
homogeneous data structures. Symbolic programs make significantly more
decisions based on examination of the structure of the data which may
vary more freely. The exact implementation of runtime typed data may
be part of the programming language (LISP or SMALLTALK types), assisted
by the programming language (PASCAL records used with case or C struct
unions), or it can be implemented in spite of the programming language
(FORTRAN, possibly with a package like SLIP or ASSEMBLY language using
the high bits for type and the rest for pointer). [Obviously, some
languages make symbolic programming easier than others].
This definition is far from perfect so I'll propose a test. Try
ranking a list of programs on the numerical<->symbolic scale. For
example (probably not in the right order):
Fast Fourier Transform
Sparse Matrix Multiply
Graph Coloring Algorithm
Simple Expression Compiler
ELIZA
LISP Interpreter
Simple Theorem Prover
Algebraic Integrator
Noun Phrase Parser
Try out your own ordering. Where would you put in things like:
FTP support for the Symbolics 3600
UNIX (kernel or cshell)
MacPaint vs. MacDraw
A Turing Machine
I'd be interested to see how these would be ranked or whether it is
meaningless to perform such rankings.
Seth Steinberg
SAS @ BBN-VAX
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 85 14:14:44 pdt
From: coraki!pratt@Navajo (Vaughan Pratt)
Subject: What is symbolic computing?
From: Mayank Prakash <AI.Mayank@MCC.ARPA>
Then, numerical computing is the mode when the major data elements are
numerical and one is interested in changing the numerical values of
these data elements. ...
I do a lot of computing with:
* complex numbers
* polynomials over various fields, including the reals
* vector spaces of various dimensions
* linear transformations
* survey maps, involving bearings, lot boundaries (expressed as lists
of line segments), areas, etc.
* outline fonts based on conic splines
Now if these aren't examples of structured data I'm a monkey's uncle.
Yet most of the time spent manipulating these structures goes into
floating point operations. On the one hand this is certainly
consistent with Mayank's observation that "most programs do some of
each." On the other hand I don't see how to apply the test "predominant
activity." Is this determined by the proportion of time spent on
floating point operations? If so then does plugging in a floating point
accelerator convert my program from a numerical to a symbolic one?
Or is it determined by the number of calls to floating point routines
in my programs? Most of my calls are to things like dot and matrix
products.
If [the memory cells] are mostly interpreted as representing
numbers, and the majority of operations that are carried out on them
are numerical, i.e., add, subtract, multiply, shift etc. their values,
then the program is a numerical mode program. ...
At this level the definition is vulnerable to the compiler. Given a
vector of reals a powerful optimizing compiler may see fit to implement
it either as a linked list (if the optimizer detects operations on the
vector that amount to expanding or contracting the vector) or an array
of contiguous locations (if there is much random access to the array).
How does one classify a program that leaves such decisions to the
compiler?
... symbolic processing languages have dynamic memory allocation
with attendant garbage collection.
When memory is allocated and released in LIFO order it is very efficient
to allocate it off a stack. When the release order is unpredictable
one resorts to a heap. How does this have anything to do with whether
numeric data types are involved?
-v
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 85 11:59 EDT
From: Guy Steele <gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolic and numerical computing
Symbolic programs:
* laugh at themselves.
* philosophize.
* till the soil.
* are featherless bipeds.
Here's a more serious attempt: ALL computing applications are symbolic.
All applications rely on processing data organized according to some
structural discipline. This discipline may be trivial or exceedingly
complex. There are typically certain invariants or axioms of the
structure, and the operations on the structure, on which the processing
relies: for example, that a tree is binary and balanced, and insertion
and deletion maintain these invariants.
A particularly large and important class of applications relies heavily
on the axioms for rings and fields, particularly the ring of integers
and the fields of real and complex numbers, and for such applications
much of the computation is done with data structures and operations
that are organized so as to obey these axioms (more or less, given the
usual finiteness of the representations). Because these applications
are so important, and the theory is well-understood and agreed-upon,
special hardware accelerators for certain very complicated operations
(such as multiplication) are the norm rather than the exception; but
the presence or absense of such hardware has, to my mind, little
bearing on the numericalness of the application.
So I propose that an application be considered numerical to the extent
that it relies on data structures obeying the axioms for rings or
fields, however these data structures may be represented as bits. I
would regard a LISP program operating on lists of NIL's as numerical if
it were so organized as to treat these lists primarily as unary
encodings of numbers, using routines to concatenate the lists (addition)
and repeatedly self-concatenate (double, multiply), and so on. (Indeed,
the SCHEME chips that I and others designed to directly interpret LISP
code had no on-chip ALU to speak of, and the chips were tested on
numerical applications using numbers encoded in exactly this way.)
Is a program that relies on a group structure numerical? What if there
is hardware to compute a*b quickly, where * is the group operator?
Suppose the group were SU(16) or GF(16) instead of Z[2↑16]? By the
proposed criterion, any such program might be somewhat numerical,
but less so than one using a ring or field.
--Guy Steele
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 85 22:18:42 pdt
From: coraki!pratt@Navajo (Vaughan Pratt)
Subject: Re: PARSYM Digest V1 #8
From: Guy Steele <gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
ALL computing applications are symbolic.
My position exactly. I particularly appreciated GLS's algebraic
examples, which I thought were right on. Subject closed (as far
as I'm concerned).
-v
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 6 August 1985, 5:15 pm PDT
From: Byron Davies <PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: What is symbolic computing?
The cat is out of the bag. Symbolic computing is indeed all
computing. PARSYM was designated the netwide mailing list for
*symbolic* computing in order to broaden the domain of discourse
rather than to restrict it to any particular branch of computing. I
hope it won't be long before someone asks the analogous question
about parallel computing -- and gets the *same* answer.
-- Byron
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Aug-85 2301 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #112
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Aug 85 23:00:44 PDT
Date: Sun 18 Aug 1985 21:06-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #112
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 19 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 112
Today's Topics:
Query - GF11 Hardware,
Information Science - Online Bibliographies,
Expert Systems - Definition vs Database Systems,
Logic Programming - Hewitt vs Prolog,
Seminars - Design Expert Systems (CMU) &
- Intelligent Design Completion (CMU),
Call for Papers - Knowledge Represention (Proc. IEEE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1985 07:44 EDT
From: "David D. Story" <FTD%MIT-OZ @ MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: GF11 Hardware
Has anyone out there looked at SIGARCH proceeding of
last month. I was wondering what comments might be
found on IBM's GF11. I heard of this machine years
ago. I thought at that time it was for a group of
problems General Foods had taken to the Yorktown
Group.
I see that they have added some new micro-code features
resembling Hewitt's Actors and Semantic Massage for a
society of experts. Though I dunno as of yet what is
happening with AI at Yorktown it seems they've tried
to get this under the hood. If the machine was meant
for the task of computing chromodynamics seems to me
that the word size would have been re-engineered since
there is no mention of double or quad wording in the
article. Whatta think ?
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 85 12:46:07 pdt
From: aurora!eugene@RIACS.ARPA (Eugene miya)
Subject: Re: Master bibliography
Excellent suggestion. The net's biggest problem is a lack of
memory. ;-)
I am trying something like this right now for parallel and distributed
computing. Mine is ftp-able, and has over 5000 entries. It also has
some copyright restrictions because I used several preexisting
bibliographies [i.e., stand on the shoulders of giants...]. There is only
one bibliography in the field larger than mine, but it's hardcopy,
hard to use, but it has many more European papers. Mine's dynamic,
useable with text formatters, and updateable. Keys and annotations, too.
I suspect an AI bibliography will have two major problems:
1) AI is a much bigger field.
2) AI has more hype literature associated with it.
If it were possible to moderate the technical content of the papers,
you will succeed nicely. I have a separate bibliography for the
"top ten" required readings in software engineering. I plan to update it
yearly with a call for suggestions. Books will be booted in and out (I hope).
Other minor problems: some work was received in Scribe bibliographic
format: I decided on refer: ran on smaller machines, Unix more widely
available, and so on. I had to write crude Scribe->refer translators.
Getting people to help add, correct, and delete work is surpising difficult:
everybody wants loaves of bread, but few want to do the work.
The initial start is the hardest of course. Try to build off of others
work if they will let you.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
emiya@ames-vmsb.ARPA
ames!aurora!eugene on UUCP
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 85 00:35:00 edt
From: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: Expert System definition vs Database Systems
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
...Somehow, I have always felt Expert
Systems to be glorified database systems....
1) Does the patient have a fever? Y
2) Has the patient vomitted in the past 24 hours? Y
3) Are the pupils dilated? N
4) etc...
But I know of many database packages where a question in the form of:
FIND FEVER > 100 & VOMIT = YES & DILATED = NO
DISPLAY ALL
In the first place, differential diagnosis is both a good and a bad
example. Bad because it is meant to provide a lot of structure that can
be likened to a data-base query with boolean logic and good because it
has been worked on a lot in AI and as you get into more details it
starts to become more clear why the database approach isn't always
powerful enough.
Consider: In the first place, there are many, many diseases. A doctor
doesn't attempt to know all of them. In fact, the questioning (in a
doctor's mind) I believe starts with something more like:
is this person in front of me about to drop dead?
a lot of info has to be processed real fast and inaccurately (from a
data base/strict machine point of view) to answer that and act on it.
Ok, let's try it again:
IF s/he has a fever AND s/he has been vomiting
THEN (will s/he drop dead in a moment?)
or FIND DISEASE WHERE FEVER & VOMIT & DEATH
hmmm, doesn't work. Maybe that's all the patient is saying though. I
guess we better find out if s/he's severely dehydrated, measure the
fever, or maybe they just have a little food poisoning.
Ok, try again:
IF he has a fever AND he has been vomiting
THEN he has malaria...
wait a minute! there's no malaria around here...try again (darn, if s/he
hadn't just fallen over I might have asked if s/he have been traveling in
the tropics lately or eaten any jalisco cheese, now what do I do...)
I think my point is, yes, it's kind of like a database query BUT WHO IS
GENERATING THE QUESTIONS. I think your example weakens a lot once the
first query is made, who decides what the second query is to be? The
expert system of course. You are assuming some magic actor generating
all these nice queries and inferences, get rid of that actor and try it
again.
-Barry Shein, Boston University
------------------------------
Date: Sat 17 Aug 85 10:38:41-PDT
From: PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Hewitt's tirade against Prolog
Carl Hewitt's message is based on several misconceptions:
1. (the least interesting one) All the so-called commercially viable
Prolog systems in Lisp are not really Prolog systems written IN Lisp,
but rather Prolog systems written FOR Lisp machines. Or is it that a
microcode sublanguage or Lisp machine pointer-smashing operations are
part of List as we know it? Without those machine-level operations,
those Prolog systems would run too slow and use too much memory to be
useful for serious Prolog programming. From the Prolog implementation
point of view, what is important about the Lisp machines is not that
they run Lisp, but that they can be microcoded and have good support
for tagged data types and stack operations.
2. If the decisions (actions) of a system are not determined by its
inputs, the system is nondeterministic. Nondeterminism in a system can
be either an artifact of our incomplete knowledge (or lack of
interest) of the detailed operation of the system; or it can be
``real physical'' nondeterminism. It would take us to far to discuss
whether the second kind of nondeterminism is ``real'' or also an
artifact. In any case, most uses of nondeterminism, say in models of
concurrency, are of the first kind, and can be expressed appropriately
in various temporal/dynamic logics. Admittedly, these are not Prolog,
but then Common Lisp is not Lisp 1.5! (Prolog is 13 years old, Lisp
25).
3. The first logic course dictum ``from a contradiction one can
conclude anything'' is getting in the way. Notice that the dictum says
``can'', not ``must''. There is an enormous difference between things
that are in principle true and things that an agent knows to be true
in a way that can affect its action. An agent might know ``p'' and
``not p'', but it might well never come to infer the dreaded totally
unrelated ``q'' which IN PRINCIPLE follows from the contradiction.
This inference might not happen either because of inference control
mechanisms of the agent (eg. it uses the set-of-support strategy) or
because the agent's logic is just TOO WEAK to conclude anything from a
contradiction (vide Hector Levesque's work in the proceedings of the
last AAAI). In any case, Horn clauses (the basis of Prolog) are too
weak to represent contradictions... :-)
4. The question of whether ``taking action'' fits in a logic paradigm
tends to be answered negatively after an hour's worth of
consideration. If you persist for several years, though, this
question becomes a source of insight on the relations between
knowledge, state and action that is not available to those who started
by dismissing the question after that initial hour. There is just too
much work on logics of knowledge and action in AI and computer science
for me to try to discuss it here. Some of this work has been applied
to logic programming, either in the form of new logic programming
languages based on temporal or dynamic logics or in representations of
temporal reasoning and decision in, say, Prolog.
5. It is curious to see someone by implication defend Lisp as a
language for expressing the taking of action! We know by now that the
most difficult issue in ``reactive systems'' is not EXPRESSING action,
but rather keeping it under control to prevent unwanted interactions.
In this area, less is REALLY more, and highly complex languages like
Lisp are just not suitable for the formal reasoning about programs
that is needed to help us believe our programs do what we intend. To
those who say ``...but we can keep to a carefully constrained subset
of Lisp, use only message passing for interactions,...'' I will answer
that the history of all large Lisp programs I know (and I think that
is a representative sample) is littered with the brutalized corpses of
constrained programming styles. Anyone who has looked at the current
flavor mechanism in Zetalisp and its use in the window system will
know what I mean...
6. Underlying Carl Hewitt's misconceptions is the old chestnut ``logic
is static, systems are dynamic''. Any language, be it first-order
logic or Lisp, is static; it is its USE which is dynamic (changes the
state of communicating agents). A good analogy here is the use of
differential equations to model dynamic systems in classical
mechanics. The differential equations themselves do not say directly
what happens when (they are ``static'' in Hewitt's jargon). It is
their SOLUTIONS that tell us the sequence of events. Even the
solutions are given as static objects (functions from an open interval
of the reals to some space). Does anyone worry that such equations do
not ``really'' describe the dynamic behavior of a system? Is it not
possible to combine such ``static'' entities with an incremental
solution procedure to build systems that actually control their
(classical mechanical) environment?
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: 15 Aug 85 15:05:59 EDT
From: Mary.Lou.Maher@CMU-RI-CIVE
Subject: Seminar - Design Expert Systems (CMU)
A GENERATIVE EXPERT SYSTEM
FOR THE DESIGN OF BUILDING LAYOUTS
Ulrich Flemming
Design Research Center &
Department of Architecture
Thursday, August 22 at 1:30 pm
Adamson Wing, Baker Hall
The talk will outline a generative expert system for the design
of building layouts aimed at systematically enumerating layout
alternatives while taking into account a broad range of criteria, a task
to which the human cognitive apparatus is not particularly well suited.
The system is roughly modelled after the DENDRAL system.
In its most simple incarnation, it will consist of a generator able to
generate all possible alternatives, a tester that evaluates these
alternatives, and a control strategy that mediates between the two
to help prune the search tree.
What makes the generator so special is that it
treats spatial relations between the objects to be allocated as the
basic design variables in which the generation takes place.
The completeness and non-redundancy of the generation have been
established.
The tester will be programmed to facilitate the addition and
modification of the design knowledge incorporated in it.
A tentative control strategy will be discussed.
It is expected that for more complicated layout problems, the control
strategy will have to be expanded into a genuine planner with at least two
levels: 'hierarchical' and 'strategic', both of which will be outlined.
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 85 13:23:26 EDT
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Seminar - Intelligent Design Completion (CMU)
Topic: Presentation of Wright Project
Speaker: Can Baykan
Place: DH3313
Date: Wednesday, August 14
Time: 10:00am - 11:00am
An intelligent design completion system is a knowledge-based CAD system
which provides a design environment and assists the designer in analyzing
and synthesizing designs. For example, the designer may generate a partial
design and have the system carry out a diagnostic evaluation, or complete
the design. Such a system would be composed of two major components: a
knowledge-base and a drafting system.
The WRIGHT system is an interactive CAD system which the designer can use in
representing, analyzing and generating kitchen designs. The goals in
building such a system are to understand:
1. The architecture and components of a design-completion system.
2. The types of knowledge required for analyzing and synthesizing designs,
Knowledge required for recognizing elements in a drawing generated by the
designer,
Knowledge required for recognizing design contexts,
3. The generation of form -a complex, structured object-, based on function
-a diverse set of constraints from many sources.
The application domain chosen for the WRIGHT system is kitchen design.
------------------------------
Date: 13 AUG 85 15:57-N
From: ROSNER%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Call for Papers - Knowledge Represention, Proc. IEEE
CALL FOR PAPERS
Proceedings of the IEEE
Special Issue on Knowledge Representation
Guest Editors: M King, M Rosner, University of Geneva
The special issue is scheduled for publication during the second half of
1986. You are invited to submit a 6-10 page extended abstract on any topic
relevant to the current state of the art in Knowledge Representation.
Deadlines:
submission of abstracts: 30th September 1985
notification of acceptance: 30th December 1985
final copy: 15th February 1986
contact: ROSNER%cgeuge51@WISCVM.ARPA (bitnet)
mcvax!cernvax!cui!rosner (usenet, eunet, uucp)
M Rosner
ISSCO,
54 route des Acacias,
1227 Geneva, Switzerland
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂25-Aug-85 2250 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #113
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Aug 85 22:50:30 PDT
Date: Sun 25 Aug 1985 20:33-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #113
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 26 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 113
Today's Topics:
Queries - Machine Learning Journals & Lisp to C &
Hardware Choices For Running LISP & Modularity and Compositionality &
Expert Systems in Psychiatry,
Literature - Master Bibliography,
Humor - Media Portrayal of Scientists,
Games - Book Openings,
Logic Programming - Hewitt's Reply to Pereira,
Seminar - Partial Evaluation in Meta-Interpreters (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 85 23:00:23 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: machine learning journals..
I (as a co-author) would like to publish a modest article
which has something to do with MACHINE LEARNING.
Can someone tell me the JOURNALs that are strictly for
machine learning ????
Are there any such conferences. ????
Thanks in advance.
--- raj doshi, University of Minnesota
doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
[Gluck@SU-PSYCH announced a new Machine Learning journal in
AIList V. 3, No. 106, Aug. 10. It will come out quarterly
beginning January 1986. Executive Editor: Pat Langley;
Editors: Jaime Carbonell, Ryszard Michalski, Tom Mitchell;
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 190 Old Derby Street, Hingham,
MA 02043, or call 617-749-5262. -- KIL ]
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 85 17:18:44 EDT (Tue)
From: duke@mitre.ARPA
Subject: Lisp to C
We are looking for a Lisp to C translator, in the hope
that it might help us move some Franz Lisp programs onto
some parallel processor machines which currently lack Lisp.
Does anyone know of such a translator?
Duke Briscoe
Mitre
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 85 12:09 EST
From: Clarke Thacher <UKC323%UKCC.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Hardware Choices For Running LISP.
Our computing center director has asked me to get some information and
make recommendations on alternatives for supporting LISP at the
University. Specifically, he has been getting researchers in several
departments submitting requests for single user LISP workstations. He
is reluctant to approve all of these requests, if a more economic
solution is available. I would appreciate any pointers which people
might be able to offer. We have an IBM 3081 with VM & CMS, and 3
Prime superminis. One of the Primes has the Salford LISP/Prolog
system but I suspect that the researchers want more than that.
Approximate costs would be appreciated.
Clarke Thacher BITNET : UKC323@UKCC
(606) 257-2900
72 McVey Hall
Computing Center
University Of Kentucky
Lexington, Ky. 40506-0045
------------------------------
Date: Wed 21 Aug 85 21:19:25-PDT
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Modularity and Compositionality
A few issues back someone used the term "modularity" to refer to parts of a
program. This leads me to ask, is there a precisely defined notion of what
"modularity" is? Also, it seems to me that there is a natural connection
between modularity as I understand it and "compositionality" as used in
linguistics. Does anyone have any information, references, or ideas on these
points?
-Lee Altenberg
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 85 17:20 EST
From: Clarke Thacher <UKC323%UKCC.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems
A professor in our Psychiatry department has expressed interest in any
work which has been done with Expert Systems in psychiatry (please not
ELIZA). He is interested in it as a diagnostic tool to be used by the
physician (and for teaching third year medical students).
Please send any leads to:
Clarke Thacher BITNET: UKC323@UKCC
Computing Center
University Of Kentucky
Lexington, Ky.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 85 13:28:56 pdt
From: aurora!eugene@RIACS.ARPA (Eugene miya)
Subject: Additional comment about master bibliography
Oh, I forgot one MAJOR point of maintenance work.
I am just now receiving smaller bibiliographies on things like computer
networks. There are many collisions with papers already in the existing file.
The problem is subtle because of slight variations in annotation
styles which bibliographic sorting programs cannot appropriately
handle. Also, transferring interesting comments and annotations
from one entry to another is also time consuming. Two smaller
bibliographies have come from England, and differences in spelling are
another subtle problem: Defense and Defence.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,hao,dual,ihnp4,vortex}!ames!aurora!eugene
emiya@ames-vmsb.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1985 02:54:13-EDT, Tue, 20 Aug 85 02:37 EDT
From: straz@AQUINAS.THINK.COM@MIT-CCC, Steve Strassmann
<straz@AQUINAS.THINK.COM>
Subject: Good news and bad news, Mr. Wizard...
[Forwarded by BNevin@BBNCCH.]
>From the September issue of "Science 85":
"This is a good time to play a scientist on TV. Researchers at the
University of Pennsylvania say that scientists on the tube are warm,
attractive, and five times more likely to be virtuous than villainous.
But the study also showed that TV scientists are killed more often than
soldiers, private eyes, and police officers."
------------------------------
Date: 25 Aug 1985 10:25:51 PDT
From: Stuart Cracraft <CRACRAFT@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
Subject: Drew Liao's comments about chess
"I too believe that a computer should learn how to play chess before
it is allowed to play in a tournament rather than rely on moves
encoded into the program."
- Drew Liao, AILIST V3 #102, 1-Aug-85
The above doesn't make much sense to me. Currently, chess programs
such as Belle and Cray Blitz usually play no more than the first
10 moves from a pre-stored "opening book".
If the opponent makes an extremely odd or unusual move early,
retrieval from the book is terminated and normal tree-searching
is begun in order to generate a move.
What would Drew have us do? Turn off book completely? Rely only
on tree-search for the opening? The opening is extremely tricky,
because pawn configurations and piece placements are being set
up for 20 moves later.
Thus, most programs that rely on heuristics and tree-search
for opening play are prone to fall into traps a book usually
avoids. They are also prone to jumble their pieces in bad ways.
Therefore, I argue that allowing opening book is essential to
good play. A more valid criticism would concern the transition
from opening book to tree-searching. Many programs deal with
this transition very poorly. International Masters or Grand-
masters can often take advantage of their poor *TRANSITION*
play and mop up quickly in a positional sense.
I see no great difference between storing 50,000 opening positions
in a computer "book" and a human expert spending 5 weeks studying
the Caro-Kann defense. Both have memorized in order to avoid
re-creating extensive work *OTHERS* have done for them ahead
of time.
Why re-invent the wheel?
Stuart Cracraft
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1985 13:30 EDT
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC
Subject: Prolog will fail as the foundation for AI
Misconceptions?
From: PEREIRA at SRI-AI.ARPA
Carl Hewitt's message is based on several misconceptions:
1. (the least interesting one) All the so-called commercially viable
Prolog systems in Lisp are not really Prolog systems written IN Lisp,
but rather Prolog systems written FOR Lisp machines. Or is it that a
microcode sublanguage or Lisp machine pointer-smashing operations are
part of List as we know it?
Yes. They are DEFINITELY part of Common Lisp as we know it being
implementations of reading and writing operations on record
structures. Such implementation methods are NOT part of Logic as a
Programming language.
Without those machine-level operations,
those Prolog systems would run too slow and use too much memory to be
useful for serious Prolog programming. From the Prolog implementation
point of view, what is important about the Lisp machines is not that
they run Lisp, but that they can be microcoded and have good support
for tagged data types and stack operations.
It is important to many users that they can make use of ALL the software
available to the community and not just be limited to the tiny amount
in Prolog. Furthermore in the future good software will be ported
from stand alone Prolog systems to Prolog implemented on Lisp. However
to good Lisp software will not be able to be ported to the stand
alone Prolog systems.
2. If the decisions (actions) of a system are not determined by its
inputs, the system is nondeterministic. Nondeterminism in a system can
be either an artifact of our incomplete knowledge (or lack of
interest) of the detailed operation of the system; or it can be
``real physical'' nondeterminism. It would take us to far to discuss
whether the second kind of nondeterminism is ``real'' or also an
artifact. In any case, most uses of nondeterminism, say in models of
concurrency, are of the first kind, and can be expressed appropriately
in various temporal/dynamic logics. Admittedly, these are not Prolog,
but then Common Lisp is not Lisp 1.5! (Prolog is 13 years old, Lisp
25).
Yes indeed there is a large problem here that poses fundamental problems
for using Logic as a Programming language to make decisions in Open
Systems.
3. The first logic course dictum ``from a contradiction one can
conclude anything'' is getting in the way. Notice that the dictum says
``can'', not ``must''. There is an enormous difference between things
that are in principle true and things that an agent knows to be true
in a way that can affect its action. An agent might know ``p'' and
``not p'', but it might well never come to infer the dreaded totally
unrelated ``q'' which IN PRINCIPLE follows from the contradiction.
This inference might not happen either because of inference control
mechanisms of the agent (eg. it uses the set-of-support strategy) or
because the agent's logic is just TOO WEAK to conclude anything from a
contradiction (vide Hector Levesque's work in the proceedings of the
last AAAI). In any case, Horn clauses (the basis of Prolog) are too
weak to represent contradictions... :-)
I claim that in practice the contradictions lie close to the surface and
occur in any nontrivial application. Thus the contradictions
pose fundamental problems for using Logic as a Programming Language.
4. The question of whether ``taking action'' fits in a logic paradigm
tends to be answered negatively after an hour's worth of
consideration. If you persist for several years, though, this
question becomes a source of insight on the relations between
knowledge, state and action that is not available to those who started
by dismissing the question after that initial hour. There is just too
much work on logics of knowledge and action in AI and computer science
for me to try to discuss it here. Some of this work has been applied
to logic programming, either in the form of new logic programming
languages based on temporal or dynamic logics or in representations of
temporal reasoning and decision in, say, Prolog.
I have been thinking about the problem for many years having designed
Micro-Planner, the first "procedural embedding of logic" programming
language in 1967. I claim that the problem of taking action poses
fundamental problems for using Logic as a Programming language.
5. It is curious to see someone by implication defend Lisp as a
language for expressing the taking of action!
I claim that current Lisp systems are better than current Prolog
systems for taking action because the only ways to take action in
current Prolog systems are kludges.
We know by now that the
most difficult issue in ``reactive systems'' is not EXPRESSING action,
but rather keeping it under control to prevent unwanted interactions.
In this area, less is REALLY more, and highly complex languages like
Lisp are just not suitable for the formal reasoning about programs
that is needed to help us believe our programs do what we intend. To
those who say ``...but we can keep to a carefully constrained subset
of Lisp, use only message passing for interactions,...'' I will answer
that the history of all large Lisp programs I know (and I think that
is a representative sample) is littered with the brutalized corpses of
constrained programming styles. Anyone who has looked at the current
flavor mechanism in Zetalisp and its use in the window system will
know what I mean...
5. Underlying Carl Hewitt's misconceptions is the old chestnut ``logic
is static, systems are dynamic''.
Note that the above quotation is NOT anything that I said.
Any language, be it first-order
logic or Lisp, is static; it is its USE which is dynamic (changes the
state of communicating agents). A good analogy here is the use of
differential equations to model dynamic systems in classical
mechanics. The differential equations themselves do not say directly
what happens when (they are ``static'' in Hewitt's jargon).
I do not deny that dynamic systems can be DESCRIBED using logic only
that they can be CONTROLLED.
It is
their SOLUTIONS that tell us the sequence of events. Even the
solutions are given as static objects (functions from an open interval
of the reals to some space). Does anyone worry that such equations do
not ``really'' describe the dynamic behavior of a system? Is it not
possible to combine such ``static'' entities with an incremental
solution procedure to build systems that actually control their
(classical mechanical) environment?
I do not believe that the control system can be implemented using Logic
as a Programming language
------------------------------
Date: Tue 20 Aug 85 21:44:22-PDT
From: Ashok Subramanian <ashok@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Partial Evaluation in Meta Interpreters (SU)
Prof. Ehud Shapiro, of the Weizmann Institute of Science, will present a
talk at 9 am on Monday, the 26th of August, in Margaret Jacks Hall room 352.
The Magic of Partial Evaluation,
or
Meta Interpreters for Real
Ehud Shapiro
The Weizmann Institute of Science
Enhanced meta-interpreters can implement sophisticated functions within
complex software system. Examples are explanation facilities in expert
systems, algorithmic debuggers in programming environments, and layers of
protection and control in operating systems.
However, the execution overhead of the added layer of interpretation
is unacceptable in many applications.
Partial evaluation can eliminate the overhead of meta-interpreters.
A partial-evaluator can specialize an enhanced meta-interpreter
with respect to a given program,
generating a variant of this program which inherits the enhanced
functionality of the meta-interpreter, but not its overhead.
An application of a Concurrent Prolog partial evaluator
to operating system development will be shown.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂26-Aug-85 1536 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #114
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Aug 85 15:36:12 PDT
Date: Mon 26 Aug 1985 12:27-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #114
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 27 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 114
Today's Topics:
Literature - AI in Business & Recent Technical Reports & Recent Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1985 21:05-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI in Business
Expert Systems, Artificial Intelligence in Business
by Pual Harmon and David King is now available from
Library of Computer and Information Science
Publishers Price $24.95
Members Price $19.95
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1985 21:44-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Technical Reports
Addresses for ordering same:
Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science
Mail STop 230-5, NASA/Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, California 94035
ATTENTION: Technical Librarian
Department of Computer Science
405 Upson Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Erna Amerman
Department of Comptuer Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1304 West Springfield Avenue
Urbana, Illinois 61801
Technical Reports
Computer Sciences Department
University of Wisconsin
1210 West Dayton Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Ms. Brenda Ramsey
UCLA Computer Science Department
3732 Boelter Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Carnegie Mellon University
Computer Science Department
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
←←←← Bibliography Entries ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
%A Jeffrey Alan Jackson
%T Economics of Automatic Generation of Rules From Examples in
A Chess End Game
%R Department of Computer Science File No. 132
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D FEB 1985
%A Robert Stepp
%T A Description and User's Guide for Cluster/2 A Program for
Conjunctive Conceptual Clustering
%R Department of Computer Science Report No. 1085
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D FEB 1985
%A G. Smolka
%A P. Panangaden
%T FRESH: A Higher-Order Language with Unification and Multiple Results
%R 85-685
%I Department of Computer Science, Cornell University
%C Ithaca, New York
%D MAY 1985
%A Rick Briggs
%T An Approach to Deeper Expert Systems
%R 84.11
%I Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science, NASA/AMES Research
Center
%C Moffett Field, California
%A Charles F. Neveu
%A Charles R. Dyer
%A Roland T. Chin
%T Object Recognition Using Hough Pyramids
%R TR 576
%I The University of Wisconsin-Madison Computer Sciences Department
%D JAN 1985
%A Deborah A. Joseph
%A W. Harry Plantinga
%T On the Complexity of Reachability and Motion Planning Questions
%R TR586
%I The University of Wisconsin-Madison Computer Science Department
%D FEB 1985
%A Udi Manber
%T A Distributed Implementation of Backtracking
%R TR588
%I University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences
%D MAR 1985
%A Matthew R. Korn
%A Charles R. Dyer
%T 3-D Multiview Object Representations for Model-Based Object Recognition
%R TR602
%I University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences
%D JUN 1985
%A Richard Preston Hooper
%A Michel A. Melkanoff
%T An Application of Knowledge-Based Systems to Electronic Computer-Aided
Engineering, Design and Manufacturing Data Base Transport
%R CSD-850011
%I Computer Science Department, UCLA
%K IGES
%X describes a method of developing methodology for transferring databases
between CADCAM systems
There is a charge of $19.25 for this item
%A Randal E. Bryant
%T Symbolic Verification of MOS Circuits
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D APR 1985
%X The program MOSSYS simulates the behavior of a MOS circuit
represented as a switch-level symbolically. That is, during
simulator the user can set an input to either 0, 1 or a Boolean
variable. The simulator then computes the behavior of hte circuit as
a function of past and present and input variables. By using heuristically
efficient Boolean function manipulation algorithms, the verification
of a circuit by symbolic simualtion can proceed much more quickly than by
exhaustive logic simulation. In this paper we present our concept of
symbolic simualtion, dervie an algorithm for switch-level symbolic
simulation, and present experimental measurements from MOSSYM
%A Jon Doyle
%T Reasoned Assumptions and Pareto Optimality
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D JAN 1985
%A D. M. McKeown Jr.
%A J. F. Pane
%T Alignment and Connection of Fragmented Linear Features in Aerial
Imagery
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D APR 1985
%A Gary Kahn
%A John McDermott
%T MUD: A Drilling Fluids Consultant
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D MAR 1985
%A Geoffrey E. Hinton
%T Distributed Representation
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D OCT 1984
%A Theodore F. Lehr
%T The Implementation of a Production System Machine
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D MAY 1985
%A Steven Linton
%T A Game-Playing Porgram that Learns by Analyzing Examples
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D MAY 1985
%A Jaime G. Carbonnel
%T Derviational Analogy: A Theory of Reconstructive Problem Solving and
Expertise Acquisition
%I Carnegie Mellon University Department of Computer Science
%D MAR 1985
------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 1985 02:23-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Recent Articles
%A M. A. Covington
%T A Further Note on Looping in Prolog
%J SIGPLAN
%V 20
%N 8
%D AUG 1985
%P 28-31
%A D. Nute
%T A Programming Solution to Certain Problems with Loops in Prolog
%J SIGPLAN
%V 20
%N 8
%D AUG 1985
%P 32-37
%A D. Poole
%A R. Goebel
%T On Eliminating Loops in Prolog
%J SIGPLAN
%V 20
%N 8
%D AUG 1985
%P 38-40
%A Mark Stefik
%T Strategic Computing at DARPA: Overview and Assessment
%J Communications of the ACM
%D JUL 1985
%V 28
%N 7
%P 690-703
%X discusses various projects at DARPA. Here are the time schedules for
various things they want as extracted from the Commerce Business Daily
request for proposals:
Autonomous Land Vehicle
1985 - The vehicle is expected to traverse a 20-km route on a paved
road at up to 10km per hour. The vehicle will carry out only forward
motion, without obstacle avoidance
1986 The vehicle is expected to maneuver to avoid small fixed polyhedral
objects spaced 100 meters
1987 The vehicle will be able to plan and execute a route
across 10km of open desert at speeds up to 5 km per hour. It should
demonstrate an understanding of types of soil and ground cover.
1988 The vehicle should plan and execute a 20-km route on a road network,
using landmarks as a navigation aid. To avoid obstacles, the vehicle
will have to maneuver off the road.
1989 The vehicle should traverse across country at 10 km per hour avoiding
obstacles.
1990 The route traversed by the vehicle will include wooded terrain, paved
and unpaved roads, and deserts. The vehicle may have to consolidate
multiple goals
Pilots Associate (R2D2 for military aircraft)
goals vague or unspecified
Aircraft Carrier Battle-Management system
phase 1 - look at military database and reason about ships and
submarines, determine their readiness for missions and the effects of
redirecting them
phase 2 - handle five times real time performance and to achieve performance
ten thousand times current performance
phase 3 - provide aid to commanders in evaluating alternatives
Expert Systems
1986 - Demonstrate capabilities for situation assessment where conclusions
are annotated with different levels of confidence, support 3000 rule
databases at 1000 inferences per second (1/3 of real time)
1989 - support speech input, increase speed factor of three
1992 - support multiple cooperating expert systems increase speed by
factor of five
Image Understanding
1986 - demonstrate image-understanding for vehicle on simple terrain
1988 - be able to recognize land marks
1990 - navigation on complex terrains
1992 - recognize targets and threats in battlefield
Speech Production and Understanding
1986 100 words vocabulary, speaker dependent, sever noise
1988 1000 word, continuous speech, speech dependent, low noise
1990 200 word vocabulary, speaker independent, sever noise
1992 1000 word, continous speech, speaker independent, natural grammar
They claim that computation will hit 40 million inferences per
second for 1986 milestones and 20 billion for 1992
Natural language
1986 - demonstrate natural language interface for queries to database
1988 - should understand paragraphs about air threat
1990 - be able to converse and actively help user form a plan
1993 - interactive multiuser system and understand streams of information
%A I. Peterson
%T Conversing with Computers Naturally
%J Science News
%V 128
%D JUL 27, 1985
%N 4
%P 53
%K microcomputers natural language database Bozena H. Thompson
Frederick B. Thompson Microrim Savvy Caltech Natural Access System
%X discusses Intellect Microrim, and Savvy and a Natural Language System
developed by Bozena H. Thompson and Frederick B. Thompson for IBM PC's
%A Eric Nee
%T Xerox to Transfer Some IS Operations to Shugart Plant
%J Electronic News
%D AUG 5, 1985
%V 31
%N 1561
%P 24
%X Xerox will transfer its Artificial Intelligence Business from Pasadena
to Sunnyvale
%T VLSI-Chip Test System Tests Itself at Board Level
%J Electronics
%D AUG 5, 1985
%P 46-49
%V 58
%N 31
%K MegaOne Expert-Like diagnostic
%X Mega-One has introduced a VLSI test system that can diagnose malfunctions
in itself. The manufacturer claims that it is "expert-like", i. e. is
an expert system but is not set up using production rules
%A Tom Manuel
%T Tektronix Makes Major Commitment to AI Market
%J Electronics
%D AUG 5, 1985
%P 46-49
%V 58
%N 31
%X Tektronix is lowering its price on its 32032 based microcomputer
that it is billing as an AI machines. It has added two more models,
and added a 32-bit object oreinted machine.
%A Adam B. Green
%T Searching for Product X
%J InfoWorld
%D AUG 5, 1985
%P 28
%V 7
%N 31
%K prolog microcomputers
%X Adam Green, noted for his pushing DBASE products, says that
the new runaway product (like visicalc and database) will be
the based on Prolog
%T Updates
%J Datamation
%P 117
%D AUG 1, 1985
%V 31
%N 15
%K Gary Moskowitz, Xerox, natural language, office systems
%X says that AI should be aim to proofread documents for grammar errors;
and to help collaboration between humans
%T VLSI Design System Uses Artificial Intelligence
%J IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications
%D AUG 1985
%P 89
%V 5
%N 8
%K Applicon BRAVO! design rule
%X Applicon has introduced BRAVO!, a VLSI system which uses AI
to monitor circuitry for design rule compliance and which will
redesign layouts.
%T IBM Adds 3 Programs for AI Applications
%J Electronic News
%D AUG 12, 1985
%V 31
%N 1562
%P 24
%K expert system tool lisp programming database
%X IBM introduced VM Programming in Logic (A Prolog compiler).
IBM provides communications with VM/SP, SQL/DS and LISP/VM.
They also introduced Expert System Consulation environment and Expert System
Development environment for building and using expert systems.
%T Control Data, Digicon Sign 3-Year Value Added Agreement
%J Electronics
%V 31
%N 1562
%P 25
%K CDC lisp prolog expert system tool
%X CDC introduced Lisp/VE, Prolog/VE, KES/VE
%T Tektronix unwraps AI workstations, Lisp Version
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 32
%D AUG 12, 1985
%P 16
%X same info as other article on Tektronix above
%T News, World Digest
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 32
%P 24
%K education Australia Queensland
%X Queensland Secondary schools will introduce a new computer curriculum
which includes AI.
%T HP Gives 3.3 million for AI Research
%J Electronics
%D AUG 19, 1985
%P 23
%V 58
%N 33
%K University of Pennsylvania
%X TI is giving some work stations to Pennsylvania. Appears to be
part of a program of giving their work stations to schools announced
elsewhere.
%A Kevin Smith
%T Britain Makes Major Bid to Build Commercial Fifth-Generation Machine
%J Electronics
%D JUL 8, 1985
%P 26-27
%V 58
%N 27
%K Alice Declarative Alvey Compiler Target Language Flagship HOPE ICL
%X describes various parallel architectures being investigated by
Britain. They hope to establish a defacto standard, beating IBM
to the punch and to get a commercial product up.
%A John Gallant
%T AI Product Deluge hits DP Market
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 33
%P 1+
%D AUG 19, 1985
%K DM Data Howard Dicken DEC IBM LISP Expert System Tool Prolog CDC
David Hertz
%X IBM has announced Prolog and Expert System tools for it
VM operating system. Charges:
Prolog (Programming in Logic): $8,000
Expert System Consultation Environment/VM (delivery front end
for expert system tool): $25,000 or a monthly charge of $1250.00
Expert System Development Environment (to make expert systems
for use by above tool): $35,000 or a monthly charge of $1750.00.
DEC has announced an AI VAXStation which is a MICROVAX II without a
floppy drive and with various languages. This includes an implementation
of Common Lisp, and they have upgraded OPS5 and have marketing agreements
with Quintus for its Prolog and Artificial Intelligence Corporation for
its Intellect front end for its database. Quintus Prolog will
cost $6,000.
CDC announcement of tools:
PROLOG/VE (version of C-prolog): $4620 to $36330
LISP/VE (Common Lisp): $5166 to $40614
KES/VE (Knowledge Engineering System): $11,424 to $70,594
Also an interview with various people on the marketing impact
of these announcements. Howard Dicken, publisher of AI trends,
says this "will legitimize AI." However, other people feel be
hurt. They draw parallel with the IBM personal computer which
on one legitimized the microcomputer industry but also took
away market share and eliminated some smaller companies.
%T Random Access
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 33
%P 2
%D AUG 19, 1985
%K Intellicorp KEE simulation microcomputer expert system
%X Intellicorp will issue the third release of their Knowledge
Engineering Kit. They also announced Simkit which will
be used to create knowledge-based simulation software and PC-Host
which is an implementation of the KEE system on "conventional
architecture computers."
%A Howard Morgan
%T The Microcomputer and Decision Support
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 33
%P 39-46
%D AUG 19, 1985
%K Lightyear microcomputer Expert-Ease
%X discusses the use of AI in MIS, particularly Light-Year and
Expert Systems in MIS on page 44 of this article.
%A Mitch Betta
%T AI Specialist Sees $5 billion expert systems mart by 1990
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 33
%P 84
%D AUG 19, 1985
%K marketing Social Security Administration Sperry Corpration Atle Fjeld
%X Atle Fjeld gave a briefing in which he discussed AI. He gave
the example of automating Social Security eligibility rules as an
example of its use. Sperry anticipates spending 200 million dollars
over the next five years and hopes to capture 15 to 20 percent of
the market. The Sperry Corporation Knowledge System Center employs 150
people.
%T TI Acquires Ten Percent of Carnegie Group
%J Electronic News
%D AUG 19, 1985
%V 31
%N 1563
%P 8
%K Explorer Knowledge Craft Language Craft
%X TI will fund research at the Carnegie Group and receive an
internal license for use of its products. Carnegie
Group is expected to install 20 of TI's explorer systems over the next
18 months.
%A Michael Bunken
%T Dec Enters Artificial Intelligence Market with Workstation
%J Electronic News
%D AUG 19, 1985
%V 31
%N 1563
%K Vaxstation Lisp Prolog Quintas OPS-5 Common Lisp
%X same info on DEC as in article in Computerworld above
%A Nicholas Ourusoff
%T The Physical Symbol System Hypothesis of Newell and Simon:
A Classroom Demonstration of Artificial Intelligence
%J SIGCSE Bulletin
%P 19-23
%V 17
%N 3
%D SEP 1985
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂30-Aug-85 1345 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #115
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Aug 85 13:44:43 PDT
Date: Wed 28 Aug 1985 09:12-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #115
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 28 Aug 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 115
Today's Topics:
Seminar - Mathematical Learning (MIT),
Conferences - Symposium on Factory Automation and Robotics &
Simulation, Automation, and Robotics &
Program of Expert Systems in Government Symposium
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 85 09:59:20 EDT
From: Andy diSessa <ADIS at MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Mathematical Learning (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Marlene Kliman will talk about her work on balancing this Weds.,
August 28, 4 PM, third floor conference room.
Mathematical Knowledge Underlying Performance on the Balance Scale
Interviews of elementary school children using a balance scale show
that balancing is a complex domain involving many levels of competence
and understanding. Performance on set balancing tasks may not always
be indicative of underlying knowledge, as children frequently display
special-case knowledge. As children experiment with the balance
scale, they not only find new pieces of knowledge, but they also begin
to find connections among pieces of knowledge. This talk will present
an analysis of mathematical knowledge underlying performance on the
balance scale in terms of the kinds of things children do and
generalizations they make when exploring the balance scale, strategies
children find natural and helpful, and facets of balancing that
children find particularly intriguing. Educational implications of
this analysis will be discussed.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 85 10:33 EDT
From: (Herb Bernstein) <BERNSTEIN@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA>
Subject: Symposium on Fact. Aut. & Robotics
Reminder:
The Symposium on Factory Automation and Robotics
A Forum for Industrial and Academic Robotics Engineers and Scientists
will be held 9-11 September 1985
by the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, NYU
in honor of Marvin Denicoff
sponsored by the National Science Foundation
Registration $35 ($25 for NYU faculty and staff), in advance to
NYU/CIMS Symposium on Fac. Aut. and Robotics
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
251 Mercer Street, New York, N.Y. 10012
Attn: Herbert J. Bernstein
Or at the meeting, Eisner and Lubin Auditorium, Loeb Student Center,
566 LaGuardia Place (corner of LaGuardia Place and Wash. Sq. South).
For more information or to RSVP, mail to yaya@nyu (on ARPANET), or
call 212-533-3363 or 212-460-7444.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1985 21:09-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference Announcement
I am relaying this from printed material received here for the benefit
of those who might be interested. I am not connected with the
conference.
Society of Computer Simulation
P. O. Box 17900 San Diego California 92117-7900
Telephone 619-277-3888
Southwestern Region Simualtion presents their Fall 85 Technical Meeting
Theme: Simulation and Automation and Robotics
Dates: October 24-25 1985 Thursday and Friday
Location: Fort Worth Texas
Cost: $25 registration fee
Keynote Address: Robotics and Intelligent Systems: An Overview by George
A. Bekey
------------------------------
Date: 28 Aug 85 08:21:59 EDT (Wed)
From: Marshall D. Abrams <abrams@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: Program of Expert Systems in Government Symposium
Following is a list of all the sessions and papers for the Expert
Systems in Government Symposium to be held October 24-25, 1985 at the
Tysons Westpark Hotel, McLean, VA. The symposium is sponsored by the
MITRE Corporation and the IEEE Computer Society. Two one-day tutorials
are scheduled for October 23rd: "Concepts of Knowledge Engineering" by
Kamran Parsaye and "Expert Systems Development" by Elaine Kant.
Additional information is available from abrams@mitre. A registration
form follows the session listing.
ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS
Vice-Chairman: Prof. Mary Lou Maher, Carnegie-Mellon University
Session-Chairman: Dr. Duvvuru Sriram, Carnegie-Mellon University
"A Rule-Based System for Masonry Failures," S.M. Cornick, Carlton
University
"Development of An Intelligent Interface To An Interactive Design
Model," R.A. Harris, Vanderbilt University
"Micro Computer Based Expert Systems In Engineering: An Exam-
ple," Nitin Pandit, D. Sriram, Carnegie-Mellon University
"LASER: A Programming Environment For Building High Performance
Expert Systems," Dr. Y.V. Reddy, West Virginia University
"An Expert Tutor for Rigid Body Mechanics: Athena Cats--
Macavity," John H. Slater, Robert B.P. Petrossiam, S. Shyam-
sunder, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MISSION PLANNING
Vice←Chairman: Prof. Mark Fox, Carnegie-Mellon University
Sessions←Chairman: Dr. Robert Milne, Pentagon
"Management of AI System Software Development For Military Deci-
sion Aids," Kerry Gates, John Lemmer, PAR Technology Corporation
"Expert Mission Planning and Replanning Scheduling System,"
G.B. Hankins, J.W. Jordan, J.L. Katz, A.M. Mulvehill, The MITRE
Corporation
"Mission Planning Within the Framework of the Blackboard
Model,"Glen Pearson, FMC Corporation
"Developing a Microcomputer Based Intelligent Project Planning
System," Suzanne Bradley, Ruth Buys, Amr ElSawy, Alan Sipes, The
MITRE Corporation
PANEL: FRONTIERS OF KBES: PRO & CON
MODERATOR: Dr. Marvin Denicoff, Thinking Machine, Inc.
Panelists:
PRO Prof. Chandrasekaran, Ohio State University PRO Dr. Neil
Pundit, DEC
CON Dr. Gary Martins, Intelligent S/W, Inc. CON Dr. John
Benoit, MITRE
MIDDLE Dr. Robert Milne, Pentagon MIDDLE Dr. Kamran Parsaye,
Intelliware
UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT
Vice←Chairman: Dr. North Fowler, RADC
Sessions←Chairman: Dr. Piero Bonissone, G.E.
"An Application of Fuzzy Reasoning to A
Confirmation/Disconfirmation Decision Making Algorithm," Joseph
A. Karakowski, U.S. Army
"An Expert System Based on a Stochastic Parallel Network," V.
Venkatasubramanian, Northeastern University
"Data Analysis Assisted by an Uncertainty Varying Expert System,"
Petr Hajek, Fred Neil Springsteel
"In Introduction to Fact Based Model Expert Systems," Sing Chi
Koo, Software Intelligence Lab, Inc.
NETWORK MANAGEMENT
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Richard Martin, MCC
Session←Chairman: Dr. Greg Vesonder, AT&T Bell Laboratories
"Specifications of a Knowledge System for Packet-Switched Data
Network Topological Design," Chelsea White, III, Edward A. Sykes,
University of Virginia
"Telecommunications Resource Allocation A Knowledge-Based Sys-
tem," Dai Chuang, Booz Allen & Hamilton
"Compass: An Expert System for Telephone Switch Maintenance,"
Shri K. Goyal, David S. Prerau, Alan V. Lemmon, Alan Gunderson,
Robert Reinke, GTE Laboratories, Inc.
"NEMESYS: An Expert System for Fighting Congestion in the At&T
Network," Dr. Richard C. Windecker, Stephen M. Guattery, Dr.
Francisco J. Villarreal, AT&T Bell Labs, Inc.
INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM
Vice←Chairman: Prof Saj-Nicole Joni, Yale
Session←Chairman: Prof. Beverly Woolf, University of Mas-
sachusetts
"Intelligent Tutoring Using the Integrated Diagnostic Model: An
Expert System for Diagnosis and Repair," Howard R. Smith, Pamela
K. Fink, John C. Lusth, Southwest Research Institute
"An Informal Programming Language," Jeffery Bonar, William Weil,
University of Pittsburg
"Understanding Discourse Conventions in Tutoring," Beverly Woolf,
University of Massachusetts
"PRUST: An Automatic System Program Debugger," Lewis Johnson,
ISI
NEW DIRECTIONS IN KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Bruce Bullock, Teknowledge
Session←Chairman: Ethan Scarl, The MITRE Corporation
"Artificial Intelligence for C:3:I: The Design and Development
of a Prototype Causal Schema Knowledge-Based System," Gerard W.
Hopple, Stanley M. Halpin, Defense Systems, Inc.
"Capturing Domain Primitives for Knowledge Engineering," R. Peter
Bonasso, The MITRE Corporation
"A Shared Knowledge Base for Independent Problem Solving Agents,"
Susan E. Conry, R.A. Meyer, J.E. Searleman, Clarkson College
"Research in the Applications of Expert Systems at the NASA
Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility," Eugene L. Duke, Victoria
A. Regeniek, NASA Ames Research Center
INTELLIGENT ANALYSIS
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Morten Hirschberg, Army Ballistic Research
Laboratories
Session←Chairman: Major Russ Frew, U.S. Army Intelligence Center
& School
"XCOR--A Knowledge-Based System for Correction of Oceanographic
Reports," Vincent G. Sigillito, R.F. Wachter, The Johns Hopkins
University
"A Demonstration of An Ocean Surveillance Information Fusion Ex-
pert System," Elizabeth H. Groundwater, Science Applications
Int., Corporation
"An AI Technology Insertion Experiment With Analyst," Peter
Bonasso, The MITRE Corporation
"ACES Airborne Communication Expert System: A Proposed Expert Sys-
tem for Managing Airborne Military Communication," Hal Miller-
Jacobs, The MITRE Corporation
"Artificial Intelligence Applications to Intelligence Analysis,"
Jerald L. Feinstein, Booz Allen & Hamilton, Inc.
PANEL: INTELLIGENT COMPUTER ASSISTED INSTRUCTION
MODERATOR: Dr. Jeff Bonar, LRDC/University of Pittsburg
Panelists:
1. Dr. Beverly Woolf, University of Massachusetts.
2. Dr. Joseph Psotka, PERI-IC, Army Research Institute
3. Prof Walker Schneider, University of Illinois
4. Prof. T. Govindraj, Georgia Instute of Technology
5. Dr. Stelan Ohlsson, University of Pittsburg
SOFTWARE
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Santosh Chokhani, The MITRE Corporation
Session←Chairman: Dr. Robert Ensor, AT&T Bell Laboratories
"Automation of Programming: the ISFI Experiments," Richard
Brown, The MITRE Corporation
"Mutations & Their Consequences; A Study of Non-Monotonic
Behavior," Gary A. Cleveland, Richard Brown, The MITRE Corpora-
tion
"Designing Expert Systems for Ease of Change," Judith N. Frosch-
er, Robert J.K. Jacob, Department of the Navy
"Arrowsmith-P A Prototype Expert System for Software Engineering
Management,: Victor R. Basili, Connie Loggia Ramsey, University
of Maryland
LANGUAGE TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Thomas London, AT&T Bell Laboratories
Session←Chairman: Dr. Kamran Parsaye, Intelliware, Inc.
"A Multicriteria Model to Select An Expert System Shell," Ernest
H. Forman, Thomas J. Nagy, The George Washington University
"Guess/1: A General Purpose Expert Systems Shell," Newton S.
Lee, John W. Roach, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University
"Prolog for Expert Systems: An Evaluation," Richard Helm, Cath-
erine Lassez, Kim Marriott, University of Melbourne
"Evaluating the Existing Tools for Developing Expert Systems In
PC Environment," Animesh Karna and Amitabh Karna , Information
Technical Institutes
WEAPONS SYSTEMS: ADAPTIVE CONTROL
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Morton Hirschberg, Army Ballistics Research
Laboratories
Session←Chairman: Dr. Morton Hirschberg, Army Ballistics
Research Laboratories
"A Numerical Symbolic Expert System in Computational Fluid Dynam-
ics," Rick Briggs, NASA Ames Research Center
"RICA: An Expert System for Radar Image Classification," Deborah
T. Franks, Software Architecture & Engineering, Inc.
"Concepts for a Tactical Fire Control Decision Aid," Richard C.
Kaste, U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory
"An Experimental Expert Weapon Direction System," R.L. Stewart,
D.R. Ousborne, The Johns Hopkins University
PANEL: NETWORK MANAGEMENT
MODERATOR: Dr. Kamal Karna, The MITRE Corporation
Panelists:
1. Dr. Shri Goyal, GTE Labs
2. Dr. Richard Wolf, AT&T Bell Labs
3. Ms. Alice Van Domelen, GTE Sprint
4. Mr. Lucien Capone, Jr., Vice President, Booz Allen & Hamil-
ton
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Vice←Chairman: Ms. Diane Tosh, E Systems, Melpar Division
Session←Chairman: Ray Dolgert, Softtech, Inc.
"An Expert System Prototype For Aiding in the Development of
Software Functional Requirements For NASA Goddard's Command
Management System," Jay Liebowitz, The George Washington Univer-
sity
"Comments on the Procurement & Development of Expert Systems,"
David L. Hall, HRB Singer
"Distributed Intelligence In Alternative Analysis for Computor
Systems Selection & Configuration," Fiorin T. Zeviar, Boeing Com-
puter Services Co.
"Expert Systems & Robotics for the Space Station: Design Con-
siderations," Barry G. Silverman, V.S. Moustakis, The George
Washington University
INTELLIGENT INFORMATION RETRIEVAL-1
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Roy Rada, National Library of Medicine
Session←Chairman: Dr. Brian McCune, Advanced Information & Deci-
sion Systems
"A Rule-Oriented Methodology for Constructing a Knowledge Base
from Natural Language Documents," Dr. Stan Matwin, University of
Ottawa
"Understanding Technical Documents and Graphics," R.P. Futrelle,
University of Illinois
"Information Retrieval Techniques In An Expert System for Foster
Care," Sheila G. Winett, Edward A. Fox, Virginia Polytechnic In-
stitute
"Cognitive Graphing & The Representation of Biomedical
Knowledge," G. Matthew Bonham, George J. Nozicka, F.N. Stokman,
The American University
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Morton Hirschberg, Army Ballistic Research
Laboratories
Sessions←Chairman: Mr. Joseph Mitola, Advanced Information & De-
cision Systems
"Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques in a War Gaming En-
vironment," Gregory B. White, Stephen E. Cross, Air Force Insti-
tute of Technology
"Evidential Reasoning for Electronic Warfare Threat Assessment,"
Dr. Tom Garvey, SRI International
"Object Oriented Modeling in Electronic Warfare, Jim Cunningham,
Advanced Information & Decision Systems
"Information Management Expert Systems, Capt Robert Milne, Penta-
gon
DESIGN, MONITORING & CONTROL
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Eric Braude, RCA
Session←Chairman: Dr. Peter Politakis, DEC
"A Knowledge-Based System for Transit Bus Maintenance," Peter
Wood, The MITRE Corporation
"Reactor Safety Assessment System--A Situation Assessment Aid for
USNRC Emergency Response," Michael A. Bray, Idaho National En-
gineering Laboratory
"Artificial Intelligence System for Failure Detection & Monitor-
ing in Electronics & Communication," L.F. Pau, Battelle Insti-
tute, Geneva Laboratories
"TITAN: An Expert System to Assist in Troubleshooting the Texas
Instruments 990 Minicomputer System," Joe D. Stuart, Steven D.
Pardue, Radian Corporation
INTELLIGENT INFORMATION RETRIEVAL-2
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Roy Rada, National Library of Medicine
Session←Chairman: Dr. Roy Rada, National Library of Medicine
"An Expert System for Document Retrieval," Bruce Croft, Roger H.
Thompson, University of Massachusetts
"Building A Knowledge Base Statistically," Hafedh Mili, Roy Rada,
George Washington University
"The Application of an Expert System for Information Retrieval at
the National Archives," Daniel DeSalvo, Jay Liebowitz, American
Management Systems, Inc.
"Intelligent Information Retrieval: Issues in User Modelling,"
Robert R. Korfhage, So. Methodist University
MEDICINE-1
Vice←Chairman: Prof. B. Chandrasekaran,
Session←Chairmen: Dr. R. Smith, Ohio State University
"A Deductive Inference & Associative Memory Retrieval," James A.
Reggia, University of Maryland
"An Expert Advisory System for Primary Eye Care in Developing
Countries," Jack H.. Ostroff, Chandler R. Dawson, John K.
Kastner, Sholom Weiss, Casimir A. Kulikowski, Kevin B. Kern,
Rutgers University
"Knowledge Representation for Knowledge Directed Data Retrieval,"
Jon Sticklen, Ohio State University
"Mapping Medical Knowledge Into the Conceptual Structure
Representation Language," Thomas C. Bylander, Ohio State Univer-
sity
FLEXIBLE AUTOMATION
Vice←Chairman: Prof. Tulin Mangir, UCLA
Session←Chairman: Roger Duncan, The MITRE Corporation
"The Evolution of an Expert System for Process Planning, Roy S.
Freedman, Hazeltine Corporation
"Flexible Automation for Printed Circuit Board Assembly, Dr.
Robert J. Stewart, Westinghouse Manufacturing Systems and Tech-
nology Center
"Sensor-Based Robot Programming for Automated Assembly," Dr.
Shaheen Ahmed, Purdue University
MEDICINE-2
Vice←Chairman: Prof. Sholom Weiss, Rutgers University
Session←Chairmen: Dr. R. Smith, Ohio State University
"RED: A Classification & Abductive Inference Expert System,"
Jack W. Smith, Jr., Ohio State University
"Improved Retrieval Through Traversal of a Knowledge-Base," Ellen
Bicknell-Brown, Roy Rada, National Institutes of Health
"Semantic Network Representations for Neurological Diagnosis," S.
Srihari, Xiang, Chatkow, Shapiro, SUNY at Buffalo
"An Expert System for Interpretation of Cranial C.T. Scan Im-
ages," R. Kremar, S. Srihari, SUNY at Buffalo
ENVIRONMENT & WEATHER
Vice←Chairman: Dr. Robert Kay, National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration
Session←Chairman: Dr. Jude Franklin, Planning Research Corpora-
tion
"Expert Systems for Environmental Regulation," Susan G. Hadden,
Chandler Stolp, University of Texas at Austin
"A Demonstration Expert System For Weather Forecasting," George
Swetnam, The MITRE Corporation
"An Expert System for Water Quality Protection Permits," Charles
Spooner, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
"The Potential Role of Artificial Intelligence/Expert Systems in
the Warning and Forecast Operations of the National Weather Ser-
vice," Randy I. Racer, John Gaffney, Jr., National Weather Ser-
vice
INTELLIGENT INTERFACES
Vice←Chairman: Prof. Saj-Nicole Joni, Yale University
Session←Chairman: Prof. Beverly Woolf, University of Mas-
sachusetts
"A Knowledge Based Lab Assistant for a Computer Based Instruction
System," Larry Christensen, Gordon Stokes, Bill Hays, E. Dale
Coons, Brigham Young University
"The Cognitive Principles Underlying Software Design," B. Adel-
son, Yale University
"Tutoring Expertise: Human & Otherwise," David Littman, Jeannine
Pinto, Elliot Soloway, Yale University
"Application of Expert Systems to Training," David L. Young, Mys-
tech Associates, Inc.
POLITICS & WELFARE
Vice←Chairman: Prof. Sholom Weiss, Rutgers University
Session←Chairman: Prof. Gavan Duffy, University of Texas at Aus-
tin, AMI Micro System
"A Prolog Model of Social Structure," Sanjoy Banerjee, Baruch
College
"WEDS Welfare Eligibility Determination System: An Expert System
in an Administrative Context," Eswaran Subrahmanian, Carnegie-
Mellon University
"Expert Systems as Elite Foreign Policy Advisors: Some
User/Machine and Organization/Machine Issues," Howard Tamashiro,
G. Brunk, University of Oklahoma
"A Role for Expert System in Foreign Policy Decision Making,"
Prof. Stewart Thorson, Dr. Christie Anderson, Syracuse Universi-
ty
"SYSFIL: A Generalized Expert System Architecture for Filings,"
Krishan Chhabra, Kamal Karna, The MITRE Corporation
This list of session was compiled 8/20/85 and is subject to further
correction.
send REGISTRATION to: Expert Systems Symposium
IEEE Computer Society
1730 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036-1903
prior to 10/1/85 late reg. surcharge
member non-member
tutorial $200 $250 $30
symposium $120 $160 $30
Give membership #, name, title, company, address, etc.
Blood type is optional (joke).
On-site registration may be limited. Call 202/371-0101 for latest
information on space availability.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Sep-85 2114 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #116
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Sep 85 21:14:15 PDT
Date: Mon 2 Sep 1985 18:59-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #116
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 2 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 116
Today's Topics:
Queries - Parallel LISP Environments & Hypercube Simulators &
OPS5 in Interlisp & Texture Images & Tax Expertise,
Philosophy - Intelligence and Generalization,
Knowledge Representation - Limitations of Frames/Semantic Nets,
Linguistics - CSLI Reports,
Expert Systems - Psychiatry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 85 15:37:18 EDT
From: Deepak Kumar <kumard%buffalo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Parallel LISP Environments
We are planning to implement a parallel-environment
simulator in LISP for trying out various control
metaphors that require parallelism.
Anyone already having any implementations or
experiences in using such environments?
We would appreciate any kind of responses that could
help in highlighting various aspects of design as well
as implementation.
Thanx.
Deepak.
UUCP : {cmcl2,hao,harpo}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!kumard
...{allegra,decvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kumard
CSNET : kumard@buffalo
ARPA : kumard%buffalo@csnet-relay
BITNET : kumard@sunybcs
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 85 13:54:23 EDT (Fri)
From: duke@mitre.ARPA
Subject: Simulators for hypercube architectures
Lisa Sokol (sokol@mitre) and I are investigating the use of parallel
architectures for object-oriented simulations. We have a large simulation
called the BEM (Battlefield Environment Model) which is written in the
simulation language ROSS, which runs on top of Franz LISP on a VAX. We
would like to have a hypercube simulator which would help us investigate
strategies for distributing objects in a hypercube. Our main problem seems
to be the integration of LISP code with the simulators. Translating the
Lisp into C would be messy at best, even with a translator program. Another
possibility would be to have Franz LISP running in another process on the
VAX and communicating with the simulator process. That sounds pretty messy
also, particularly for analyzing the timing since the Lisp is running
outside of the simulator process. For our purposes, it may be better to
write a Lisp simulator of a hypercube architecture. Do you know of anyone
who already has such a simulator? We expect that Lisp will be available on
some hypercube in the next year, and our simulator studies should allow us
to determine how to distribute the objects by that time.
Duke Briscoe
duke@mitre
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 85 00:20:55 cdt
From: neves@wisc-ai.arpa (David Neves)
Subject: OPS5 in Interlisp?
Has anyone translated OPS5 into Interlisp? If yes, please send me
mail.
David Neves
Computer Sciences Department
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Usenet: {allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,uwm-evax}!uwvax!neves
Arpanet: neves@uwvax
------------------------------
Date: Thu 29 Aug 85 14:48:30-PDT
From: BARNARD@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: texture images
I am collecting a set of digital images of natural textures. If you
have any such images, I would appreciate your help. They could either
be images of single textures (Brodatz-type) or images of natural
scenes constaining several textured surfaces. I will make the
collection available to the AI community.
Reply to Barnard@SRI-AI.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 29 Aug 85 13:26:29-CDT
From: Charles Petrie <CS.PETRIE@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Tax Expertise Available for Expert System
Prof. Lewis Solomon is a specialist in tax law and is interested in
working with someone on an expert system in that domain. He would also
like to hear about existing systems. His US Mail address is:
George Washington University
National Law Center
Washington, D.C. 20052 Phone #(202)676-6753
------------------------------
Date: 28 Aug 85 14:51:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: Intelligence as the ability to apply the distributive property
To wax philosophical for a while and then get down to specifics:
1. A major (the major?) aspect of intelligence is the ability to
see several instances of a thing and then be able to abstract
out common features. This is terribly handy for information
representation as it allows one to condense, by "factoring out",
the total info. Nothing really new here - the notion of
"inheritance", based on the is-a relation is a clear example.
2. The whole problem of context seems strongly related - isn't
context simply that which we hold constant over time, until we
are forced to assume something new? - finding the antecedent
of pronouns can be seen as the problem of: given the most
recent n sentences, what (single, common) interpretation allows
me to maximize the number of unchanged assumptions?
3. A big issue then becomes, how rich is the repertoire of
pattern-matching mechanisms? Put concretely, and blithely
assuming that you can represent anything with lists, given n
lists (Lisp-type if you like), which abstractions are available
for describing (by generalizing about) them, and which of several
applicable abstractions should take precedence? For example,
is there a Lisp system out there which would abstract over the
following sets of lists the way I suspect would be done by thee
or me? Any research being done on general-purpose similarity
finding among Lisp lists?
(a b c), (a b c), (a b c)
(a b c), (a b w), (a b q), (a b d e r)
(a b c q), (a b c e), (a b c (d e (w e)))
(a b c), ((a) (b) (c)), (((a)) b c)
(a b c), (aaaa bb ccccc), (aaa b cccc)
(a b c), (A B C), (a B c)
((a b c) (b)), ((a b c d e f) (b c d e)), ((a b (c d) (e f)) (b (c d)))
(a a a), (b b b b b b), (xx xx xx xx)
(2 3 5), (5 6 11), (12 2 14)
(2 3 5), (5 6 11), (12 2 14), (one three four), (3 four 7)
The last set is, of course, somewhat unfair, since it relies on
knowledge of English semantics, and not simply on structural
properties.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: 28 Aug 1985 10:04-EDT
From: Robert.Frederking@CMU-CS-CAD.ARPA
Subject: AI Mag article on KR
The current (Fall 85) issue of AI Magazine has an article by
Ron Brachman raising one of the issues (lack of definitional
information) that has been bothering me about AI knowledge bases. He
explains why these capabilities are necessary, and then shows that they
aren't possible in a KR system where prototype information can be
overridden, i.e., where nodes are treated as prototypes containing
default information.
[Among other points, Brachman shows that a frame/semantic net/
inheritance network/nonmonotonic representation seems to have the
following limitations: it cannot determine automatically where in
the network to place an ELEPHANT-WITH-THREE-LEGS (or similar composite)
node; it cannot infer that this is a subclass of elephants, or indeed
that it has anything to do with elephants; it cannot infer that instances
have three legs; and it cannot recognize a three-legged elephant as
an instance of this concept. My 5-year-old also enjoyed the riddles
about "What's big and gray, has a trunk, and lives in the trees?"
(Valid answers in Ron's strawman representation systems are "elephants",
"giraffes", and "ideas".) -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 28 Aug 85 17:10:02-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New Reports
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORTS
Report No. CSLI-85-29, ``Equations, Schemata and Situations: A
framework for linguistic semantics'' by Jens Erik Fenstad,
Per-Kristian Halvorsen, Tore Langholm, and Johan van Benthem, and
Report No. CSLI-85-30, ``Institutions: Abstract Model Theory for
Computer Science'' by J. A. Goguen and R. M. Burstall, have just been
published. These reports may be obtained by writing to David Brown,
CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 85 15:49 EST
From: Clarke Thacher <UKC323%UKCC.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems In Psychiatry (Responses)
I would like to thank all of the people who responded to my recent
request. The following is a summary of the responses which I have
received (so far). I have passed this information to Dr. David Atcher
in our Med. School, and he may be following up on some of these leads.
←←←←←←←
> Date: 26 August 1985, 14:45:02 GMT
> From: Thomas Rothenfluh K715311 at CZHRZU1A
>
> I've read your request in the AIList and like to submit you two hints.
>
> In the last AI Magazine there was an article about AI research at
> the University of Michigan where some research is done in the field
> of expert systems in psychiatry. Upon request, I received a manuscript
> with a short overview about current systems, own work and bibliography:
> Micheal Feinberg & Robert K. Lindsay
> "Expert systems in psychiatry"
> (Mental Health Institute, Dept. of Psychiatry, Univ. of Michigan,
> Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-0010)
>
> Another research group around Janet L. Kolodner at the Georgia Institute
> of Technology (School of Information and Computer Science, Georgia
> 30332) is also working on a psychiatric expert system, e.g. see:
> Kolodner, J.L.: Towards an understanding of the role of experience
> in the evolution from novice to expert. In: M.J. Coombs. (Ed).
> Developments in expert systems. London: Academic, 1984.
>
> There are a lot of references in the field of computer-assisted
> diagnosis in psychiatry, however there a only few concerning
> expert systems in a sense that deserves that term.
>
> As I'm working on a dissertation project related to this field
> (a computer model for the diagnostic process of experts in diagnosing
> borderline personality disorders), I would be happy if you could send
> me a collection of other people's answers.
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Thomas E. Rothenfluh, research assistant
> Konfliktforschungsstelle
> University of Zurich
> Zurichbergstrasse 43
> CH-8044 Zurich
> Switzerland (K715311 at CZHRZU1A.BITNET)
←←←←←←←
> Date: Mon 26 Aug 85 17:12:45-EDT
> From: David.Servan-Schreiber@CMU-CS-C.ARPA
>
> I have developed with a collegue an expert system for the
> pharmacological treatment of depressive disorders called Blue-Box. You
> can find a description of our work in "Computers in Biomedical
> Research", Feb 84 issue. and also in the KSL series published by
> Stanford University (public domain reports).
>
> David
←←←←←←←
> Date: Tue 27 Aug 85 18:19:24-PDT
> From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
>
> I don't know much about his work, but Sam Holtzman
> (Holtzman@sumex-aim.arpa) has an expert system which helps infertile
> couples decide what their next move should be. You could ask him for
> other references at least.
> --Christopher
←←←←←←←
> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 85 10:14:03 pdt
> From: broder@isi-vaxa (Ben Broder)
>
> I would be interested in any leads you turn up on Psychiatric
> Expert Systems. I'm sorry that I don't have any information to give
> you.
>
> Ben Broder
←←←←←←←
> Date: Thu 29 Aug 85 11:15:27-PDT
> From: Michael Walker <WALKER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
>
> You asked on the AIList for pointers to expert systems in
> psychiatry. One developed here at Stanford by Benoit Mulsant and David
> Servan-Schreiber was written up in Computers and Biomedical Research,
> as I recall in 1984 or late 1983.
>
> Mike Walker
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Sep-85 1145 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #117
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Sep 85 11:44:48 PDT
Date: Tue 3 Sep 1985 09:26-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #117
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 3 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 117
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Force Dynamics (UCB) & Term Rewriting Systems (SMU) &
PARLOG (CMU) & Temporal Logic (UT) &
Speech Recognition (BBN) & NL Processing (BBN),
Conference - Intelligent Simulation Environments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 85 14:12:49 PDT
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Force Dynamics (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, September 3, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:00 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Leonard Talmy, UCB
TITLE: ``Force Dynamics in Language and Thought''
A semantic category that has previously been neglected in
linguistic research is that of ``force dynamics''--how enti-
ties interact with respect to force. Included here is the
exertion of force, resistance to such a force, the overcoming
of such a resistance, blockage of the expression of force,
removal of such blockage, and the like.
Though scarcely recognized before, force dynamics figures
significantly in language structure. It is, first of all, a
generalization over the traditional notion of ``causative'':
it places naturally within a single framework not only `caus-
ing', but also `letting,' as well as a set of notions not nor-
mally considered in the same context.
Force dynamics, furthermore, plays a structuring role
across a range of language levels. First, it has direct gram-
matical representation. In English, such representation
appears not only in subsets of conjunctions, prepositions, and
other closed-class elements but, most significantly, also as
the semantic category that the modal system as a whole is
dedicated to expressing. Force dynamic patterns are also
incorporated in open-class lexical items, and bring numbers of
these together into systematic relationships. Lexical items
involved in this way refer not only to physical force interac-
tions but, by metaphoric extension, also to psychological and
social interactions, conceived in terms of psycho-social
``pressures.'' In addition, force dynamic principles can be
seen to operate in discourse that is involved with persuasion.
Such rhetorical interchange (including efforts to exhort, con-
vince, or logically demonstrate) involves the deployment of
points to argue for and against conflicting positions.
Force dynamics is a major conceptual organizing system,
constituting one of four major ``imaging'' systems that I have
developed which provide an integrated semantic schematization
of a referent scene. Cognitively, it corresponds to concepts
within ``naive physics'' as well as to ones in ``naive
(social) psychology,'' and can be contrasted with modern
scientific concepts in these domains.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 1985 07:42-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Seminars - Rewrite Rules (SMU)
Dr. Franz Winkler
Department of Computer and Information Science
University of Delaware
Improvements of the Completion Algorithm for Bases of Polynomial Ideals
and Rewrite Rule Systems
Time: 1:00 - 2:00 PM Wednesday, September 4, 1985
Place: 315 Science Information Center, SMU, Dallas, Texas
The Knuth-Bendix completion procedure for rewrite rule systems is one
of wide applicability in symbolic and algebraic computation. Attempts
to reduce the complexity of this completion algorithm are reported in
the literature. Already in their seminal 1967 paper Knuth and Bendix
have suggested to keep all the rules intereduced during the execution
of the algorithm. Huet has presented a version of the completion
algorithm in which every rewrite rule is kept in reduced form with
respect to all the other rules of the system. Using an idea of
Buchberger's for the completion of bases of polynomial ideals we have
proposed in 1983 a criterion for detecting "unnecessary" critical
pairs. If a critical pair is recognized as unnecesary then one need
not apply the costly process of computing normal forms to it. Only
recently have we given a proof that these approaches can be combined.
I.e., it is is possible to keep all the rewrite rules interreduced
and still use a criterion for eliminating unnecesary critical
pairs.
←←←←←←←
Speaker: Leo Bachmair
Department of Computer Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topic: Termination of Rewrite Rule Systems
Time: 3:00-4:00 P. M.
Wednesday, September 4, 1985
Place: 315 Science Information Center, SMU, Dallas, Texas
Applications of rewrite rule systems to programming languages,
specifications of abstract data types, theorem proving, algebraic
simplification, etc. often depend on the termination of the given
systems and various termination methods have been developed in recent
years. Termination, in general, is a nondecidable property for rewrite
systems, however.
We will describe several termination methods. Of particular practical
importance are methods based on the use of simplification orderings.
These include orderings that extend a given partial ordering on operator
symbols (a precedence ordering) to terms. Examples are the
recursive path ordering and the recursive decomposition ordering.
Other techniques apply to rewrite systems satisfying certain syntactic
restrictions like linearity. We will also describe recent results on
termiantion of associative-commutative rewrite systems.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 1985 1043-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - PARLOG (CMU)
Keith Clark will visit CMU on August 29.
He is a reader and senior research fellow at Imperial College,
London. He has been actively engaged in logic programming research
since 1975.
Speaker: Keith Clark
Imperial College, London
Date: Thursday, August 29
Time: 3:30 pm
Place: 8220
Topic: PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic
PARLOG is a Horn clause logic programming language designed
for efficient parallel implementation, including both and-
parallel and or-parallel evaluation mechanisms. The talk
will include a summary of the history of parallel logic
programming. Then the features of PARLOG will be presented
by means of examples; and some aspects of the implementation
outlined.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 85 14:06:18 cdt
From: julie@ut-ratliff.UTEXAS.EDU (Julie Barrow)
Subject: Seminar - Temporal Logic (UT)
University of Texas
Computer Sciences Department
COLLOQUIUM
SPEAKER: Amir Pnueli
Weizmann Institute
TITLE: Temporal Logic - Global vs. Compositional
DATE: Thursday, August 29, 1985
PLACE: PAI 3.14
TIME: 4-5 p.m.
We present the general framework of Temporal
Logic as a formalism for specifications, verification
and develpment of reactive systems. Recent enhance-
ments required by a compositional approach will be dis-
cussed.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1985 16:08-EDT
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminars - Speech Recognition and NL Processing (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
There will be an AI seminar on Monday August 26 at 10:30 in the second floor
conference room at 10 Moulton St. Jean-Francois Cloarec and Michel Gilloux
of Centre Nationale d'etudes des Telecommunications (CNET), Lannion, France
will speak. Their abstract:
SERAC : An Expert System for Acoustic-Phonetic Speech Recognition
We present a knowledge based approach to speech recognition at the
phonetic level. SERAC is a production system generating phonetic
hypotheses for continuously spoken french sentences.
We give the motivations for using such an approach and we describe
the knowledge representation language.
Then we present the knowledge base and report some preliminary
results.
There will be another talk by Karen Sparck Jones the next morning,
August 27th, at 10:00 in the 2nd floor conference room. Her abstract:
Natural Language Processing Research
at the
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
The talk will outline recent and current work at the
Laboratory. This includes both research with a semantic
stimulus and research driven by parsing issues. The semantic
work is concerned with interpretation problems like reference
resolution, and with techniques for representation and
inference involving general as well as domain knowledge, in
the context of such tasks as database query and construction,
paraphrase, and indexing. The parsing work includes projects
on grammar construction, morphological analysis, and the use
of a large machine-readable dictionary, and research on finite
state techniques for compositional interpretation and on
robust phrase-based parsing strategies.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 1985 07:37-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Conference - Intelligent Simulation Environments
1986 SCS MultiConference January 23-25 1985
Bahia Hotel
San Diego, California
Intelligent Simulation Environments
An expert system for simulation model selection
Delphi-based distributed expert decision making
Expert systems and user decisionf in simulation studies
Artificial Intelligence and Rapid Prototyping
Professional Development Seminar
An Introduction to Prolog
Instructor: Dr. Heimo H. Adeslsberger
For more info write to:
SCS, P. O. Box 17900 San Diego, CA 92117 (619) 277-3888
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-Sep-85 1448 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #118
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Sep 85 14:48:09 PDT
Date: Thu 5 Sep 1985 11:12-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #118
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 5 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 118
Today's Topics:
Query - CUSP/MANDALA,
AI Tools - OPS5 in Interlisp & Prolog and Lisp,
Expert Systems - FDA Approval for Expert Systems,
Humor - Re: Good News and Bad News,
Games - Chess Openings & Computers Cheat at Chess?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Sep 1985 10:19-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: CUSP/MANDALA
I found this in net.ai. I also have attached a response for him/her.
Can you either get it back to him or put in AIList? (I checked the
curent UUCP map and find no record of this site.)
/* Written 10:38 am Aug 30, 1985 by jjd@oce-rd2.UUCP in smu:net.ai */
/* ---------- "CUSP/MANDALA" ---------- */
Can anybody tell me about CUSP, Mandala and/or other
End User Languages.
CUSP = Customer Programming Language
Mandala = Pictoral Language
Response:
Electronics Week, November 19, 1984
ICOT Details Its Progress. Reports on work done on prolog
machines, a new logic language called Mandala. page 20
%A Robert Haavind
%T Playing to win a New Generation
%J High Technology
%D AUG 1985
%P 63-65
%K prolog lisp machine KL1 mandala ICOT
%X describes new parallel and other novel architectures being developed
in Japan including those for AI
------------------------------
Date: Tue 3 Sep 85 08:18:36-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: OPS5 in Interlisp
Someone asked about OPS5 in Interlisp; I picked up a brochure at IJCAI
on a version that is for sale.
SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation)
First package (1 disk, object code only, and 1 user's manual) $2000
additional packages $500 each
source code $5000 (interlisp)
For more information, write:
saic, p.o. box 2341, La Jolla, CA 92038 [attention: Linda Anderson]
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Mon 26 Aug 85 00:57:43-PDT
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Prolog and Lisp
From: Carl E. Hewitt <HEWITT@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Prolog (like APL before it) will fail as the foundation for Artificial
Intelligence because of competition with Lisp. There are commercially
viable Prolog implementations written in Lisp but not conversely.
From: PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA
1. (the least interesting one) All the so-called commercially viable
Prolog systems in Lisp are not really Prolog systems written IN Lisp,
but rather Prolog systems written FOR Lisp machines. [They are
microcoded and have good support for tagged data types.] Without
those machine-level operations, those Prolog systems would run too
slow and use too much memory to be useful for serious Prolog
programming.
Hewitt's message alludes to an apparent difference between Lisp and
Prolog which Pereira's response ignores. The response also implies
that Prolog in Lisp is inherently slow. A previous message from
Pereira (Prolog Digest Volume 1, Issue 21) correctly emphasizes that
speed is important. (This issue and the ones following are quite
informative.)
From: PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA
What Prolog "does" is not just to make certain deductions in a certain
order, but also MAKE THEM VERY FAST.
One of the differences between Lisp and Prolog is in how efficiently
they support embedded languages. Special purpose languages, like
special purpose hardware, are an important tool. Prolog has not
demonstrated its ability to support them (apart from Logic in Prolog,
of course), Lisp has.
One example of this is the Prolog interpreter Foolog by Martin
Nilsson* in that Prolog Digest issue. Written in 2 pages of Maclisp,
it runs about 75% as fast as interpreted DEC-10 Prolog; a later
version was supposed to be marginally faster. Naturally, Foolog
doesn't include a debugger and other system functions or all of the
user utilities in the Prolog library (but they're written in
Prolog...), but it does support cut, call, bagof, arithmetic, and I/O.
A simple compiler apparently was written later that generated code 25%
as fast as compiled DEC-10 Prolog. After that message, I lost track
of Foolog. Nilsson described it as a "toy"; I doubt much came of it.
Obviously the first 50% is the easiest and one shouldn't ignore the
environment. (Both Prolog and Lisp encourage powerful environments.
At that time, DEC-10 Prolog was fairly mature.) When Prolog is the
appropriate language, then one should use the best Prolog available.
When you need a special language however, Lisp is hard to beat.
If logic is by far the most important language for AI, Lisp may be in
trouble. If it isn't, pure Prolog environments are in trouble.
-andy
ps - The speed advantage of special Lisp hardware is shrinking. I
assume that the same is true for Prolog.
* Nilsson was one of the developers of LM-Prolog.
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 3 Sep 1985 11:40:22-PDT
From: billingslea%lite.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Mark Billingslea `Lock and Load!')
Subject: FDA Approval for Expert Systems
This mail was sent to me, from Germany. Thought I would pass it on to you
for review.
-Mark
From: GYPSC2::ROLLER "Christian E. Roller - PSC Muenchen - RTO"
1-SEP-1985 02:51
To: COORS::BILLINGSLEA
Subj: Some news for AI digest
<><><><><><><><> T h e V O G O N N e w s S e r v i c e <><><><><><><><>
Edition : 897 Friday 30-Aug-1985 Circulation : 365
Send subscription requests, backissue requests and letters to MAGIC::VNS
[TAYLOR ]
[Nashua, NH, USA]
Some AI systems may need FDA approval
Expert systems come within the FDA ambit to the extent that
they supplement doctor's work, according to Richard Beutal, a
Washington D.C. attorney specializing in the legal aspects of
technology.
An expert system may be defined as a computer program that
embodies the expertise of one or more human experts in some
domain and applies this knowledge to provide inferences and
guidance to a user. some of the earliest and most
sophisticated systems were developed for medical diagnosis:
MCYIN, EMCYIN, CADUCEUS AND ATTENDING. [There are several
more in use in Japan. --mjt]
Beutal called attention to proposed FDA regulations that, if
implemented, would require medical expert systems to obtain
FDA pre-marketing approval. Given that FDA approval for what
are class 3 devices could take up to 10 years and that
reclassifying such devices can take almost as long, these FDA
regulations would virtually cause investment to dry up.
{Government Computer News Aug 16, 1985}
[...]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 85 10:50:13 EDT
From: Cymru am Byth! <bradford@AMSAA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Good news and bad news, Mr. Wizard...
From: straz@AQUINAS.THINK.COM@MIT-CCC, Steve Strassmann
But the study also showed that TV scientists are killed more often than
soldiers, private eyes, and police officers."
WOW! Just how often is a TV scientist likely to be killed?
Not more than once, I hope!
PJB
"So you think being drunk feels good -- tell that to a glass of water!"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 85 8:15:37 EDT
From: Bruce Nevin <bnevin@bbncch.ARPA>
Subject: chess openings
It is not clear whether a human expert studying the Caro-Kann defense for five
weeks memorizes 50,000 openings or generalizes in ways that are difficult
in conscious, verbal terms to articulate. Indeed, isn't there evidence that
even human memorizing entails kinds of generalization that are not present in
simple storage of a table for later lookup?
Seems to me this points to the kernel issue of machine learning,
and a hard nut at that!
[For recent progress in chess subpattern learning see Albrecht Heeffer's
"Validating Concepts from Automated Acquisition Systems", IJCAI-85, pp.
613-615. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 85 09:33:14 pdt
From: Tom Dietterich <tgd%oregon-state.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Computers Cheat at Chess?
I enjoyed Stuart Cracraft's notes concerning the use of tree searching in
chess programs. Amidst all of the hype about "shallow" versus "deep" expert
systems, it is interesting to note that most computer chess systems should
be classified as "deep". Once they get past the opening moves, they play
every game from "first principles"!
--Tom
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Sep-85 1323 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #119
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Sep 85 13:23:37 PDT
Date: Fri 6 Sep 1985 10:41-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #119
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 6 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 119
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Flavor-Based Knowledge Representation (CSLI) &
Misconceptions about Basketball Statistics (UCB) &
Haptic Object Recognition (UPenn) &
Scalar Implicature (UPenn) &
NL Menu Interfaces to Databases (SMU),
Conference - Army AI and Robotics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 4 Sep 85 17:17:57-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Flavor-Based Knowledge Representation (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
``FORK: A Flavor-Based Environment for
Object-oriented Knowledge Representation''
C. Beckstein, G. Goerz, University Erlangen-Nuernberg, West Germany
2:15, Thursday, September 5, Ventura Seminar Room
Most object-oriented extensions of LISP provide only marginal
support for the purpose of knowledge representation. In particular,
there are only poor means---if any---for specifying meta-information
about attributes of objects such as typed domains, methods for
determining values (demons), multiple-valued attributes and explicit
control of inheritance. Furthermore, they usually don't offer
adequate utilities for handling multiple perspectives, retrieving
objects through patterns of characteristic features, and maintaining
structural relations (integrity constraints) in and between objects.
FORK is an attempt to extend Flavors, an object-oriented extension of
LISP, by adding features which are well known from frame-like systems
with the advantage of keeping a systematic distinction between classes
and instances. The procedural knowledge is attached to classes either
in the usual sense of methods as functions or in the form of (forward
chaining) rule sets. In addition, FORK offers a programming
environment to support users in the construction and maintenance of
large, hybrid knowledge bases.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 85 13:43:19 PDT
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Misconceptions about Basketball Statistics (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, September 10, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Amos Tversky, Department of Psychology,
Stanford University
TITLE: ``Misconception of Chance Processes in
Basketball''
We investigate the origin and the validity of common beliefs
regarding ``the hot hand'' and ``streak shooting'' in the game
of basketball. Basketball players and fans alike tend to
believe that a player's chance of hitting a shot are greater
following a hit than following a miss on the previous shot.
However, detailed analyses of the shooting records of the Phi-
ladelphia 76ers provided no evidence for a positive correla-
tion between the outcomes of successive shots. The same con-
clusions emerged from free-throw records of the Boston Cel-
tics, and from a controlled shooting experiment with the men
and women of Cornell's varsity teams. The outcomes of previ-
ous shots influenced Cornell players' predictions but not
their preformance. The belief in the hot hand and the
``detection'' of streaks in random sequences is attributed to
a general misconception of chance according to which even
short random sequences are thought to be highly representative
of their generating process.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 85 20:56 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Haptic Object Recognition (UPenn)
HAPTIC OBJECT RECOGNITION: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM HUMANS FOR MACHINE
PERCEPTION AND MANIPULATION.
Susan Lederman, Psychology Department, Queen's University in Kingston, Canada
2pm Friday, September 6, 216 Moore School, University of Pennsylvania
We shall present our investigation of haptic object recognition which
concerns with what we call "knowledge based control of Human hand movements.
The "knowledge based" hand movements are directed by the observer's goal. This
implies an analysis of hand movements at the cognitive level rather than at a
biomechanical or neutral level. Some exploratory hand movement procedures are
being suggested.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 85 15:04 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Scalar Implicature (UPenn)
DISSERTATION DEFENSE
A Theory of Scalar Implicature
Julia Hirschberg
10:00am Sept 4 1985
216 Moore School, University of Pennsylvania
Determining what an utterance conveys, beyond its semantic import, is
an important goal of natural-language processing. This thesis first
proposes a definition of one type of non-logical inference, Gricean
conversational implicature. Within this framework, it defines a class
of conversational implicature, scalar implicature, revising and
extending work by Horn (1972), Harnish (1979), and Gazdar (1979). A
theory of scalar implicature is proposed based upon an analysis of
naturally occurring data. A representation of the phenomenon is
developed, as are algorithms for calculating licensed implicatures. An
application to computer-human question-answering is discussed, as are
other potential uses in natural-language generation and understanding.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Sep 1985 11:14-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Seminar - NL Menu Interfaces to Databases (SMU)
Speaker: Dr. Craig W. Thompson, Texas Instruments, Inc.
Topic: Menu-Based Natural Language Interfaces to Databases
Time: 3:00-4:00 p. m., Wednesday, September 11, 1985
Place: 315 SIC SMU, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas
Menu-based natural language as implemented in the NLMenu system,
provides useful near-term solutions to a number of problems that
affect conventional natural language interfaces to databases.
This talk overviews our research on menu-based natural language,
describing
1) the basic NLMenu approach
2) advantages of the approach including ease-of-use for end users
and low cost for interface designers
3) applications of the approach for database updates, request for
business graphs and map displays, and mixed
dbms and keyword based informaiton retrieval queries.
The talk ends with research directions related to this new approach.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 85 11:46:41 EDT
From: MAJ Kenneth Rose (Ft. Benj. Harrison) <krose@BRL.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - AI and Robotics
The U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command is sponsoring an
artificial intelligence and robotics symposium in conjunction
with the American Defense Preparedness Association on November
6th-7th in Austin, Texas. The pupose is to afford members of
industry and the acedemic research community an opportunity to
respond to Army areas of technical interest as described in the
call for papers. A more specific description of Army interests
is in preparation for distribution at the symposium. The agenda
for the symposium follows. For more information, contact Colonel
Bruce Holt at--
American Defense Preparedness Association
Rosslyn Center, Suite 900
1700 North Moore Street
Arlington, VA 22209
*****************************************************************
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ROBOTICS SYMPOSIUM
6-7 November 1985, Austin, Texas
AGENDA
Tuesday, 5 November
1800- REGISTRATION, Wyndam Hotel, Austin, Texas.
2000
2030 PRE-SYMPOSIUM MEETING FOR SPEAKERS, Wyndam Hotel. Room
location to be announced.
Wednesday, 6 November
0700 REGISTRATION, Wyndam Hotel.
OPENING SESSION
0800 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS, Major Kenneth H. Rose, Chief of
Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, US Army Soldier
Support Center, Sessions Chairman.
0805 PURPOSE OF CONFERENCE, Major General Maurice O. Edmonds,
Commander, US Army Soldier Support Center, Conference
Chairman.
0815 KEYNOTE ADDRESS, Lieutenant General Robert L. Moore,
Deputy Commanding General for Research, Development, and
Acquisition, US Army Materiel Command.
0925 US ARMY ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTIONS, Mr. Richard
Vitali, Deputy Chief of Staff for Technology Planning
and Management, Headquarters, US Army Materiel Command.
SESSION I - ROBOTICS
0950 Mobile Robots for Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and
Manipulative Missions: A Survey of Current Systems.
Mr. Harvey B. Mieieran, H. B. Meieran Associates.
1015 Technology Development in Intelligent Machine Systems.
Mr. Thomas G. Bartholot, Odetics, Inc.
1105 Loading, Assembling, and Packaging of Ammunition:
Applying Flexible Automation in the Future to Solve the
Problems of the Past. Mr. Vernon L. Mangold, KOHOL, Inc.
1130 Control of a Multi-Robot Processing Line Using
Artificial Intelligence. Mr. James M. McNair, GA
Technologies.
1300 ROMAC Muscle Powered Mobile Robots. Mr. Guy Immega,
MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates, Ltd., (Canada) and
Mr. Harvey B. Meieran, HB Meieran Associates.
SESSION II - AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
1325 Abstractions to Represent the Plan of an Autonomous Land
Vehicle. Dr. Theodore A. Linden, Advanced Information &
Decision Systems.
1350 A Planning System for Autonomous Land Vehicles: An
Overview of the Hughes System. Dr. David Y. Tseng,
Hughes Aircraft Company.
1415 A Land Vehicle Navigation System Supported by a Digital
Map Data Base. Mr. Walter B. Zavoli, Etak, Inc.
1500 Obstacle Avoidance Simulation for Autonomous Land
Vehicles. Dr. Theodore A. Linden, Advanced Information
& Decision Systems.
1525 An Incremental Path Toward Autonomous Vehicles. Mr.
Jack Harper, Robot Defense Systems, Inc.
1550 Robot Combat Vehicles: Synchronizing Technology and
Applications. Mr. R. G. Diaz, General Dynamics Land
Systems Division.
1615 Remote Control Weapons Platforms. Mr. C. Ron Clouser,
Robot Defense Systems, Inc.
1640 Robotic Ranger: Recent Testbed Results/Path to Autonomy.
Mr. Jerome Kirsch, Grumman Corporation. (PROPRIETARY
INFORMATION: US GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL ONLY)
1800- RECEPTION BUFFET, Wyndam Hotel.
2000
Thursday, 7 November
0800 Design of a Lightweight, Full Mobility Vehicle. Mr.
David D. Wright, Unique Mobility, Inc.
SESSION III - KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
0825 Expert System for Logistics Analysis. Mr. William O.
Hedgepeth, US Army Logistics Center.
0850 Relevant Help, User Modeling, and Reasoning Under
Uncertainty. Dr. Joseph Dempsey, RCA.
0915 A Software Architecture for Realtime, Embedded Expert
Systems. Dr. Kenneth R. Whitebread, Honeywell, Inc.
1000 Stochastic Resources Allocation for Command and Control.
Dr. Marc D. Diamond, FMC Corporation and Ms. Olivia M.
Carducci, Carnegie-Mellon University.
1025 Knowledge Integrity Maintenance: Quality Assurance in
Knowledge System Development. Dr. E. Webb Stacey, Jr.,
Scientific Systems, Inc.
SESSION IV - COMMAND AND CONTROL
1050 Embedding AI Systems Into Command and Control
Applications. Ms. Sharon Storms, Ford Aerospace and
Communications Corporation.
1115 A Knowledge-based System Approach for Enhanced Crisis
Action Planning. Ms. Ina Ghaznavi-Collins, GTE
Government Systems.
1300 Intelligent Tactical Display. Mr. James R. Richardson,
Symbolics, Inc. and Captain Bill Johnson, US Army Armor
Center.
SESSION V - NATURAL LANGUAGE
1325 A Natural Language Understanding System for Maneuver
Control. Mr. Isaac Fajerman, US Army Communications-
Electronics Command, and Dr. Abe Lockman, Horizon
Information Systems.
1350 A Speech Understanding Testbed for Command and Control
Dialogs. Dr. Richard Kittredge, Odyssey Research
Associates and Mr. Isaac Fajerman, US Army
Communications-Electronics Command.
SESSION VI - TRAINING
1415 A Mark 45 Maintenance Advisor. Mr. Dick Grommes, FMC
Corporation.
1440 The Design of a Generic Intelligent Trainer. Mr. Philip
Underwood, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company.
PAPERS TO BE PUBLISHED IN SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS.
Project PERICLES: The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Assisting
the Provision of Legal Services. Harvard University Law School.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Sep-85 1807 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #120
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Sep 85 18:07:37 PDT
Date: Sun 8 Sep 1985 16:27-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #120
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 9 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 120
Today's Topics:
Queries - Source Licenses for Common Lisp & Semantic Net Graphics &
Krypton & Children's Story Generator,
AI Tools - Prolog and Lisp,
Psychology - Misperception of Probability,
Public Service - Trojan Horses
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 85 15:23 MST
From: May@HIS-PHOENIX-MULTICS.ARPA
Reply-to: May%pco@CISL-SERVICE-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Source Licenses for Common Lisp
We are interested in porting Common Lisp to our large system hosts
and are looking for software houses who are interested in selling
source licenses for Common Lisp that is written in either Pascal
or, preferably, C. If you know of any, please send whatever
information you can to me and I will post the responses here in
the list. Thanks. Bob May
May%pco @ cisl-service-multics
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 85 21:18:31 edt
From: Brad Miller <miller@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Wanted: Graphics Software for 3600 (Semantic Nets)
I'm doing a semantic parser, and just for hacks, want to display the
output graphically as a Semantic Net. Anyone out there hack anything
similar for the Symbolics FLAVOR system? (or the TI explorer, or LMI,
or any other degenerate case of MIT's LM) I'm a novice to this sort of
graphics, so anything likely (say a program that displays ATNs) would
be fine! I just want to get a better grasp on this stuff than the provided
examples give....
Brad Miller
miller@ur-seneca.rochester.arpa
University of Rochester CS dept.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Sep 85 09:29:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: Krypton
In the October 1983 issue of IEEE's Computer, there was an
article called "Krypton: A Functional Approach to Knowledge
Representation" by Ronald Brachman, Richard Fikes, and
Hector Levesque. It described work in progress. Does anyone
out there know what became of this effort? Any follow-up
articles, etc??
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: 7 Sep 85 21:04:13 EDT
From: Steve.Hoffmann@CMU-CS-K
Subject: Children's story generator
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Can anyone give me a reference to a story-generation program, I believe from
Schank's group at Yale, which tells stories about such characters as Joe Bear
and Irving Bird? Also, any pointers to other story generation would be
appreciated. Thank you.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1985 08:14 EDT
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Prolog and Lisp
I would like to respond to the message from Andy Freeman who sent the
following:
From: Carl E. Hewitt <HEWITT@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Prolog (like APL before it) will fail as the foundation for Artificial
Intelligence because of competition with Lisp. There are commercially
viable Prolog implementations written in Lisp but not conversely.
[...]
I believe that the Prolog implementations on Common Lisp will be just
as efficient as the stand-alone Prolog implementations. However, it
is not possible to make a commercially viable Common Lisp
implementation on Prolog. This means that any good software written
for a stand-alone Prolog system will soon appear on the Lisp Systems
but NOT vice versa. Therefore the stand alone Prolog systems will
always have impoverished software libraries by comparison with the
Common Lisp systems and will not be commercially viable in the long
run.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 4 Sep 85 21:17:20-PDT
From: Donald Henager <HENAGER@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Misperception of Probability
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The October issue of Science 85 has an interesting article on people's
mistaken view of probability. It starts with the results of an experiment
in which people were drilled about the advantages of seat belts, then
agreed that seat belts were great, and then drove away without their seat
belts fastened. It goes on to say:
"If you think the apparent irrationality of Slovic's subjects frustrated him,
imagine how people in the nuclear power business must feel. [This is] the
same general public whose concern for the safety of nuclear reactors -- which
have claimed a total of three lives in accidents in the last 30 years --
brought the industry to a virtual standstill. It's the same general public
that smokes billions of cigarettes a year while banning an artificial
sweetner because of a one-in-a-million chance that it might cause cancer;
the same public that eats meals full of fat, flocks to cities prone to
earthquakes, and goes hang gliding while it frets about pesticides in food,
avoidsthe ocean for fear of sharks, and breaks into a cold sweat on airline
flights.
"In short, we the general public are irrational, uninformed, super-
stitious, even stupid. We don't understand probability, are biased by the
news media, and have a fear of some technologies that borders on the
primeval."
It's an interesting article about how people think about probability and
in particular points out some catchy statistics about what is and isn't
dangerous to your life span. If you can get a copy, read it.
Don
[Although I have retitled this message "Misperception of Probability",
articles by Amos Tversky (and cited by Paul Cohen) have stressed that
people seem to base judgements on prototype similarity rather than on
probability, even when the "priors" needed for probabilistic reasoning
are presented as the major component of a problem specification. Given
that people >>want<< to reason in this manner, the misperception involved
may be that of the scientific community in assuming that people are
trying to reason probabilistically and that they are getting it wrong.
There may be valid epistemological reasons (as well as computational
ones) for prototype-based pattern recognition and reasoning. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 05 Sep 85 14:37:38 EDT (Thu)
From: Marshall D. Abrams <abrams@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: WARNING !! [A Trojan Horse Bites Man]
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[Forwarded from the Info-Atari bboard by MRC@SIMTEL20.]
[Forwarded to the Info-Atari bboard by Malpass@LL-SST.]
Today's Wall St. Journal contained the following article. I think
it is of enough potential significance that I'll enter the whole thing.
In addition to the conclusions it states, it implies something about
good backup procedure discipline.
In the hope this may save someone,
Don Malpass
******************************************
(8/15/85 Wall St. Journal)
ARF! ARF!
Richard Streeter's bytes got bitten by an "Arf Arf," which isn't
a dog but a horse.
Mr. Streeter, director of development in the engineering department
of CBS Inc. and home-computer buff, was browsing recently through the
offerings of Family Ledger, a computer bulletin board that can be used by
anybody with a computer and a telephone to swap advice, games or programs -
or to make mischief. Mr. Streeter loaded into his computer a program that
was billed as enhancing his IBM program's graphics; instead it instantly wiped
out the 900 accounting, word processing and game programs he had stored in
his computer over the years. All that was left was a taunt glowing back
at him from the screen: "Arf! Arf! Got You!"
"HACKERS" STRIKE AGAIN
[...] Several variations of the "Arf! Arf!" program have made
the rounds, including one that poses as a "super-directory" that
conveniently places computer files in alphabetical order.
[...] Al Stone, the computer consultant who runs Long Island
based Family Ledger, [says] "Don't attempt to run something unless you
know its pedigree," he says.
That's good advice, because the computer pranksters are getting more
clever - and nastier. They are now creating even-more-insidious programs
that gradually eat away existing files as they are used. Appropriately
enough, these new programs are known as "worms".
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Sep-85 1825 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #121
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Sep 85 18:25:29 PDT
Date: Tue 10 Sep 1985 15:58-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #121
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 11 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 121
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Equational Logic as a Programming Language (UPenn) &
Constructive Lexicon-Grammar (BBN) &
Corporate Distribution Management (CMU) &
Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (SU),
Conferences - Factory Automation and Robotics &
Aerospace Applications of AI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 85 14:10 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Equational Logic as a Programming Language (UPenn)
EQUATIONAL LOGIC AS A PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE
Michael J. O'Donnell, The University of Chicago
3pm September 19th, 216 Moore School, University of Pennsylvania
In logic programming languages, programs are logical assertions with no
explicit procedural information, and execution consists of the efficient
derivation of certain logical consequences of a program. Prolog, and
relational database query languages are both logic programming languages based
on the predicate calculus. The advantages of logic programming are clarity of
programs, simplicity of semantics, and the potential for parallel execution
without timing dependence. In this talk, I describe a programming language
based on the logic of equations. A prototype implementation exists, and has
been used in a number of experiments. The talk will focus on examples
illustrating the advantages of equational programming, and the differences
between equational programming and Prolog programming.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Sep 1985 17:37-EDT
From: AHAAS at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Constructive Lexicon-Grammar (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
The next BBN Artificial Intelligence seminar will be held in the 3rd
floor large conference room at 10 Moulton Street, 10:30 on Friday
September 13. Bruce Nevins of BBN wil speak on "Constructive
Lexicon-Grammar". His abstract:
Maurice Gross's group in Paris found that, after they had specified
French verbs by their syntactic properties, there was no need for
lexical features to make further semantic distinctions between them.
Because of this perhaps surprising result, they have been able to
develop a highly specific lexical representation, using classifier
words in sentence forms rather than abstract features. Their
lexicon-grammar replaces most context-free parsing with simple lookup
in 3-dimensional tables of syntactic properties of words.
Constructive grammar, as exemplified by Harris's ←A←Grammar←of
←English←on←Mathematical←Principles← (Wiley, 1984), uses only the
constructive `has-a' relations of dependency and adjunction, limiting
the taxonomic `is-a' relation to classifier hierarchies of words in
the lexicon. A given input morpheme can only be one of a few kinds of
things: an operator with specified argument requirement, a primitive
argument (roughly, a concrete noun), an argument-indicator like -ing,
the operator-indicator -s, or a product of certain precisely
specifiable reductions of strings to more compact, and more
conventional, form. Because each morpheme has at most only a very few
possible syntactic roles--frequently, just one--computer analysis of
text has much less structural ambiguity to cope with than in other
approaches.
In this talk, I will show how these two approaches to natural language
processing may be combined in a system for construing (as opposed to
parsing) natural language input that should be readily adaptable to
text generation as well. I will sketch extensions similar to Naomi
Sager's system for automatically incorporating new text information
into subject-matter specific data bases.
------------------------------
Date: 9 Sep 85 11:09:38 EDT
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Seminar - Corporate Distribution Management (CMU)
Topic: Presentation of Inet Project
Speakers: Ramana Reddy and Nizwer Husain
Place: DH3313
Date: Wednesday, September 11
Time: 11:30am - 12:30pm
The Inet project is an application of Knowledge Based Simulation(KBS)
techniques to the domain of corporate distribution management. Corporate
distribution management provides a rich environment for studying new
techniques developed in KBS. Consider a typical manufacturing organization
which manufactures a number of products and whose components are manufactured
in a number of widely separated locations. These components are warehoused
and merged at different locations and distributed to reseller locations. In
such a system there are numerous decisions that have to be made about the
transportation, warehousing, manufacturing and order administration policies.
The purpose of I-NET is to provide a simulation model which can be
understood, modified and used by managers directly without the assistance of
a programmer. These facilities should provide the manager with an indepth
understanding of the distribution network and aid in decision making.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 9 Sep 85 10:45:56-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (SU)
DAY October 1, 1985
EVENT Computer Science Colloquium
PLACE Skilling Auditorium
TIME 4:15
TITLE Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning
PERSON Dr. Joe Halpern
FROM IBM Corporation
BELIEF, AWARENESS, AND LIMITED REASONING
Classical possible-worlds models for knowledge and belief suffer from the
problem of logical omniscience: agents know all tautologies and their
knowledge is closed under logical consequence. This unfortunately is not a
very accurate account of how people operate! We review possible-worlds
semantics, and then go on to introduce three approaches towards solving the
problem of logical omniscience. In particular, in our logics, the set of
beliefs of an agent does not necessarily contain all valid formulas. One of
our logics deals explicitly with awareness, where, roughly speaking, it is
necessary to be aware of a concept before one can have beliefs about it,
while another gives a model of local reasoning, where an agent is viewed as a
society of minds, each with its own cluster of beliefs, which may contradict
each other. The talk will be completely self-contained.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 85 10:33 EDT
From: (Herb Bernstein) <BERNSTEIN@NYU-CMCL1.ARPA>
Subject: Symposium on Fact. Aut. & Robotics
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Reminder:
The Symposium on Factory Automation and Robotics
A Forum for Industrial and Academic Robotics Engineers and Scientists
will be held 9-11 September 1985
by the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, NYU
in honor of Marvin Denicoff
sponsored by the National Science Foundation
Registration $35 ($25 for NYU faculty and staff), in advance to
NYU/CIMS Symposium on Fac. Aut. and Robotics
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
251 Mercer Street, New York, N.Y. 10012
Attn: Herbert J. Bernstein
Or at the meeting, Eisner and Lubin Auditorium, Loeb Student Center,
566 LaGuardia Place (corner of LaGuardia Place and Wash. Sq. South).
For more information or to RSVP, mail to yaya@nyu (on ARPANET), or
call 212-533-3363 or 212-460-7444.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Sep 1985 13:30-EDT
From: cross <cross@wpafb-afita>
Subject: Aerospace Applications of AI Conference
Registration is still open for the First Annual Aerospace Applications
of Artificial Intelligence, September 17-19, 1985 in Dayton Ohio.
The number to call for registration information is (513) 426-8430.
The conference will be held at the Dayton Convention Center and the
conference hotel, Stouffer's Dayton Plaza, is adjacent. Stouffer's
phone number is (513) 224-0800. The registration cost of $225.00
includes the two conference luncheons and the banquet. The program is
listed below:
First Annual Aerospace Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference
Program
Tuesday Morning, 9:00 AM - 9:15 AM
Welcome to Dayton
Mayor Paul Leonard
Welcome to AAAIC'85
Jack Schira, AAAIC'85 General Chairman
Capt Stephen E. Cross, AAAIC'85 Program Chairman
Tuesday Morning, 9:15 AM - 11:30 AM
Management Session
Session Moderator:
Brig Gen Philippe O. Bouchard
Vice Commander, Aeronautical Systems Division
Speakers:
Brig Gen Philippe O. Bouchard
Vice Commander, Aeronautical Systems Division
Dr. Woodrow Bledsoe
MCC and U. of Texas at Austin
Dr. Joseph Watson
Vice President of the Data Systems Group,
Texas Instruments
Dr. Clinton Kelly III
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Tuesday Luncheon, noon - 1:30 PM, Stouffer's Dayton Plaza
Dr. Ed Taylor, TRW
Tuesday Afternoon, 2:00 PM - 4:30 PM
Avionics Session
Session Moderator:
Maj James R. Johnson, AFWAL
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. Tom Garvey, SRI International, AI Center
"Keeping the Pilot in Command: AI and Avionics"
Speakers:
Dick Feldman and Hal Cambell, Systran
"Expert System Pilot Aid - an Update"
Dr. Bruce Anderson, Christa McNulty, and Garr S. Lystad
"Expert Systems for Aiding Combat Pilots"
Dr. Michael R. Fehling, Teknowledge Inc.
"Research Issues for Knowledge Based Planning"
Programming Languages
Session Moderator:
Dr. Gary Lamont, AFIT
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. Kenneth Kahn, Xerox PARC
"The Integration of Multiple Paradigms for AI
Programming"
Speakers:
Charles T. Kitsmiller, J. Boose, T. Jardine
Boeing Computer Services
"Coupling Symbolic and Numerical Computing in Expert
Systems"
Bruce Reed Jr., Goodyear Aerospace
"An Implementation of LISP on a SIMD Parallel
Processor"
Dick Naedel, Intellimac
"Ada and Artificial Intelligence"
Mark Miller, Computer Thought
"Ada and Artificial Intelligence"
Wednesday Morning, 9:00 AM - 11:30 AM
Manufacturing
Session Moderator:
Dr. Vince Russo, AFWAL
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. Mark Fox, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon Univ.
"Artificial Intelligence in Manufacturing"
Speakers:
Dr. Petros Papus, Westinghouse Electric Corp.
"ISIS Project in Review"
Robert Joy, Northrup Corp.
"Lisp Machine Based Generative Process Planning and
Object Oriented Simulation"
Capt Thomas Triscari, AFIT, and
Dr. William M Henghold, Universal Technology Institute
"Research Needs for AI in Manufacturing"
Man-Machine Interfaces
Session Moderator:
Dr. Tom Furness, AAMRL
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. William Rouse, Search Technology Inc.
"Human Interaction with Intelligent Systems"
Speakers:
D. Woods and E. Roth, Westinghouse R&D Center
"Joint Person-Machine Cognitive Systems: Issues in
Intelligent Decision Support"
Norm Geddes, Georgia Institute of Technology
"Intent Inferencing Using Scripts and Plans"
Dr. Russ Hunt, Search Technology Inc.
"Human Factors of Intelligent Computer-aided Display
Design"
Wednesday Afternoon, 2:00 PM - 4:30 PM
Maintenance
Session Moderator:
Cpt Rob Milne, Army AI Center, Pentagon
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. B. Chandrasekaran, Ohio State University
"Artificial Intelligence Applications to Diagnostics
and Maintenance"
Speakers:
Mr. R. Cantone, Automated Reasoning Corp., and
Dr. Don Allen, Northrup Corp.
"Technical Diagnosis by Automated Reasoning"
Dr. Joseph Hintz, Raytheon Co.
"Expert Systems in Higher Echelon Maintenance
Activities"
Dr. F. Pippitone and Dr. K DeJong, Naval Research Lab
"FIS: An Electronics Fault Isolation System Based on
Qualitative Causal Modeling"
New Architectures
Session Moderator:
Dr. Barry Deer, Systran
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. Victor Lesser, Univ. of Massachusetts at Amherst
"Overview of Important Issues in Distributed Problem
Solving"
Speakers:
Dr. Barry Deer, Hal Cambell, Jack Schira, and
Dick Feldman, Systran
"Architecture-Based Machine Intelligence"
Cpt Richard Routh and Dr. Matthew Kabrisky, AFIT
"Cortical Thought Theory: A New Computing Architecture
Based on the Human Brain"
Bruce Reed, Goodyear Aerospace
"The ASPRO Parallel Inference Engine (A Real Time
Production Rule System)"
Wednesday Evening Banquet, 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM
Dr. Mark Stefik, Xerox PARC
Thursday Morning, 9:00 AM - 11:30 AM
Decision Support Systems
Session Moderator:
Dr. Yan Yufik, NCR
Keynote Speaker:
Prof Donald Michie, The Turing Institute
"The Automated Development of Decision Support
Systems"
Speakers:
Cpt Rob Milne, Army AI Center, Pentagon
"An Equipment Distribution Expert System"
Dr. Thomas Sheridan, MIT, and Dr. Yufik, NCR
"Hybrid Knowledge Based System for Operation
Planning"
Dr. Jeffrey Schwartz, Grumman-CTEC
"Determining the Relevance of Cues: A New Type of
Decision Support"
Expert System Tools
Session Moderator:
Mr. David Dietz, System Research Laboratories Inc.
Keynote Speaker:
Dr. Earl Sacerdoti, Teknowledge Inc.
"Overview of Expert System Building Tools"
Speakers:
Dr. William Faught, IntelliCorp
"Aerospace Application and the Use of KEE"
Linda Brainard, System Research Laboratories Inc.
"Developing Portable Expert Systems"
Mark Maletz, Inference Corp., and C. Cuthbert, NASA
"Monitoring Real-Time Navigation Processes Using the
Automated Reasoning Tool (ART)"
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂12-Sep-85 1143 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #122
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Sep 85 11:43:00 PDT
Date: Thu 12 Sep 1985 09:31-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #122
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 12 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 122
Today's Topics:
Queries - Expert Systems for Advising & Autonomous Vehicle,
Bindings - KRYPTON Team,
AI Tools - Prolog and Lisp,
Obituary - Professor George Polya,
Literature - AI Report, SEP 1985
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 85 09:57:34 cdt
From: Don <kraft%lsu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: expert systems for advising
Can anyone provide me with information and/or a bibliography on expert
systems to advise undergraduate students vis-a-vis planning their
curricula?
Don Kraft
kraft%lsu@csnet-relay
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 10-Sep-85 17:45:01-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Autonomy
From a recent AIList (Vol 3 # 119) announcement of a meeting
(Army AI) a discussion was to take place on a
``Robotic Ranger: Recent Testbed Results/Path to Autonomy...''
Can we really look forward to an autononous system? And in such
a setting?
Gordon Joly (now gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa)
------------------------------
Date: Tue 10 Sep 85 23:55:41-PDT
From: FIKES@USC-ECL.ARPA
Subject: Your Inquiry About KRYPTON
John,
The KRYPTON project resulted in papers at AAAI-82, AAAI-83,
AAAI-84, and IJCAI-85, in addition to the one in IEEE Computer. The
KRYPTON "team" is currently dispersed as follows: Ron Brachman is at
AT&T Bell Laboratories, Hector Levesque is at the University of Toronto,
and Victoria Gilbert and I are at IntelliCorp.
richard fikes
------------------------------
Date: Tue 10 Sep 85 12:15:06-EDT
From: "Fanya S. Montalvo" <MONTALVO%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Prolog and Lisp
In-Reply-To: <HEWITT.12141071402.BABYL@MIT-XX>
From: Hewitt
However, it
is not possible to make a commercially viable Common Lisp
implementation on Prolog. This means that any good software written
for a stand alone Prolog system will soon appear on the Lisp Systems
but NOT vice versa. Therefore the stand alone Prolog systems will
always have impoverished software libraries by comparison with the
Common Lisp systems and will not be commercially viable in the long
run.
This type of argument strikes one as historical accident not as anything
fundamental. And by that accident I mean vagaries of the market place.
Could you say more about how it's fundamental, or do you agree that it's
historical accident?
------------------------------
Date: Sun 8 Sep 85 14:28:05-PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Professor George Polya
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Dr. George Polya, professor emeritus at Stanford and a leading research
mathematician, died Saturday at his home after a long illness. He was 97.
Memorial services are pending; the family prefers memorials be contributions
to the George Polya Memorial Book Fund, Stanford University Department of
Mathematics, Stanford 94305.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Sep 1985 09:13-EST
From: leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: AI Report, SEP 1985
Artificial Intelligence Report, September 1985, Volume 2, No. 9
REPORT ON IJCAI-85 (interesting facts not reported by me from
other sources)
over 6000 attendees, 250 papers, five dozen commercial display
booths, fourteen tutorials,
Xerox announced new 1185 and 1186 AI work stations at $9,9995 and
$15,865 are comptabile with the IBM-PC.
Symbolics anounced the development of a workstation which will
sell at approximately half the price of present machines.
Hewlett Packard demonstrated an integrated circuitry photolithography
advisor and natural language analyzer.
Intellicorp previewed KEE 3.0 which has an updated version of its
object oriented graphcis package (scheduled for shipment in January).
Intellicorp also announced KEEWorlds, a tool that compares and
merges complementary worlds of knowledge, a system for delivering
expert systems on a personal computer and a manufacturing
simulation package. They will be opening a European Office
in Munich.
Palladian Software announced a Financial Adivisor running on a Symbolics
3640 connected to a major mainframe. The economic strategies were
provided by Professor Steward Myers of the Sloan School of Management.
Among the first commercial will be the CIGNA Corporation.
Symbolics announced a record fourth quarter and fiscal 85 sales. It
has shipped its 1,250th machine. Their new units will use Symbolics
release 6.1 and will run Common Lisp.
TI demonstrated its PC-Scheme.
Inference Corporation announced the ARTIST graphics environment
and the ART STUDIO knowledge base browsing material. It signed
an agremement with the Insurance Company of North America to develop
expert systems for the financial industry.
Teknowledge released Version 2 of its M.1 expert system and has rewritten
S.1 in the C programming language.
Teknowledge has announced an agreement with Computer Thought company
to convert S.1 to ADA programming language.
Apollo Computer and Sun announced agreements with LUCID to sell and
support LUCID's implementation of COMMON Lisp.
Membership in AAAI is over 10,000. AAAI next conference to
be held in Philadelphia, August 11-15 1986 will have two tracks,
engineering and scientific.
REPORT ON FRENCH AI PROGRAM
which listed areas being studied and government agencies supporting
AI. Also includes a comment by Geoffroy d'Aumale, Editor of
La Lettre da l'Intelligence Artificiel that unless something is
done about French research in AI, the fifth generation will be out
of reach of French Industry
THE CONNECTION MACHINE
discusses the Connection Machine Project of Thinking Machine Company.
Thinking Machine Company also will be offering a program that indexes
natural language for online text browsing. It can generate indexes
at the rate of 200,000 characters per hour. It runs on Symbolic
Machine and will soon run on other systems running the C language.
THE TURING INSTITUTE
This is the commercially independent AI system in Glasgow, Scotland.
It has been founded by Donald Michie and has the charter to develop
intelligent computers without interference from 'systems analysts,
programmers and operators.' They are affiliated with the company
behind Expert-Ease, Radian Corporation.
AION CORPORATION:
This company is building expert systems on personal computer that
can access large mainframe databases.
EXPERT-EASE SYSTEMS
Expert-Ease Systems of Menlo Park has received a Department of
Energy contract to
1) develop an expert system to enhance reliability-based decision
making in power plants
2) apply knowledge engineering to power plant heat rate performance
monitoring
List of quotes overhead at the Gartner Group Forum on AI
book reviews of:
%A Shimon Y. Nof
%T Handbook of Industrial Robotics
%I John Wiley and Sons
%C Somerset, New Jersey
%X 1358 pages $76.95
%A International Society for Optical Engineering
%T Applications of Artificial Intelligence II
%E Mary S. Pickett
%E John W. Boyce
%T Solid Modelling by Computers From Theory to Applications
%I Plenum Press
%A Stephen J. Andriole
%T Applications in Artificial Intelligence
%I Petrocelli Books
%C Princeton, New Jersey
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Sep-85 1238 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #123
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Sep 85 12:37:14 PDT
Date: Mon 16 Sep 1985 10:07-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #123
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 16 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 123
Today's Topics:
Linguistics - TaleSpin Story Generator Reference,
Humor - Psychotherapy,
AI Tools - LISP to C & More Xerox Announcements at IJCAI &
New Lists for TI Explorer Discussion &
Connectionist Network Simulator &
Discussion of AI Languages,
Information Retrieval - Interactive Encyclopedia &
Technical Foreign Language Material
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 12 Sep 85 12:00:25-PDT
From: Matt Heffron <BEC.SHAPIN@USC-ECL.ARPA>
Subject: Re:TaleSpin
Re: Children's story generator <7-Sep-85 Steve.Hoffman@CMU-CS-K>
The program you're interested in is TALE-SPIN, by James Meehan.
He is currently at:
James R. Meehan
Cognitive Systems Inc.
234 Church St.
New Haven, CT 06510
MEEHAN@YALE
- Matt Heffron
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 9-Sep-85 16:26:12-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Analysis of ...
Re: Expert Systems In Psychiatry (Vol 3 # 116)
Psychotherapy is debugging for humans...
Gordon Joly.
[I'm not sure what the intent of this message is. I'll pass it along
under a "humor" label, but to avoid any "Polynomial" debacle would
like to point out that psychotherapy is not a joking matter. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu 12 Sep 85 12:03:19-PDT
From: Matt Heffron <BEC.SHAPIN@USC-ECL.ARPA>
Subject: Re: LISP to C
Re: Lisp to C <20-Aug-85 duke@mitre.ARPA>
I know of (no endorsement, no experience with) a system called SILL
which is built on top of PSL on the Apollo. It can "... output standard
PASCAL (or other conventional languages). This capability enables the
user to port SILL developed code to other environments."
Contact:
SILMA Incorporated
1800 Embarcadero
Palo Alto, CA 94303
(415)-493-0145
-- Matt Heffron
From: Matt Heffron : Beckman Instruments Inc.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Sep 85 15:12 PDT
From: Fischer.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: More Xerox announcements at IJCAI
The 1185 and 1186, though they can run IBM-PC software, do not use the
8086 to run Interlisp. The primary processor is microprogrammable,
constructed using bitslice chips. A second IO processor is, in fact, an
8086. IBM compatability is provided by a yet third processor, an 8086,
on a plug in board. Performance is about 15% greater overall than the
Dandelion; we're still benchmarking. These machines also have a new
larger 19" screen availible as an option, with more pixels at the same
density.
Also announced was a version of Quintus Prolog for D-machines, using
microcode support, which benchmarks at 51,000 LIPS.
Xerox Commonlisp was announced for 2nd quarter 1986. It is to be fully
integrated with the Interlisp environment.
(ron)
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Sep 85 15:16:25-PDT
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Lists for TI Explorer Discussion
In order to facilitate information exchange among DARPA sponsored
projects using TI Explorers, two ArpaNet mailing lists are being
created. INFO-EXPLORER will be used for general information
distribution, such as operational questions, or announcing new
generally available packages or tools. BUG-EXPLORER will be used to
report problems with Explorer software, as well as fixes. Requests to
be added to or deleted from these lists should be sent to
INFO-EXPLORER-REQUEST or BUG-EXPLORER-REQUEST, respectively. All
addresses are at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA. These lists signify no commitment
from Texas Instruments or Stanford University. Indeed, there is no
guarantee that TI representatives will read the lists. The idea of
the lists is to provide communication among the users of Explorers.
-- Rich Acuff
Stanford KSL
------------------------------
Date: 13 Sep 1985 1557-EDT (Friday)
From: Hon Wai Chun <hon%brandeis.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Connectionist Network Simulator
CONNECTIONIST NETWORK TEACHING / LEARNING TOOL
A connectionist network teaching / learning tool called AINET-1 is available
for distribution (educational and research purposes only) from the Computer
Science Department, Brandeis University.
AINET-1 is a graphic-oriented software package which can be used to
interactively create, manipulate, and experiment with connectionist
networks. Most commands are conveniently driven by a mouse. Nodes in
AINET-1 are shaded to reflect their activation levels. Once a network is
created, the user can run an animated simulation (network relaxation). In
the simulation, AINET-1 will change the various node shadings as the
activation levels change during each run cycle. After a simulation, the
user can plot the results or display tables of previous activation levels.
Networks can be stored into binary files and reloaded later for further
editing.
AINET-1 is intended to be used mainly as a learning tool to give the user a
flavor of how connectionist networks behave. A more sophisticated version,
called AINET-2 (under development), may be useful for development work.
AINET-1 is written in Symbolics Common Lisp and presently runs on Symbolics
Lisp machines (Release 6.0). The system is offered on a non-commercial,
non-disclosure, and as-is basis for a nominal fee.
The fee is $150 for universities, and $250.00 for laboratories. Interested
parties should send requests to (or call).
Hon Wai Chun hon@brandeis.csnet
Computer Science
Brandeis University
Ford 232A
Waltham, MA 02254
617-647-2650 or
617-647-2119 (main-office)
------------------------------
Date: 14 Sep 1985 07:21 EDT (Sat)
From: Wayne McGuire <Wayne%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp vs. Prolog vs. ?
Predicting what language will be most used for AI is problematic since
there seems to be little agreement about what AI is. Let's assume,
however, that over the next decade or two ''AI'' will refer primarily
to expert systems.
In that case, one might speculate that perhaps the bulk of AI code
will be written neither in Lisp nor Prolog (not even an enhanced
Prolog which can elegantly manipulate and coordinate in the same
conceptual space multiple worlds, logics, and beliefs), but a
higher-level language, perhaps using Lisp and/or Prolog as a base.
One of the major tasks in the coming years will be tranferring the
expert knowledge from many domains--economics, medicine, sociology,
political science, literature, law, etc.--into expert systems.
Experts in these fields have dedicated their lives to mastering their
respective fields, not to learning the art of writing compact and
elegant Lisp code. These experts are not computer scientists or even
computer programmers.
This situation implies three methods for transferring the knowledge of
domain experts into computer programs:
(1) Natural language understanding systems which can translate
raw text directly into working knowledgebases. We probably won't see
such systems on a large scale, which can operate with any degree of
reliablity, for at least another twenty-five years, and perhaps much
longer.
(2) The laborious interviewing of domain experts by expert system
experts (if you will), and the transcription of those interviews into
programs.
(3) The direct encoding of knowledge into expert systems by
domain experts themselves.
If the third method does indeed become the preferred method for
writing expert programs, then whatever higher-level language and user
interface best supports that activity (and I doubt it will be Lisp or
Prolog, which are relatively low-level) will probably become the
language which is most widely used for AI.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 85 08:22:25 edt
From: Ben Shneiderman <ben@MARYLAND>
Subject: The Interactive Encyclopedia System (TIES)
[Excerpted from IRList 1.8 by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The Interactive Encyclopedia System (TIES)
--- ----------- ------------ ------ ------
Ben Shneiderman, Department of Computer Science
Janis Morariu, College of Library and Information Services
University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
June 1985
The Interactive Encyclopedia System (TIES) has been under development at the
University of Maryland since Fall 1983. It allows novice users to explore
information resources in an easy and appealing manner. They merely touch (or
use arrow keys to move a light bar onto) topics that interest them and a brief
definition appears at the bottom of the screen. The users may continue read-
ing or ask for details about the selected topic. An article about a topic may
be one or more screens long. As users traverse articles, TIES keeps the path
and allows easy reversal, building confidence and a sense of control. Advanced
features include the ability to view an index of articles or print out arti-
cles of interest. [...]
The TIES authoring software guides the author in writing a title, brief defin-
ition (5-25 words), text (50-1000 words, typically), and synonyms for each
article title. The author marks references in the text by surround them with
a pair of tildes. TIES collects all references, prompts the user for synonym
relationships, maintains a list of articles, and allows editing, addition, and
deletion of articles. A simple word processor is embedded in the authoring
software, but users can create articles on their own word processor, if they
wish. There are no commands to memorize, every operation is done by selection
from options on the screen. [...]
In the study comparing the arrow keys (maybe better termed "jump" keys because
the cursor would jump to the closest target in the direction pressed) to the
mouse, the arrow keys proved to be and average of 15% faster and preferred by
almost 90% of the subjects. We conjecture that when there are a small number
of targets on the screen and when jump keys can be implemented, they provide a
rapid, predictable, and appealing mechanism for selection. [...]
We did find touchscreen was easier to teach people than arrow keys,
and that arrow keys were a solid winner against the mouse when there
are a small number of large targets on the screen.
-- Ben Shneiderman
[A mouse could be programmed for similar "jump selection", of course.
It would be interesting to know whether this would be more distracting
than helpful. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 13 Sep 1985 1209-PDT (Friday)
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Technical foreign language material
Lately, there have been significant technical advances from non-English
speaking countries: Japan and the Continent. How many know the Japanese
equivalent to the CACM? What is the German equivalent of the IEEE?
It is too easy to say that such organizations and publications are
not significant. We have been accused of parochialism.
Our problems in the computer industry are rather unique as colleagues in other
fields such as nuclear fusion report that most of their colleagues are,
for all practical purposes, forced to come to the U.S. This is not the case
with computing
Just as we have file servers and process servers, we have a
distributed system. Our greatest resource are not the machines, but
the people with special skills. To this end I propose the following:
Propose:
1) to identify individuals who are capable of providing simple
translation. It would help if the Universities could do this.
Perhaps, Universities could get assistance from foreign language
departments.
2) Identify various foreign language publications of technical interest.
Quickly identify articles of wide interest. This information could
be posted to general interest Usenet newsgroups such as net.research
and net.mag as well as the special interest groups such as the AI List,
net.lang, and so forth. We should not create news groups, but work
on top of existing groups.
3) Help fund subscription and translations. Perhaps, individuals
without technical translation expertise can get together to pay for
technical translations [commercial], and/or help fund the subscription
of those with technical translation expertise.
Dymond@nbs-vms.ARPA has started an info-japan and a nihongo discussion
group on the ARPAnet, but it would be difficult to get Usenet
participation. I specifically do not want to create new newsgroups.
This structure can be placed atop the existing news group structure.
The Usenet has several advantages for the circulation of this type
of material: 1) it has the links into Japan, Korea, Australia,
Germany, France, and the rest of Europe not on the ARPAnet. 2)
since there is no global authority, industrial companies can participate
more easily. 3) There are a diversity of news groups which make news
dissemination easier: net.mag for instance is used for posting
the TOCs of various publications, ideal for this type of dissemination.
Other significant groups include:
net.ai, net.cse, net.announce, net.physics, net.arch, net.math, net.mag,
net.research, net.bio, net.graphics, net.wanted, net.nlang
It appears our most critical needs are in the Eastern Asian languages
such as Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. Other useful work would include
French, German, and the other European languages. We have to look to
the Universities for much of our assistance, but private organizations
and government can also help. We can certainly make inquires.
The Usenet extends into Japan, France, and other non-English native
countries. We must take benefit of these contributors.
Similarly, we can contribute to these countries by tagging significant
English language documents.
I am willing to act as a clearing house for determining finding
individuals and groups, and specific journals. For this purpose,
I am giving my address an ARPA/uucp gateway. Send the mail inquiries
there. More in a couple of weeks.
From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!amelia!eugene
eugene@ames-nas
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Sep-85 1334 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #124
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Sep 85 13:33:31 PDT
Date: Wed 18 Sep 1985 09:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #124
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 18 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 124
Today's Topics:
Query - AI Conference Listings,
Correction - Expert Systems in Government,
Volunteers Needed - Expert Systems in Government,
Call for Papers - Knowledge-Based Expert Systems (IEEE Software),
Seminars - Cognitive Science Calendar (MIT) &
Learning Mathematical Abstractions (UCB) &
Programming in Equational Logic (CMU) &
Explanation of Quantitative Models (CMU) &
Automating CAD Design (GMR),
Conference - Workshop on Argument Structure (Brandeis)
Course - The Logic of Robot Design (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 09:47 EST
From: Atul Bajpai <bajpai%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: AI Conferences
Can somebody out there in the computer world provide me with a list
of major AI conferencs/symposiums/tutorials that are scheduled
through the end of 1986? Location and dates of these activities would
be useful. Thank you.
--Atul Bajpai-- CSNET: bajpai%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay
[A couple of good sources for such information are the ACM SIGART
newsletter and the monthly Communications of the ACM. IEEE Computer
carries both a calendar and calls for papers, and the AI Magazine
from AAAI has quite a few conference announcements. Yoni Malachi
(YM@SAIL) has been keeping an indexed list of conference announcements
in file confer.txt[2,2] at SAIL (Stanford AI Lab). Back issues of
AIList are a pretty good source as well. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Sep 85 23:38:29-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSLA.ARPA>
Subject: False advertising for "Expert Systems in Gov't"
Ailist V3 #115 includes a message dated August 28, from Marhshall Abrams
at Mitre, describing the program for a forthcoming conference on
"Expert Systems In Government".
My name appears as a panelist in a session entitled "Frontiers of KBES:
Pro & Con".
AIList readers should know that neither I nor anyone else from
Intelligent Software Inc. will be appearing in any capacity at this
festival of hype.
I have a written promise from Marshall Abrams to desist from this false
advertising. He has known for several weeks that this announcement is
false.
Misrepresentation, exaggeration, and falsehood are important elements
of contemporary AI. We would only ask that these be confined to the
technical presentations, and not spill over into administrative and
procedural announcements.
Thanks.
Gary R. Martins
------------------------------
Date: 18 Sep 85 11:12:05 EDT (Wed)
From: Marshall D. Abrams <abrams@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: Gary Martins will not be at ESIG
Due to a clerical error, the preliminary program for Expert Systems
in Government indicates that Gary Martins will participate on a panel
discussion.
I apologize for any inconvenience this error may have caused.
Sincerely,
- Marshall D. Abrams, phone: (703) 883-6938
The MITRE Corporation, 1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
Mail Stop W458, Mc Lean, VA 22102
------------------------------
Date: 12 Sep 85 08:53:08 EDT (Thu)
From: Kamal N. Karna <m16045@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: Second EXPERT SYSTEMS IN GOVERNMENT CONFERENCE 1986
The second Expert Systems in Government Conference, sponsored by
the IEEE/CS and the MITRE Corporation, will be held in October
1986 in Washington D.C. metropolitan area.
Volunteers at all levels are solicited to participate in the
next year's program.
ESIG 1986 is anticipated to be much larger and broader in
scope. The ESIG 1986 conference shall include one day of
tutorials followed by the sessions on unclassified and classified
topics. There will be two technical co-program chairmen
to organize the technical programs.
People interested in participating in ESIG 1986 please
contact
Dr. Kamal N. Karna
Conference Chairman
Second Expert Systems in Government Conference 1986
The MITRE Corporation
1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
McLean, Virginia 22102.
(Tel.) (703) 883-5866 (O)
(301) 921-0392 (H)
KARNA@MITRE----ARPANET
------------------------------
18-Sep-85 09:35:14-PDT,1332;000000000001
Date: Tuesday, 17 September 1985 14:52:06 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cive.ri.cmu.edu
Subject: Call for submissions to IEEE Software
CALL FOR PAPERS
In addition to the regular features, the March 1986 IEEE Software
special issue on Knowledge-based Expert Systems (KBES) for Engineering
Applications will have a section on research being conducted on the
applications of KBES for engineering. Authors should submit a 3 page
(doubly spaced) paper, focusing on the following issues:
- goal of the project;
- architecture of the system;
- current status; and
- future plans.
All submissions should be sent before October 15th, 1985 to:
D. Sriram/M. Rychener
Civil Engg. and Construction Labs.
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
ARPAnet address: sriram@cive.ri.cmu.edu or sriram@cmu-ri-cive.arpa
(Net mail is preferable)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1985 11:42 EDT
From: Peter de Jong <DEJONG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Cognitive Science Calendar
Reply-to: Cog-Sci-Request%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
The Cognitive Science Calendar is a weekly listing of Cognitive
Science talks with their abstracts which are given at MIT and the
surrounding area. The listing includes the areas of Artificial Intelligence,
Cognitive Psychology, Philosophy, and Linguistics.
If you would like to join the listing or have talks listed please
reply to COG-SCI-REQUEST%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 85 09:03:50 PDT
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Learning Mathematical Abstractions (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, September 17, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Alan H. Schoenfeld, Education & Mathematics, UCB
TITLE: ``Obstacles To Making Sense of Mathematical
Notions, or, The Transfer Problem Rears its
Ugly Head Once Again''
It can be argued that the fundamental difficulty in mathemat-
ics learning is the transfer problem. That is, the power of
mathematics lies in the potential applicability of mathemati-
cal ideas to new situations. It doesn't matter whether the
idea is, for example, function, group, number, or triangle.
Once any particular mathematical entity is recognized as
belonging to an identified class of objects, everything known
about that class of objects applies to that entity. In such
abstaction resides much of the power and utility of mathemat-
ics. This paper explores some theoretical and some pragmatic
obstacles to students' abstraction of mathematical notions.
We look at two domains, whole number arithmetic and plane
geometry. Some parallels between the two domains are drawn,
to indicate that the processes of abstraction are similar in
both. In the case of number, we examine a theoretical para-
dox: the use of good ``hands on'' manipulatives to help stu-
dents make sense of base 10 addition and subtraction may make
it harder to understand the nature of ``number.'' In the case
of geometry, we discuss an empirical obstacle. When things
are compartmentalized in the curriculum, connections that we
would hope are ``natural'' turn out to be very hard to make.
------------------------------
Date: 17 September 1985 1308-EDT
From: Theona Stefanis@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Seminar - Programming in Equational Logic (CMU)
Name: Michael J. O'Donnell - The University of Chicago
Date: Monday, 23 September
Time: 3:00
Place: WeH 5409
Title: Equational Logic as a Programming Language
In logic programming languages programs are logical assertions with no
explicit procedural information, and execution consists of the efficient
derivation of certain logical consequences of a program.
Prolog, and relational database query languages are both logic
programming languages based on the predicate calculus. The advantages
of logic programming are clarity of programs, simplicity of semantics,
and the potential for parallel execution without timing dependence.
In this talk, I describe a programming language based on the logic of
equations. A prototype implementation exists, and has been used in a
number of experiments. The talk will focus on examples illustrating the
advantages of equational programming, and the differences between
equational programming and Prolog programming.
Mike O'Donnell
------------------------------
Date: 17 Sep 85 16:16:10 EDT
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Seminar - Explanation of Quantitative Models (CMU)
Intelligent Systems Lab Seminar
Topic: Presentation of Ergo Project
Speaker: Dr. Donald Kosy
Place: DH3313
Date: Friday, September 20
Time: 11:00am - 12:00noon
The Ergo project is an investigation into computer methods for explaining
results produced by quantitative planning models. It is an outgrowth of
previous research in which we developed a procedure that explains differences
in results by comparing their derivations. For example, given a suitable
quantitative model and a series of results from it such as:
1982 1983 1984
Profit $683.00 $676.40 $951.60
this procedure can answer "why" questions about the results such as:
Why did profit go down in 1983?
Profit went down in 83 primarily because overhead cost went up and
profit = gross margin - overhead cost. Although gross margin went up
by 19%, overhead cost went up by 41% and the latter outweighed the
former. Would you like me to continue?
The explanation can be continued all the way down to the lowest level of the
model, i.e. down to its input variables.
The intent of the current work is to extend the explanatory power of this
procedure and to evaluate its potential for practical use. In particular
we are interested in extensions to cover:
*Models that involve simultaneous equations
*Models that involve conditional expressions
*Explanations of differential magnitude, e.g. Why did overhead cost
go up so much?
*Inferring the referents of comparison, e.g. Why is production cost
high in 83?
*Explaining lack of change, e.g. Why did material cost remain
constant?
*Explaining differences between "what-if" cases and a base case, e.g.
Why is profit in case 1 higher than for the base case?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 85 14:24 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar - Automating CAD Design (GMR)
Presentation is to be held at General Motors Research Laboratories in
Warren, Michigan.
Function, Form and Fabrication:
Considerations in Automating Design
James R. Rinderle
Assistant Professor
Carnegie-Mellon University
Monday, September 16, 1985
Any design modification requires knowledge of whether changed features
affect the functionality of a product, impact the producibility or are
simply arbitrary specifications. Good designers simultaneously consider
the form of the product, the functional requirements and the means for
fabrication. Even the most modest attempts at automating design are doomed
to fail unless these considerations are included at some level.
A CAD database should consist of multiple representations of a product in
terms of function, form and fabrication analogous to the traditional
specification list, drawings and process plan. The relationships among
these representations is the basis for design. Design modification may be
facilitated by developing a syntax for describing function, form, and
fabrication and by developing strategies for manipulating the descriptions.
Dr. James R. Rinderle is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering
at Carnegie-Mellon University. He was awarded the Ph.D. degree by the
Mechanical Engineering Department of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in 1982. He also received the Master of Science and Bachelor of
Science degrees from MIT. He is a member of Sigma Xi, Pi Tau Sigma, the
ASME, Robotics International and CASA of SME. He was named a Presidential
Young Investigator in 1985.
-Steve Holland
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1985 03:00 EDT
From: INGRIA%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Workshop on Argument Structure - Brandeis
The
Linguistics
and Cognitive Science Programs
Brandeis University
Present
A Workshop on
Argument
Structure
Friday, September 20th
9AM to 5PM
Sachar International Center
Presentations will be one (1) hour long with time for questions.
Speakers:
9:30 Ken Hale
``A View from the Middle''
11:00 Ray Jackendoff
``The Role of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory''
1:30 Edwin Williams
``Argument Structure and Heads''
2:45 Armin Mester and Jane Grimshaw
``Light Verbs in Japanese'
4:00 Howard Lasnik
``Subjects of NPs?''
5:00 - 7:00
Reception - Sachar International Center
For more information, call (617)-647-2986.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Sep 85 08:22:53-PDT
From: Leslie Kaelbling <KAELBLING@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: New course: The Logic of Robot Design (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THE LOGIC OF ROBOT DESIGN
This course will explore theoretical issues in the design of software
for intelligent agents. Its aim is to provide conceptual tools for
coping with complexity in robot design, covering processes from the
sensorimotor level through reasoning, planning, and linguistic
communication, emphasizing the role of formal methods in analysis and
synthesis of robot software.
The following topics will be covered:
- applications of epistemic and temporal logic to robotics
- automata-theoretic models of knowledge
- inference and planning
- logic-based tools for programming intelligent robots.
Some familiarity with basic logic and computer programming will be
assumed. Coursework will consist of problem sets and one programming
assignment.
Instructor : Stan Rosenschein (stan@sri-ai; 859-4167)
Time : TTh 11-12:15
Place : 460-252
Course number : CS428
Units : 3
TA : Leslie Kaelbling (kaelbling@sri-ai, pack@su-sushi,
k.kaelbling@su-lots-b; 859-2578)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Sep-85 1251 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #125
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Sep 85 12:50:50 PDT
Date: Fri 20 Sep 1985 10:16-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #125
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 20 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 125
Today's Topics:
Queries - FRL Sources & Parallel Rule Execution &
Information Retrieval & Lisp/Prolog for IBM4361,
AI Tools - Xerox 1185 & Prolog vs. Lisp,
Expert Systems - Intellectual Honesty and the SDI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 85 10:01:08 cdt
From: neves@wisc-ai.arpa (David Neves)
Subject: FRL sources
I remember a message a year ago about someone having the sources to FRL.
Unfortunately I don't remember who that person was. Could anyone who
has the sources send me mail? -Thanks, David Neves
Usenet: {allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,uwm-evax}!uwvax!neves
Arpanet: neves@uwvax
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 85 09:04:36 pdt
From: Thomas L. Zimmerman <zimmer%marlin@nosc.ARPA>
Subject: Parallel Rule Execution
The Naval Ocean Systems Center (NOSC) and Goodyear Aerospace are working
on a series of experiments to demonstrate the feasibiliy of running expert
systems on the Goodyear ASPRO parallel processor. A unique representation
for rules and data has been developed which on paper allows the ASPRO to
test 2,000,000 rules per second for satisfaction. This representation
scheme does put some limitations on the system involved - it appears to
require a very pure production system with no embedded control or functions in
the rules. So far a small (500 rule) system was written with this application
in mind and run on both a Symbolics and the ASPRO sucessfully. We would now
like to convert an existing sequential expert system for parallel execution
in order to determine the degree of speedup actually available and to discover
the limitations of converting a system not originally designed for this
application. Unfortunatly I am having trouble finding a system to convert for
this demonstration - which is why I am appealing to all of you. We need a
reasonably sized (200-700 rule) system, preferably military in character, that
meets the above limitations that we can attempt to run on our parallel inference
engine. This would be a no-cost way for someone to have their system speeded up
by an estimated three orders of magnitude. Any takers? If you're interested
please contact me:
Lee Zimmerman
Naval Ocean Systems Center
Code 421
San Diego CA 92152
(619) 225-6571 or zimmer@nosc
------------------------------
Date: 18 Sep 85 15:30:36 EDT
From: MARS@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: NLP for knowledge acquisition
Hi: I am interested in info about projects which use Natural Language
Processing Techniques to analyse scientific articles or abstracts
with the aim of deriving knowledge bases from them.
I am aware of a few projects in that field (UCLA, IBM
Heidelberg, Leiden University, Chemical Abstracts), but I
would appreciate any further pointers. Please
reply directly to me, and I will summarize to the net. Thanks.
Nicolaas J.I. Mars
[I have forwarded this message and the next to the information
retrieval list, IRList%VPI.CSNet@CSNet-Relay.ARPA. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 09:08 EST
From: Ramesh Astik <rampan%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: query - Information Retrieval
I was looking for some references in synthetic organic chemistry
on a Chemical Abstract Database system.The first hit was 10,000
followed by narrowing down to 400 ! The same search by an expert
bibliographer or search assistant gave me exactly 23 article list.
This is the difference in eye-balling and machine-search.
We had a lot of debate on the mental process of the human expert
doing the job and whether that can be mimicked on a computer or not.
Does any one know of any expert-system which can save us so
much paper work in searching and retrieving the information?
Our University has access to approximately 300 databases and
after the Automated search list is obtained,most of us do
equally long eye-balling!!
Kindly send any information to RAMPAN@NORTHEASTERN.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 85 14:23:22 EDT
From: "Martin R. Lyons" <991@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET>
Subject: Info on Lisp/Prolog for IBM4361
Greetings all. Does anyone have any leads where I might obtain
a LISP or Prolog implementation that would run on an IBM 4361? I am
looking for public domain or reasonably priced packages; and wouldn't
you know it, time is of the essence. If anyone has any leads please
contact me at the address below.
I will summarize and post here if there is sufficient interest.
As always, thanks in advance!
MAILNET: Marty@NJIT-EIES.Mailnet
ARPA: Marty%NJIT-EIES.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
or @MIT-MULTICS.ARPA:Marty@NJIT-EIES.Mailnet
USPS: Marty Lyons, CCCC/EIES @ New Jersey Institute of Technology,
323 High St., Newark, NJ 07102 USA (201) 596-2932
"You're in the fast lane....so go fast."
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 85 15:28 PDT
From: Fischer.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Correction: Xerox 1185 uses 80186 not 8086
Being as close as I am to the subject I'm embarassed to say (but
overjoyed to know) that I was wrong and that the 1185 and 1186
workstations use the Intel 80186 processor chip both in the IO processor
and on the IBM PC emulator boards. Their (micro programmable) main
processor is built with bitslice devices.
But note that I never claimed to be a faultless spokes-thing for Xerox
or Xerox AI Systems, just another random attendee of IJCAI.
Sorry folks,
(ron)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1985 06:28 EDT
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Prolog and Lisp
I would like to respond to the message in AILIST from Fanya Montalvo
who wrote:
From: Hewitt
However, it
is not possible to make a commercially viable Common Lisp
implementation on Prolog. This means that any good software written
for a stand alone Prolog system will soon appear on the Lisp Systems
but NOT vice versa. Therefore the stand alone Prolog systems will
always have impoverished software libraries by comparison with the
Common Lisp systems and will not be commercially viable in the long
run.
From: Montalvo
This type of argument strikes one as historical accident not as anything
fundamental. And by that accident I mean vagaries of the market place.
Could you say more about how it's fundamental, or do you agree that it's
historical accident?
This is a very good question! However, in this case I believe that
the commercial marketplace is reflecting some very real deficiencies
in Prolog and its underlying conceptual basis of LOGIC as a
PROGRAMMING language. As far as I can tell no one in the Prolog
community believes that they will EVER be able to construct a
commercially viable Common Lisp on Prolog. That indicates that there
are some critical limitations of Prolog that are not just historical
accidents. I believe that the deficiencies of Prolog cannot be
repaired within the framework of LOGIC as a PROGRAMMING language.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 18:05 EDT
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Lisp vs. Prolog vs. ?
I agree with Wayne McGuire who wrote as follows to this list:
... one might speculate that perhaps the bulk of AI code
will be written neither in Lisp nor Prolog (not even an enhanced
Prolog which can elegantly manipulate and coordinate in the same
conceptual space multiple worlds, logics, and beliefs), but a
higher-level language, perhaps using Lisp and/or Prolog as a base.
However, I would like to point out that Prolog is not a suitable base
to implement the kind of higher-level languages that Wayne envisions
since it does not provide the appropriate primitives. Implementing
higher-level Artificial Intelligence languages requires efficient data
structure and control primitives that are not part of Prolog. I agree
that Common Lisp is too low level to use very much to directly
implement applications. However, Lisp has historically been an
excellent implementation language for implementing higher-level
Artificial Intelligence languages. Indeed some of the best Prolog
systems and other logic systems such as FOL (Wheyhrauch et. al.), MRS
(Genesereth et. al), the Pure Lisp Theorem Prover (Boyer and Moore),
and LogLisp (Robinson et. al.) are implemented on Lisp.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Sep 85 15:48 EDT
From: WAnderson.wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Intellectual honesty and the SDI
At the recent IJCAI at UCLA I picked up a couple of papers at the GE
exhibit booth. One of these, entitled "A Tutorial on Expert Systems
for Battlefield Applications," (delivered at a meeting of the Armed
Forces Communications and Electronics Association last May) states that
"AI systems that incorporate human expertise may be the only way" to
fill the gap between availability of people and complexity of military
hardware. In defense of this strategy the author states:
- In contrast with humans, AI systems are good at handling the myriad
details of complex situations, such as often occur in military settings.
- In contrast with other computational approaches that are more formal
and algorithmic, AI systems are more robust: they are designed to deal
with problems exhibiting uncertainty, ambiguity, and inaccuracy.
I find it appalling (and frightening) that statements like this can be
presented in a technical paper to military personnel. The author
(according to the references) has contributed widely to the AI field at
many conferences. It's simply ludicrous to state that current AI systems
are better in battlefield situations than humans. What was the last AI
system that could drive a tank, carry on a conversation, and fix a
broken radio whilst under enemy fire? The second comment is equally
misleading. To contrast "formal and algorithmic" with "robust" seems
to imply that algorithms and formal procedures are inherently not
robust. On what is this claim based? (There is no reference attached
to either statement.) It sounds like a recipe for unreliable software
to me.
How can someone write this stuff? I know, to make money. But if this
is the kind of information that is presented to the military, and upon
which they make decisions, then how can we expect any kind of fair
assessment of the possible projects in the Strategic Computing (and
Defense) Initiatives? How can this kind of misinformation be rebutted?
Bill Anderson
P.S. The full reference is available on request.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Sep-85 2347 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #126
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Sep 85 23:45:18 PDT
Date: Sat 21 Sep 1985 21:56-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #126
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 22 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 126
Today's Topics:
Expert Systems - Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 21 Sep 85 17:40:46-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSLA.ARPA>
Subject: Are We Ready For This ?
In reading and replying to Bill Anderson's msg in a recent edition of
AIList, it occurred to me that there may be broader interest out there
in a discussion of the question of objectivity and truthfulness in the
fields of "AI", "expert systems", "knowledge engineering", etc.
I have repeatedly observed the following at conferences, symposia,
briefings, etc., and in "AI" journals and magazines:
- non-existent systems are described and debated as if
they were real
- unsuccessful developments are described as operationally
validated
- expensive and ineffective methods and "tools" are said to
solve difficult problems in computing
This happens too often to be accidental or aberrational. Those
responsible include highly placed figures from some of our most
prestigious institutions.
It would greatly interest me to understand:
- why this happens ?
- is this good or bad for "AI" ?
- does this happen in all high-tech fields, or is "AI"
unique ?
- what can or should be done about it ? by whom ?
Would AIList readers and contributors like to address these issues,
or is this set of topics too "sensitive" for the community to address
at this time ?
Many thanks!
Gary R. Martins
------------------------------
Date: Fri 20 Sep 85 20:33:22-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSLA.ARPA>
Subject: Phony claims in AI
Bill -
I read your recent AIList comment with a mixture of amusement and
amazement. Will you pardon my asking: where have you been ? So far
as I have been able to probe, the entire edifice of "AI" -- and most
especially "expert systems" -- is built on a foundation of the most
outrageous baloney. At an endless procession of conferences,
symposia, press briefings, etc., the most outrageous claims are
relentlessly presented for the performance of a number of "AI"
systems. I have personally been associated with several of these
developments, and I can testify that not a single one of them can
honestly be said to "work" in any authentic sense of that word.
There are apparently a few utterly trivial systems that "work", after a
fashion. But the astronomical development costs of these toys should
make any rational user shrink from following a similar path.
Yet, despite these plain and rather obvious facts, military and industrial
audiences are daily told about the "successes" of "AI" and "expert
systems". The sorts of claims you refer to are entirely ordinary and
routine in this context.
One has to wonder, is this what modern science and technology is all
about ? Or is "AI" just a special case of extreme dishonesty ?
Gary R. Martins
PS -- Yes, send me the references, just for the record!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 85 23:50:57 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: AI and Satellite Control
As one of the military (Capt USAF) standing guard against
over-enthusiastic claims by DoD contractors, I would like to assure
readers of this net that the USAF is not as gullable as Bill Anderson
fears in his recent message.
My job for the past year is to develop an architecture which
is compatible with SDI which incorporates Expert Systems as appropriate.
Essentially Beau Shields conveyed the essence of our thinking in his
recent article published in Computer Design. Expert Systems assist
experts with tasked well understood by experts, providing more time
for experts to handle the tough problems.
To my knowledge, no person is seriously considering cutting
people out of the loop any more than you can completely replace
the engine in your car with a turbo charger. We (the Air Force
Satellite Control Facility, Plans & Programs Division) plan to issue
the next version of our masterplan in late December, which will
describe our thinking in detail. If you can come up with a good
reason why I should send you a copy, send a request to:
AFSCF/XRP
Attn: Capt Richard Jennings
PO Box 3430
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3430
on letterhead requesting a copy of REVISION G, and stating your reason.
The document is not classified, but for obvious reasons, distribution
is limited, and I may have to argue for your copy on a case by case
basis.
People have to do a lot more than write fiction about their
expert systems to get our serious interest. Rome Air Development
Center, and the AFSCF both now have Symbolics 3670's to evaluate
these systems: RADC in the context of the current state of the art,
and the AFSCF in the context of satellite control. The AFSCF is
also in the process of putting IBM-PC AT's into operations areas to
evaluate the PC-AT as a delivery vehicle in the context of distributed
shells such as KEE.
One large defense contractor also know for dominating the
PC marketplace, as in *** PC, has tried for 4 years to solve one
of our operational problems *using their own funds* without acceptance.
Back to GE, they are visiting us next week, and will get a chance
to show their system to the people who fly satellites for a living if
they sufficiently impress the Plans and Programs people.
Regards, Rich.
PS. Standard Disclaimer: I definitely hold opinions, but I am not always
successful at conveying them to my employer -- so they should be considered
my own personal opinions.
PSS. Perhaps I have been going after a gnat with a terminal air defense
system, but the concerns raised by Bill Anderson seemed to be a good
leadin to a request for information (by me) about what we should be
doing.
ARPA: jennings@aerospace
AV: 799-6427
ATT: 408 744-6427
sNAIL: AFSCF/XRP(Jennings), PO Box 3430, Sunnyvale CA, 94088-3430.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1985 03:57 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #125
I am amused at Bill Anderson's flame, in view of his righteous indignation
about an AI author's boasts about the merits of AI programming.
It's simply ludicrous to state that current AI systems are better
in battlefield situations than humans.
From what we could see of the paper in question, there was no
suggestion about being better than humans. The suggestion was that AI
systems are better than conventional software.
What was the last AI system that could drive a tank, carry on a
conversation, and fix a broken radio whilst under enemy fire?
To my knowledge, ONLY AI systems, so far, can drive cars, carry on
conversations, and debug electronic systems. They don't do these jobs
very well yet, but they're coming along -- and have no competition in
those areas from any other kind of software. So one could certainly
say that Anderson's representation is "appalling".
The second comment is equally misleading. To contrast "formal and
algorithmic" with "robust" seems to imply that algorithms and
formal procedures are inherently not robust. On what is this claim
based? It sounds like a recipe for unreliable software to me.
I think it is a fair claim. This is because it appears infeasible to
prove the correctness of non-trivially complex programs, especially
because of the profound weakness of all known formal specification
languages, without which formal systems are entirely impotent. In
such circumstances, AI methods which employ many kinds of redundancy
and plausibility tests, e.g., comparing plans to models, are the best
methods available. They have a long way to go, but I suspect that,
for sufficiently complicated jobs, even the crude "expert systems" of
today are already ahead of all other practical forms of commercial or
theoretical programming methods.
How can someone write this stuff? I know, to make money. But if
this is the kind of information that is presented to the
military, and upon which they make decisions, then how can we
expect any kind of fair assessment of the possible projects in
the Strategic Computing (and Defense) Initiatives? How can this
kind of misinformation be rebutted?
This is a complicated subject and it won't clarify it by making that
kind of accusation.
I have not heard enough good ideas to be convinced, incidentally, that
SDI is a feasible replacement for MAD. But, I certainly am dismayed
by the strange arguments I've heard from the CS community about why
the hard problem with it is "software". It seems to me that the hard
problem is centered around the proposed defensive weapons, and if
they're any good (which I doubt) then aiming and controlling them
should not be unusally difficult. The arguments I've seen to the
contrary all seem to be political flames.
So is this, I suppose, hence I don't plan to defend what I've said
here in more messages.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 85 10:35 EST
From: Carole D Hafner <hafner%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Honesty and the SDI: Reply to Bill Anderson
I was pleased to see Bill Anderson's comments on AILIST, and I admire his
courage for publicly criticizing the "Expert Battlefield Management System"
research. He is not alone - there are many people in the AI field and
Computer Science in general who view these projects - with their definite
schedules for implementation of the various components - with alarm.
However, to say or imply that unscrupulous people are making these promises
just to "make money" is an oversimplification.
From the beginning of Computer Science as a separate subject in the early
1960's (or perhaps a bit earlier), much if not most of the research funding
has come from the DOD. This is especially true for AI. This is not the
case in most other Western countries, where there are specific agencies
for funding scientific research, and the military services are more focused
on military projects.
Over the years, the DOD-supported research groups provided a wonderful
environment to pursue AI research - the most money, the best equipment, access
to ARPANET, etc. And the DOD allowed the researchers a great deal of freedom
in pursuing their interests. As a result, many of the best researchers ended
up working in these groups.
I have always felt that this is, structurally, a very dangerous situation both
for Computer Science and for the country. For a very simple reason: if the
livelihood of a majority of AI researchers is dependent on the DOD, how can we
have a free and open debate on the use of computers in the military? Now it
looks as if some of my fears are coming true. I know some of the researchers
involved in SDI have severe misgivings about it - but if you have a 20-30
person group who all depend on the DOD for their jobs, it's a tough situation.
I personally would like to see groups such as "Computer Professionals for
Social Responsibility" attack the structural problem rather than
"Star Wars" per se.
It is likely that the promises being made for the battlefield management
systems will not be fulfilled - since researchers in industrial labs are still
struggling with the problem of recognizing stationary objects in a "bin of
parts", and most industrial vision systems have to use special lighting
to recognize separate parts moving on a conveyer belt. Furthermore, speech
understanding systems require ideal conditions and even then only work with
very limited vocabularies. So it's interesting to wonder how the description
of the complex events taking place during the battle will be communicated to
the computer.
Perhaps the field of AI is fortunate that the SDI is happening now instead of
20 years from now. We have a chance to get our research funded on a different
basis, so that this unfortunate situation won't happen again.
Carole Hafner
College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
csnet: hafner@northeastern
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Sep-85 0032 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #127
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Sep 85 00:32:49 PDT
Date: Sun 22 Sep 1985 22:46-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #127
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 23 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 127
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Spencer-Brown Seminar in San Francisco &
Knowledge Representation (SRI) &
Knowledge-Directed Database Management (IBM-SJ) &
Learning Spatial Concepts (CSLI) &
2nd-Order Lambda Calculus (UPenn) &
Computer Tutor for Programming Recursion (UCB),
Course - AI Theories of Belief and Action (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 13:15:23 pdt
From: william@aids-unix.ARPA (william bricken)
Subject: Spencer-Brown seminar in San Francisco
G. Spencer-Brown, the author of LAWS OF FORM, will be presenting
a five-day seminar at the Miyako Hotel in San Francisco, from
October 7 through 11, 1985.
Morning sessions will address the technical methodology of Laws
of Form. Afternoon sessions will address "open intelligence",
Spencer Brown's ideas on life and living.
Registration costs: $650 for both sessions,
$300 for afternoons only.
Information: UNI-OPS
260 Marshall Drive
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2833
phone Walter Zintz, (415) 945-0048
PERSONAL COMMENTS: Spencer-Brown's work on the 4-color map theorem was
discussed in this list early last year. The man is an iconoclast, and
has managed to alienate a significant portion of most audiences. The
afternoon session may be anything from EST training (which Spencer-Brown
is said to have originated) to metaphysical ecstacy. The application of
Brownian mathematics to representation theory and automated theorem
proving in AI is profound. Followers of his work range from mystics
to mathematicians; he is both. I have heard that he is not talking
to mathematicians.
william
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Sep 85 15:19:44-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge Representation (SRI)
THE SKY IS A BLUE COLOR
Marcel Schoppers
SRI International AI Center
11:00 AM, MONDAY, September 23
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
I present a representation which will allow us to encode and
access much of the information contained in simple descriptive
statements. "The sky is a blue color" entails that blue is a
color, that the sky has a color, that the sky is blue, that the
sky is visible, and that the sky is located both spatially and
temporally. These generalizations are so trivial that they border
on presuppositions, and they have consequently been taken for
granted in semantic nets and frames. Making such information
explicit greatly increases the density and usefulness of stored
knowledge. One interesting application is to disambiguate an
adjective/predicate to suit a given noun/extension.
My representation is parsimonious, having O(three) primitive con-
structs (link types); is highly irredundant, since blue(sky) and
color(blue) reference the same blue; and is static, being inten-
ded to formalize and implement "massively parallel" deterministic
connectionist question-answering systems. Predicates, relations,
and simple forms of quantification all emerge as by-products of
function applicability and set inclusion. Viewed as a logic the
representation is potentially O(w), intensional and inconsistent.
The talk will touch on issues in philosophy of logic and linguistics.
I will especially appreciate constructive criticism in those areas,
as I am a novice there.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 15:34:00 PDT
From: IBM-SJ Calendar <CALENDAR%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge-Directed Database Management (IBM-SJ)
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
CALENDAR
SEPTEMBER 23 - 27, 1985
Thurs., Sept. 26 Computer Science Seminar
10:00 A.M. PROBE: A RESEARCH PROJECT
Aud. B IN KNOWLEDGE-DIRECTED DATABASE MANAGEMENT
Conventional record-based DBMSs will be
inadequate for many of the knowledge-intensive
information processing applications (e.g.,
business and industrial automation, CAD/CAM, and
military command and control) of the future.
These applications require integrated access to
a variety of information types (e.g., images,
maps, signals, text) not currently supported by
DBMSs. Also, they rely on specialized knowledge
or expertise for processing the new information
types; for many of these types, specialized
storage devices and processors (e.g.,
workstations, image enhancers, solid modellers),
are or will be available. Currently, DBMSs have
no general facilities for efficiently
assimilating and utilizing this special
knowledge or for incorporating these specialized
processors into their own processing. The
objective of the PROBE project is to develop an
advanced DBMS effective for these
knowledge-intensive applications. Our approach
is to enhance existing DBMSs with (a)
user-defined object classes as the basis for
defining new information types and operations
and for integrating specialized processors, (b)
dimensional (space and time) concepts, which are
a common characteristic of many of the new
information types, and (c) recursive predicates
and queries, which provide intensional knowledge
processing capabilities essential for many of
the applications. In each case, it is necessary
to augment both the logical (data model, query
language) components and the physical (storage
structures, access methods, query processor)
components of the DBMS. In this talk, we
describe approaches to addressing all these
issues.
Dr. U. Dayal, Computer Corporation of America
Host: C. Mohan
------------------------------
Date: Thu 19 Sep 85 08:14:26-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Learning Spatial Concepts (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
``Crossing the Rubicon: From a Physics of Dead Coordinate Spaces
to a Physics of Living Coordinate Spaces''
Dr. Peter Kugler, The Crump Institute for Medical Engineering, UCLA
Monday, September 23, 1985, 2:15pm, Ventura Hall
This talk will be about self-organizing systems that involve
low-energy (nonforce) coupling and the nature of the predicates that
constitute the low-energy descriptors, and will be organized around
issues pertaining to general problems of language and information.
The emphasis will be on systems that generate (self-assemble) new
levels of description. These new levels constitute new languages
parasitic on the lower level languages but not reducible to their
predicates. In the self-organizing systems of interest it is the
``coordinate spaces,'' which are themselves evolving, that become the
important objects of study. Instead of assuming a fixed coordinate
space, when the interest focuses on trajectories, attention is devoted
to the coordinate space itself, since this is what provides the semantics.
This approach is very similar to developments in computer
architecture that focus on parallel processing. In these machines
(connection machines, Boltzmann, etc.) the machine language
self-organizes (e.g. programs itself through the emergence of new
stable configurations), and the new predicate descriptions play the
role of symbols in terms of their opacity with respect to the lower
level language. The machine language `gives birth' to the symbolic
level of description. This situation contrasts dramatically with that
of von Neumann machines, for which the symbolic language is
ontologically independent of the machine language. A symbolic
language can run on any of an infinite variety of mechanistic
substrates, the primacy of the symbol prevailing over the substrate
machine. The approach advocated here, puts the focus on the machine
level of interaction, thus preserving an ontological continuity and
avoiding mind/body, syntactic/semantic, etc. problems.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 85 11:06 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - 2nd-Order Lambda Calculus (UPenn)
THE 2ND ORDER LAMBDA CALCULUS - Dale Miller, Penn CIS
Joint Mathematics / Computer Science Logic Colloquium
4:40 Monday 23 September 1985, DRL 4E17, University Of Pennsylvania
In this talk we will present the description of an extended type lambda
calculus where types can be used as values. We will illustrate how this
language can be used to perform computation in novel fashions and what
semantics might work with it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 11:12:07 PDT
From: davies%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Catherine Davies)
Subject: Seminar - Computer Tutor for Programming Recursion (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, September 24, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Peter Pirolli, School of Education,
UC Berkeley
TITLE: ``A Cognitive Model and Intelligent Computer
Tutor for Programming Recursion''
Recursion is typically a novel concept for programming stu-
dents that causes them considerable grief and difficulty.
Thus, the study of how people learn to program recursive pro-
grams provides a useful domain for addressing the psychologi-
cal issue of how fundamentally new knowledge is acquired as
well as the instructional issue of how to teach a difficult
programming concept. I will present a production system model
that addresses expert and novice problem-solving, problem-
solving by analogy, and skill acquisition in programming
recursive functions. This research served as the basis for
the development of recursion lessons in an intelligent com-
puter tutor for programming LISP. Specifically, a simulation
model of ``ideal'' and ``buggy'' novice problem-solving was con-
structed for coding recursion. Using this model, the LISP
tutor provides instruction, hints, and feedback in the context
of programming. The LISP tutor also maintains a model of the
skill development of individual students. Evaluations show
that the LISP tutor is more effective in teaching introductory
LISP programming than good classroom instruction and
approaches the effectiveness of human tutors.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Sep 85 09:26:04-PDT
From: Kurt Konolige <KONOLIGE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Course - AI Theories of Belief and Action (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Announcement of a new course in Artificial Intelligence:
CS429: Formal AI Theories Of Belief and Action
Instructor: Kurt Konolige, SRI International and CSLI
Description: We will discuss some formal commonsense theories of
belief and action that have emerged over the last 5-7 years. This
course is intended both as a survey of recent research in this area,
and as an introduction to the application of techniques from formal
logic to AI problems. The emphasis is on acquiring a facility for
working with the tools of logic, especially by analyzing and
critiquing current AI research. The following is a list of topics we
will cover:
1. Knowledge and Belief
- Kripke and sentential semantics
- Modal logics for knowledge and belief
- Proof methods for quantified modal logics,
including recent resolution methods
2. Formal planning theories
- The situation calculus
- Integration of action and belief
3. Further topics
- Introspective belief theories
- The relation between introspection and nonmonotonic
reasoning
Prerequisites: Some familiarity with basic concepts from first-order
logic will be assumed, e.g., students should know what what a model
is, how to construct proofs from axioms and rules of inference, and so
on.
Requirements: Graduate-level course for CS students, 3 units.
Students will be expected to read 1-2 papers a week. There will be
one problem set a week, and either a project or final exam.
Time: MWF 11am (50 min), MJH 352, Fall 1985
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Sep-85 2226 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #128
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Sep 85 22:26:43 PDT
Date: Mon 23 Sep 1985 20:35-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #128
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 24 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 128
Today's Topics:
Query - Expert Systems for Knowledge Engineering,
Knowledge Representation - Cooperative Structuring of Information,
Literature - AI Interactions, Vol. 1, No. 1 and 2 &
Aerospace Applications of AI Proceedings,
Expert Systems - Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 85 12:13:28 mdt
From: crs%a@LANL.ARPA (Charlie Sorsby)
Subject: Knowledge Engineering
> Date: 14 Sep 1985 07:21 EDT (Sat)
> From: Wayne McGuire <Wayne%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
> Subject: Lisp vs. Prolog vs. ?
>
> Predicting what language will be most used for AI is problematic since
> there seems to be little agreement about what AI is. Let's assume,
> however, that over the next decade or two ''AI'' will refer primarily
> to expert systems.
> ...
> (1) Natural language understanding systems which can translate
> raw text directly into working knowledgebases. We probably won't see
> such systems on a large scale, which can operate with any degree of
> reliablity, for at least another twenty-five years, and perhaps much
> longer.
>
> (2) The laborious interviewing of domain experts by expert system
> experts (if you will), and the transcription of those interviews into
> programs.
>
> (3) The direct encoding of knowledge into expert systems by
> domain experts themselves.
What work is being done toward the objective of combining (2) and (3)?
I. e. who is working on "expert system" expert systems incorporating
the knowledge of these expert system experts into an expert system
that will interview experts in other fields to free the human expert
system experts from the laborious interviewing tasks so that they can
do more creative work?
I just read that paragraph! All those "experts" and "systems" sure
make it read as double talk but it is an honest question. Is any
work being done in this area? Thanks.
Charlie Sorsby
...!{cmcl2,ihnp4,...}!lanl!crs
crs@lanl.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 14 Sep 1985 16:07-EDT
From: Lowe@NYU-CSD2
Subject: Cooperative structuring of information
[Excerpted from the IRList by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Readers of IRList may be interested in research I have been doing on methods
for information retrieval that are not based on the use of keywords. [...]
Therefore, I have been developing a
structured representation for debate in which the computer maintains a
record of the reasoning behind each decision. Rather than simply voting on
the correctness of each item in the database, users are required to indicate
which items of evidence support or refute a particular conclusion. Not only
are users more likely to agree on whether specific evidence supports a
conclusion than they are to agree on the conclusion in the abstract, but the
representation provides a record for each user of what others have
considered to be the best available evidence bearing on each conclusion.
The representation is used not only to debate aspects of presentation and
indexing, but also to represent the content of much of the material in the
database as a snapshot of the reasoning process that links the concepts in
mind of each user.
The specific representation that is used for debate is derived from the
theory of argument developed by the British philosopher Stephen Toulmin.
There is not space here to give a full explanation of the system, but I have
written a fairly detailed paper on the topic. This paper was published as
"The representation of debate as a basis for information storage and
retrieval" by David G. Lowe, AFIPS Conference Proceedings Volume 53, 1984
National Computer Conference, pp. 595-603. A more extensive version of this
paper will soon be published in the International Journal of Man Machine
Studies. I will be happy to mail copies to anyone who sends me their U.S.
mail address. I can be reached at LOWE@NYU-CSD2 on the ARPANET or the
following address:
Prof. David Lowe
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
251 Mercer Street
New York, NY 10012
[...] My own research background is in
artificial intelligence, but I have come to believe that the best route to
progress lies in having the computer represent the content of information in
the manner of AI systems while leaving the input task up to human users.
This type of system is well within the scope of existing technology and
would greatly increase the range of applications for information retrieval.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Sep 1985 14:17-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: AI Interactions, Vol 1, No 1 and 2
AI Interactions is published by the Texas Instruments' Data Systems Group
AI Interactions, Volume 1 Number 1, August 1985 summary:
Discussions of TI products: Explorer (Lisp Machine), Personal
Consultant (Expert System building tool), Arborist (decision tree
tool), NaturalLink (menu based natural language system) and Speech
Command (speech input).
Discussion of Campbell's Soup developing expert system to diagnose
large "cookers" which produce soup.
The California Firm, The Scientific Press, is developing a textbook
on decision analysis based on Arborist.
TI is supporitng expert system development projects at various
universities including:
Statistical Consultant, Carleton College
Weld Selector, Colorado School of Mines
Analysis and prevention of mechanical failures, Duke University
Material Handling Equipment Selector, North Carolina State University
Controlling Plant Life in Ponds, North Texas State University
Credit Limits for Industrial Customers, University of Delaware
Health Care Billing Advisor, Ohio State University
Utilizing Part Characteristics to Determine Feeding and
Orienting Devices for Automatic Assembly, Texas A&M University
Expert Linear Programming System, The American University
Predicting and Measuring the Risk of a Small Business Becoming
Insolvent, University of Texas at Dalls
Expert General Library Reference Work, Drexel University
AI Interactions, Volume 1 Number 2, September 1985 Summary:
Discussion of 42 million dollar Explorer contract by Sperry Corporation
Work done by Marc Victor in using Arborist to help lawyers decide
whether to continue with a law suit and settle.
Some technical tips on using Arborist and Personal Consultant
TI is selling a Personal Computer Plus for $2950. It
supports compiled lisp and 2000 knowledge base elements (rules and
unique parameters). It also adds graphics and extended
frame capability. Personal Computer Consultant itself is
selling for $950 or with comprehensive training for $1750.
Infomart, the first shopping mall devoted solely to information
technology, is using a personal computer based expert system
called SNAP to help first time users help them decide what kind
of computer they need.
Carnegie-Mellon and National Bureau of standards has developed an
expert system to evaluate soil prior to excavation of shallow
trenches. This is designed to help prevent cave ins.
------------------------------
Date: 23 Sep 1985 21:40-EDT
From: cross@wpafb-afita
Subject: Conference Proceedings - Aerospace Applications of AI
The proceedings for the First Annual Aersopace Applications of
Artificial Intelligence are available. The cost is $30.00. Send
a check or money order to:
AAAIC'85
PO Box 31250
Dayton, Ohio 45431-0250
For information call (513) 426-8530.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 22 Sep 85 17:16:17-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: exaggerated claims
In response to Bill Anderson's observation about grossly exaggerated
claims for AI systems, I don't think that this has a purely pecuniary
motivation, althought that certainly may play a role. As Herbert Dreyfus
documents in the first part of his "What Computers Can't Do", grossly
exaggerated if not blatantly false claims about the capabilities of AI
programs have been common from the very beginning, even in cases
(such as chess playing programs) where there was no monetary gain in sight.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 85 19:44:48 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: SDI/AI/Free and open Debate
The Strategic Computing Program (DARPA) and SDI are opportunities
for technologists to convince the US Military that they have something to
offer. Contrary to some of the recent comments on this net (and on
ARMS-D) the US Military is not constituted from defunct latin american
dictatorships.
There is a raging debate within the military on the utility of
AI for battle management, and the USAF *pays* people to shoot holes
in it. For those interested in the history of technology, most of the
things we take for granted (microelectronics, automobiles, planes,
interstate highway system) were gestated and field tested by the
US Military.
SDI (ie. Space Development Initiative) is laying the ground work
for the commercialization of space which we will all take for granted
in 2000 or so. The AI community (Minsky et al) feel that they have
something to offer, and I concur with providing them funding to put up
or shut up. As usual, we will probably find that their initial claims
were a bit optimistic, but in the end they will have made a fundamental
contribution to the fabric of the incomparable standard of living
afforded by our nation.
If you are willing to stay off the interstate higways, the
inland waterways, airplanes and other fruits of technology ripened
by close association (computers, and computer networks as has been
pointed out) -- worry about the military and AI and SDI. But upon
close inspection, I think it is better that the military have the
technology and work the bugs out on trivial things like autonomous
tanks BEFORE it is an integral part of an artificial life support
system.
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: 23 Sep 85 09:22:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: AI hype
I've been reading the laments, complaints, etc regarding AI hype
with some interest; here's my $.02 worth. I believe that the level
of promotional gas *is* higher in expert systems, AI, etc, than in
other aspects of the computer field (e.g., graphics, DBMS), and
than in many sciences (chemistry..) and engineering disciplines
(bridge-building...). Howcome?? Well, it seems to me that a
unique aspect of AI is that it is involved with commercial
products for which we have *a priori* expectations as to
performance, because we are already familiar with a system that
does the same thing.
Notice the difference in reaction: if someone tells you (before
you've ever heard of VCRs) that he's got a marvelous machine
that will let you record and play back TV shows, you're happy
that such a thing is possible at all. You are willing to accept
extra constraints and features as "part of the package" (eg you
can't record and play at the same time, you can pre-set to
record at some future time, a tape is good for 6 hours, ...).
But if someone tells you he's got a machine that will: diagnose
blood diseases, read a map, drive a car, compose music, play chess,
do arithmetic, etc, etc, the immediate question is: does the machine
do it better or worse than me, or some other representative of the
species? If the machine is a lot better (200 googol floating-point
square roots per nanosecond or whatever) we are suitably
impressed and will buy several. But if the map-reader can't
tell the difference between a secondary road and a river, well...
Take a physical analogy: suppose someone were selling a machine
that would chop and stack firewood (all by itself). Aside from
the cognitive capabilities involved, wouldn't we expect that
such a machine could stack at least as neatly as people? Handle
wood chunks of at least a reasonable size? Complete the task
at least as fast as a person? Justifiably or not, we would
probably ask whether we were better off buying the machine, or
just paying someone to do the job.
Since AI, by definition, seeks to replicate areas of human
cognitive competence, its results will tend to be judged in
light of human performance. And, lurking in the background
is the economic question: Am I better off hiring humans or
buying expert systems to get this job done? No such issue
arises with VCRs, or with DBMSs, for that matter. That is,
hiring people is not a practical alternative - either the
capability is worth the price or it's not.
And so, in semi-conscious response to this attitude, purveyors
of AI software feel compelled to make their wares sound
impressive, not only with respect to what's been done a year
ago, but with respect to human capabilities.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Oct-85 1839 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #129
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Oct 85 18:39:19 PDT
Date: Sun 29 Sep 1985 11:14-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #129
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 29 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 129
Today's Topics:
Queries - FRANZ Questions,
AI Tools - Public domain Prolog and Hope,
Psychology - A Counterexample to Modus Ponens,
Literature - New CSLI Reports & Recent Technical Reports, Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 85 17:39:06 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: FRANZ-unix question...
> In Franz, how can I access the following:-
(1) The user's name (not just the login name, but also
the actual name from the '.plan' (or whatever) file ???
(2) The date.
Thank you very much.
--- raj doshi, University of Minnesota
doshi%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Raj Doshi
2030 Wilson Avenue, Apt #27
Saint Paul, MN 55119
(612)-739-2353
(612)-739-2151
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 85 20:58:58 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: unknown prop.lists ..
**** QUESTION about FRANZ-LISP, atoms & their properties :-
Suppose that I have access to an atom (i.e. I know its NAME).
But I don't know anything more about it.
Now, is there a FRANZ function, whereby I can
ask franz to RETURN/LIST all the properties,
(given to the atom via PUTPROPs by the user).
if any, (and maybe their values) to me ???
Maybe the creators of FRANZ didn't see the need for such a function
or maybe they did not think about this, but,
I am sure FRANZ has to keep track of an atom's properties
(probably in an array or frame like structure).
HOW DOES FRANZ actually STORE THE properties OF ATOMS ??
If I know this, I could (probably?) write the function myself.
Thanks in advance.
--- raj doshi, University of Minnesota
[Full address in first message of this digest. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 85 21:53:59 cdt
From: Raj Doshi <doshi%umn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: i AND o ....
**** Question about CONCURRENT i/o to the SAME file.
I am trying to do the following in Franz-Lisp:-
I have a file which has some stuff in it (= it is non-empty).
First, I want to *append* something to it (that is, I want
to write something FROM its end-of-file; I want to preserve
its original contents).
Then, I want to read something from the start-of-the-file.
Then, I want to *append* something-new to the new-version
of this file.
Now, I have tried the following:-
Lets say that the file name is fn.
TRY #1 : setq portout (outfile 'fn)
fseek portout
(filestat:size (filestat 'fn)) ;Filestat take only 2 param.
0)
(defun p-raj () (patom "Hi-raj" portout))
(p-raj)
(p-raj)
----------------
The problem with this is that the
>setq portout (outfile 'fn)
seems to AUTOMATICALLY and PERMANENTLY
put the r/w-cursor at the START of the file
(without my permission). Also, once this is
done, FSEEK become impotent. It will always
send back a zero. Also, a FILEPOS has no effect.
Basically, you cannot move the @<@!!# cursor
unless you write (and therefore overwrite the
original contents) something to the file.
Note however that, if I had not done
setq portout (outfile 'fn)
then,
>(filestat:size (filestat 'fn))
does return the true (unix) size of the file.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
TRY #2 : (setq inout (infile 'fn))
(fileopen 'fn 'w+) ; FILEOPEN takes only 2 parameters.
; you can also try the following
; (fileopen 'fn 'a+)
(filepos portio)
[this gives back a zero, which is ok.]
(filestat:size (filestat 'junk))
[this does give its true size, say 232 blocks.]λ
(filepos portio (filestat:size (filestat 'junk)))
[this does put the r/w-cursor at 232.]
(filepos portio)
[this confirms that.]
(patom "IS this really going to get appended ?" portio)
[this prints the above string on the TERMINAL,
not onto the file fn.]
(filepos portio)
[the cursor is STILL at 232.]
Basically, I think that the reason it won't write to the file
fn in this second case is that the <inout> was defined
for reading and not for writing.
{Is this the correct impression ?}
[I have tried many many different permutations also.]
SO, in brief, a <setq pi (outfile..>
automatically puts the cursor at the start-of-the-file;
and the FILEOPEN, FILEPOS, FSEEK dont seem to have any effect.
and, a <setq po (infile...>
never allows me to write onto the file atall
even if I do a <FILEOPEN 'fn 'w+>.
>>>>>> QUESTION: What am I missing here ?? <<<<<<
Thanks in advance.
--- raj doshi, University of Minnesota
[Full address in first message of this digest. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 85 10:09:19 pdt
From: Peter Ludemann <ludemann%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay>
Subject: Public domain Prolog, Hope
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The August 1985 issue of BYTE magazine has a number of
articles on Declarative Languages (Prolog, Hope, FP).
Public domain versions of Prolog (from Automata Design
Associates) and Hope (from Imperial college) for MS-DOS
machines are apparently available from BYTEnet at (617)
861-9774. [...]
-- Peter Ludemann
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 85 10:57:18 edt
From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
In the most recent issue of The←Journal←of←Philosophy, there is an
article by Vann McGee that presents several counterexamples to modus
ponens. I am not sure whether to count them as counterexamples or as
cases where we hold inconsistent beliefs. If the latter view is right,
it should be of interest to those who model belief systems.
One example of McGee's suffices to give the flavor of his article.
Before the 1980 presidential election, many held the two beliefs below:
(1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
(2) A Republican will win the election.
Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
(3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
John
------------------------------
Date: Wed 25 Sep 85 16:54:08-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New CSLI Reports
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORTS
Report No. CSLI-85-31, ``A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action''
by Robert C. Moore, and Report No. CSLI-85-32, ``Finite State
Morphology: A Review of Koskenniemi'' by Gerald Gazdar, have just been
published. These reports may be obtained by writing to David Brown,
CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 1985 19:49-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Technical Reports
Addresses for requests:
Carnegie Mellon University, CS Department, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Stanford University, Department of Computer Science, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
%A Zohar Manna
%A Richard Waldinger
%T The Origin of the Binary Search Paradigm
%R STAN-CS-85-1044
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%D MAR 1985
%X $2.75 - shows how binary search based algorithms in numerical
analysis would be derived by an automatic program-synthesis system
%A Anne von der Leith Gardner
%T An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning
%R STAN-CS-85-1045
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%D JUN 1984, 205 pages (microfiche only $2.00←
%A Jeffrey D. Ullman
%A Allen Van Gelder
%T Testing Applicability of Top-Down Capture Rules
%R STAN-CS-85-1046
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%D APR 1985
%X $2.50 We extend the theory of "Capture rules", introduced in
Ullman (1984) and Sagiv and Ullman (1984), as a way
to plan the evaluation of queries in a "knowledge base." The central
issue of the paper is how to adorn the nodes of
a rule/goal graph with limited amounts of information that can be used
to test wehtehr one can answer a query "top-down" as a Prolog would.
Moreover, the test must be performed quickly, preferably in time that is
polynomial in the size of hte logical rules in the "knowledge base."
We define the "uniqueness" property for rules and give an efficient
algorithms to generate a set of equalities among the sizes of arguments
in sets of such rules. Satisfaction of these inequalities is sufficient
for the top-down processing of rules to cnverge. We then give an efficient
test for satisfaction of these inequalities. There is, of course, no
polynomial test that is both necessary and sufficient for applicability of
this or most any interesting capture rule.
%A Zohar Manna
%A Richard Waldinger
%T Special Relations in Automated Deduction
%R STAN-CS-85-1051
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%K relation replacement rule relation matching rule polarity
%D MAY 1985
%X $4.00
%A Martin Abadi
%A Zohar Manna
%T Nonclausal Temporal Deduction
%D JUN 1985
%R STAN-CS-85-1056
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%D JUN 1985
%K propositional temporal logic
%X 2.75
%A Ian A. Mason
%A Carolyn L. Talcott
%T Memories of S-expressions, Proving properties of Lisp-like programs
that destructively alter memory
%D JUN 1985
%R STAN-CS-85-1057
%I Stanford University Department of Computer Science
%X $3.50
%A Masaru Tomita
%T An Efficient Context-free Parsing Algrithm for Natural Languages
and its Applications
%D MAY 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Gary L. Bradshaw
%T Learning to Recognize Speech Sounds: A Theory and Model
%D JUN 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Masaru Tomita
%T Feasibility Study of Personal/Interactive Machine Translation
Systems
%D JUL 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Jaime G. Carbonnell
%A Masaru Tomita
%T New Approaches to Machine Translation
%D JUL 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Robert E. Frederking
%T Syntax and Semantics in Natural Language Parsers
%D MAY 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Jeannette M. Wing
%A Farhad Arbab
%T Geometric Reasoning: A New Paradigm for Processing Geometric Information
%D JUL 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%A Jeannette M. Wing
%A Mark R. Nixon
%T Adding Temporal Logic to Ina Jo
%D JUL 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
%K temporal logic formal specification
%A Ketan Mulmuley
%T A Mechanizable Theory for Existence Proofs of Inclusive Predicates
%D JUL 1985
%I Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 1985 20:02-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Articles
D BOOK15 Applications of Artificial Intelligence II\
%D April 9-11\
%I International Society for Optical Engineering (SPIE)\
%C Bellingham, Washington
D BOOK16 Solid Modeling by Computers From Theory to Applications\
%D SEP 25-27 1983\
%I Plenum Press\
%O (sponsored by) General Motors Research Laboratories of Warren Michigan
D BOOK17 Applications in Artificial Intelligence\
%I Petrocelli Books\
%C Princeton, New Jersey\
%E Stephen J. Andriole
%A Paul J. Besl
%A Ramesh C. Jain
%T Three-Dimensional Object Recogniton
%J Computing Surveys
%D March, 1985
%A Elain Marsh
%A Carol Friedman
%T Transporting the Linguistic String Project from a Medical
to a Navy Domain
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Jonathan Slocum
%A Carol F. Justus
%T Transportability to Other Languages: The Natural Language
Processing Project in the AI Program at MCC
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Samuel S. Epstein
%T Transportable Natural Language Processing Through Simplicity
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Bozena Hernisz Thompson
%A Frederick B. Thompson
%T ASK is Transportable in Half a Dozen Ways
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Fred J. Damerau
%T Problems and Some Solutions in Customization of Natural Language Database
Front Ends
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Carole D. Hafner
%A Kurt Golden
%T Portability of Syntax and Semantics in Datalog
%J ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems
%D APR 1985
%A Graham Birtwistle
%T Artificial Intelligence, Graphics and Simulation
%I Society for Computer Simulation
%D JAN 1985
%X $20.00, 119 pages, ISSN 07359276
%A Willard M. Holmes
%T Artificial Intelligence and Simulation
%I Society for Computer Simulation
%D MAR 1985
%X $20.00 75 pp ISBN 0911801057
%A Strategic Incorporated
%T Artificial Intelligence: Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI):
Markets, Issues, Suppliers and Technology Trends
%I Strategic Corporation
%D FEB 1985
%C Cupertino, California
%X price $1950.00
%A Perkins
%A Laffey
%A Nguyen
%T Rule-based Interpreting of Aerial Photographs Using LES
%J BOOK15
%A Captain Robert Milne
%T Functional Reasoning for Fault Diagnosis Expert Systems
%J BOOK15
%A Broadwell
%A Smith
%A Barnette
%A Staros
%T Decision Aiding for Tactical Aircraft
%J BOOK15
%A Appelbaum
%A Ruspini
%T ARIES: A Tool for Inference Under Conditions of Imprecision and
Uncertainty
%J BOOK15
%A Klinger
%T Search Processes for the Application of Artificial Intelligence
%J BOOK15
%A Levitt
%A Kirby
%A Muller
%T A Model-Based System for Force Structure Analysis
%J BOOK15
%A Hardt
%A Rosenberg
%T Developing an Expert Ship Message Interpreter-Theoretical and Practical
Conclusions
%J BOOK15
%A Rosenberg
%T ERIK, An Expert Ship Message Interpreter: New Mechanism for Flexible
Parsing
%J BOOK15
%A A Adams
%A Deutsch
%A Harrison
%T A hierarchical Planner for Intelligent Systems
%J BOOK15
%A Obermeier
%A de Hilster
%T DIID -- A Data-independent Interface for Databases -- The
AI Perspective
%J BOOK15
%A Haralick
%A Shapiro
%T Image Segmentation Techniques
%J BOOK15
%A Chestek
%A MUller
%A Chelberg
%T Knowledge Based Terrain Analysis
%J BOOK15
%A Forman
%T Robot Vision for Depalletizing Steel Cylindrical Billets
%J BOOK15
%A Bazakos
%A Panda
%T Stereopsis and Scene Partititoning for Terrain Interpretation
%J BOOK15
%A Lenger
%A Cipovic
%T Shape Recognition of Complex Objects by Syntactical Primitives
%J BOOK15
%A Castore
%T Solid Modeling, Aspect Graphs and Robot Vision
%J BOOK16
%A Lozano-perez
%A Brooks
%T An Apporoach to Automatic Robot Programming
%J BOOK16
%A Descotte
%A Latombe
%T GARI, an Expert System for Process Planning
%J BOOK16
%A Paul Lehner
%A Stephen Barth
%T Expert Systems on Microcomputers
%J BOOK17
%A Roger Schank
%A Steven Shwartz
%T The Role of Knowledge Engineering in Natural Language Systems
%J BOOK17
%A Jaime Carbonnel
%T The Role of User Modeling in Natural Language Interface Design
%J BOOK17
%A Gerald Hice
%A Stephen Andriole
%T Artificial Intelligent Videotex
%J BOOK17
%A Jean-Daniel Dessimoz
%T Vision for Industrial Robots
%J BOOK17
%A Dexter Fletcher
%T Intelligent Instructional Systems in Training
%J BOOK17
%A Jonathan Weiss
%T GenTree A Content Oreinted Aid to Decision Problem Structuring
%J BOOK17
%A Roger C. Schank
%A Peter G. Childers
%T The Cognitive Computer: On Language, Learning, and Artificial Intelligence
%X available from Library of Computer and Information Science for members
price of $14.50
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂01-Oct-85 2136 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #130
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Oct 85 21:35:50 PDT
Date: Sun 29 Sep 1985 16:27-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #130
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 29 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 130
Today's Topics:
Literature - New Citation/Abstract Distribution Service &
Leff Bibliographies & Recent Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 85 13:38:21 cdt
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: New Citation/Abstract Distribution Service
I have volunteered to organize an electronic mechanism for the distribution
of technical report lists from Universities and R&D labs. Some (and
hopefully all) of the people producing technical reports would send a copy
of the list to me. I would then send these to a moderated group on USENET
as well as a mailing list for those sites on the INTERNET who do not get
news (ARPANET, CSNET, etc.).
I need two things from you:
1) if your organization prepares technical reports and sends them
out to interested parties (perhaps for a fee), please arrange
to have electronically readable copy of your lists sent
to trlist%smu@csnet-relay.
2) if people at your organization would like to receive lists
of tech reports produced by universities and R&D labs, please
provide me an electronic address to send them to (if you are not
on USENET). Send such administrative mail to trlist-request%smu@
csnet-relay.
Some frequently asked questions:
1. What are the advantages of sending my lists to you?
a. Most of the people to whom you are sending printed lists will
be receiving this list, either through the INTERNET as a mailing list
or as a moderated news group on the USENET distributed bulletin board
system. Thus you can save the postage and printing costs in mailing
these lists. I would be happy to provide you with a list of institutions
receiving this list as a mailing list as well as those institutions
on USENET who would be receiving it that way. You can use this to
prune the mailing list you use to send out printed copies of your
technical report lists.
b. Many people at the Universities are not aware of technical
report lists. I have been sending out lists of AI tech reports
to the AIList, an electronic newsletter on AI, for some time.
Every time I do so, my electronic mailbox fills up with requests on
how to obtain the tech reports. Many of these requests come from
the most prestigious AI organizations in the country.
c. Many companies, particularly those on the USENET, would not
otherwise be aware of your research. There are hundreds of small
companies on USENET who have no other access to the wealth of
information represented by University and other tech reports.
2. What is a technical report?
Most universities and big company R&D labs publish reports about their
research. Some are highly research oriented (like new results in automata
theory). Others are manuals for their public domain software or tutorials.
...
3. What format should the tech report lists be in?
Please see to it that there is some info indicating how people
can order the tech reports (whether sending you a check to
cover costs, requests via electronic mail or the reports can
be electronically available for Arpanet FTP transfer).
If you are already producing the list in some format, feel free to use that
format. If you are preparing the list just for this purpose, I would prefer
that you use the input format for bib/refer, a common bibliography tool.
This way people can dump the lists into a file on their machine and be able
to do keyword searches. Also bib/refer will automatically include and
format references in documents to be formatted or typeset. However, I would
prefer the material in some weird format than not to have it at all!
For those not familiar with bib/refer, here is a brief tutorial.
Each report or other item should be a sequence of records which
are not separated by blank lines. Each report should be separated
by the others by one or more blank lines. Each report entry
consists of a label consisting of a % followed by a capital
letter and then a space. Then include the information. If the
information for a field (such as an abstract) requires more than one line,
just continue the field on a new line with no initial space.
The labels needed for tech reports are:
%A Author's name (this field should be repeated for each author).
%T Title of report
%R report number
%I issuer, this will be the name of your institution. This may
be ommited if implied by the report number
%C City where published (not essential)
%D Date of publication
%X Abstract
Here is an example of some tech report listings in the appropriate
format:
%A D. Rozenshtein
%A J. Chomicki
%T Unifying the Use and Evolution of Database Systems: A Case Study in
PROLOG
%R LCSR-TR-68
%I Laboratory for Computer Science Research, Rutgers University
%K frame control
%A C. V. Srinivasan
%T CK-LOG, A Calculus for Knowledge Processing in Logic
%R DCS-TR-153
%I Laboratory for Computer Research, Rutgers University
%K MDS
4. I already have exchange agreements with other Universities.
How does this affect them?
The only change would be how the information on what technical reports you
have for them to request gets transferred. [...]
5. I need to charge for my tech reports to cover costs.
Fine. Just include the prices for your reports next to each report (you can
use the %X field for that too). At the beginning of the list you send me,
state where checks should be sent and to whom they should be made payable.
6. What about non-CS reports?
I am happy to handle reports for other departments. If the volume of non-CS
reports becomes significant, I will split the list into tr-cs, tr-math,
tr-ee etc. I would suspect that the majority of the people receiving this
list would be CS researchers since CS departments are quick to join
networks, etc. However, some CS researchers (myself included) are working
in applications of computers and would like to receive information in
those areas as well.
7. I am already on USENET. What should I do?
I anticipate a USENET moderated group in a time frame of one to
two weeks which will contain the same information as the
technical report lists. If you indicate that you will get the
information via USENET, I will remove your name when the
list is established. If you want to wait a week or two to
see if the list comes up, that is OK too. I can send back
copies of the TR Lists that get sent out in the first few
batches of the mailing. I will also send out on the USENET group,
everything that got sent out in the mailing list so you won't
miss anything either way.
8. I am on Arpanet, BITNET, etc.
I can get to Arpanet sites through csnet-relay so there is no problem there.
Otherwise, send me your address as best you know it. I will
get through to you if at all possible.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 1985 20:03-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Bibliographies
[Forwarded from a message to AIList-Request.]
You have probably noticed the announcement of the new tech
report list. [...] The thing that started me on this
was the response of AIList readers to my lists of tech reports.
From what filled up my mailbox, it was obvious that many if not
most of your readers were not seeing the tech report lists and
a substantial fraction of those did not even know that tech reports
existed! Hopefully this list will serve a useful function for
everyone. It was something that should have been done a long
time ago. [...]
I have increased the number of magazines from which my bibliographies
(type 1) are drawn. We now have added ComputerWorld as well as a
few minor magazines. ComputerWorld did a very good job on IJCAI-85
and I found material there that was no place else. [...]
According to bib, we now have 430 documents sent to you since I
changed formats to machine readable. This does not include
information sent to you in other formats.
[I would like to thank Laurence for providing his services to
AIList and the net community. It's a heck of a hobby, but he
does a great job. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 1985 20:00-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Articles
%A Ruth E. Davis
%T Logic Programming and Prolog: A Tutorial
%J IEEE Software
%D SEP 1985
%P 53-62
%V 2
%N 5
%T Advertisement
%A Texas Instruments
%J IEEE Spectrum
%D SEP 1985
%V 22
%N 9
%P 22-23
%X announces a TV satellite symposium that can be received by
various companies using a satellite dish. (On November 13, 1985)
%A T. A. Marsland
%A F. Popowich
%T Parallel Game-Tree Search
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 4
%D JUL 1985
%P 442-452
%K alpha-beta
%A K. C. Drake
%A E. S. McVey
%A R. M. Inigo
%T Sensing Error for a Mobile Robot Using Line Navigation
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 4
%D JUL 1985
%P 485-490
%A A. Lansner
%A O. Ekeberg
%T Reliability and Speed of Recall in an Associate Network
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 4
%D JUL 1985
%P 490-498
%A W. A. Gale
%T Book Review: The AI Business: The Commerical Uses of Artificial
Intelligence- P. Winston and K. Prendergast, Eds
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 4
%D JUL 1985
%P 499
%T FMC Invests $3.5 Million in Knowledge-Based Systems
%J IEEE Software
%D JUL 1985
%V 2
%N 4
%P 101
%K Teknowledge
%X FMC has invested $3.5 million in Teknowledge.
%T US, Japan AI firms enter joint ventures
%J IEEE Software
%D JUL 1985
%V 2
%N 4
%P 101
%K Carnegie Group Intelligent Technology Knowledge Craft Language Craft
Jack Geer McDonnell Douglas
%X Carnegie Group and Intelligent Technology have signed
a joint venture agreement where Intelligent Technology will distribute
Knowledge Crat and Language Craft throughout the far east. They will
be creating Japanese language versions of these products. Carnegie
Group has appointed Jack Geer, formally of the Knowledge
Engineering Division of McDonnell Douglas Information Systems Group,
as director of marketing.
%A Eric Bender
%T AI Firms Outgrow Seat-of-the-Pants Style
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 10+
%K Golden Common Lisp
%X general article on Gold Hill Computers, the author of Golden Common Lisp,
and Arity computers, the author of a Prolog compiler/interpreter.
Golden Common Lisp has sold approximately 3000
copies. They employ 18 people and have a "monthly run rate" of
$200,000. They anticipate selling a large memory version for
the PC/AT which can use 16M of memory.
The largest user of Arity products is software vendors with
classic DP shoppers a closer second.
Arity Prolog tools were used by one software vendor to develop
a system to consult on software installation.
%T Vendors Fuel AI Language Debate
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%X discusses battle between Prolog and Lisp as standard for AI.
%A Charles Babcock
%T Experts Beat out Expert Systems at Financial Firm
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 12+
%K business insurance financial Metropolital Life Roger Jones
expert system medical
%X Rojer Jones, planning manager in Metropolital Life's corporate
systems planning division, said that it is very difficult to
encode expert thinking and in many cases the bank prefers
training human experts to developing expert systems. He said that
experts might lie, be wrong or the business might change. He
emphasized that some experts are so possessive of their knowledge
that they would covertly sabotage the expert system development
process. In the case of one project, it cost more to transcribe
the 30 pages of medical information to provide to the expert system
than to have an underwriter evaluate the information. Insurance
companies are using larger pools of data to determine actuarial
tables so that expert systems based on segregated pools (e. g. with
men separated from women) would be obsolete. He claims that
the systems that were successful (Prospector, Dendral) mapped a very broad
knowledge base of simple facts.
%T Artificial? Or Intelligent?
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 18
%X editorial on AI, saying that there is a legitimate demand
for AI technology but it will be frought with hard work and
that DP staffs can't neglect their day to day work to pursue
the interesting AI interests.
%A Eric Bender
%T Lively Discussions Highlight AI Meet
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 49+
%K IJCAI
%X quotes overhead at IJCAI-85
Beau Sheil of Xerox Artificial Intellgience Systems - AI works best
with a lot of information that can be manipulated at a shallow level
Xerox has received an order for 1000 of its 1185 work stations and is
flooded with requests at similar volume.
Alan Kay of Apple said "we need to do problem finding," not problem
solving. He also griped about logic programming and parallel
processing. He made a comment that if the Intel 80286 is a weak
architecture, what is it when you have 16 of them? [probably a
veiled reference to Intel's Cosmic Cube.]
Larry Levesque of Carnegie Group said that AI products and
demos are tools and they don't scale up.
%T Secure Xerox Workstation Out
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 63+
%X Lisp Machine
%K Xerox announced the 1108-105T, an AI work station that meeets
standards for release of electronic radiation that can be tapped for
use in National Security and other places. It also announced an
1108 series of AI work stations that can interface with IBM
and Multibus equipment.
%T Systems and Peripherals
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 35
%D SEP 2, 1985
%K digitization machine vision Industrial Vision Systems
%X Industrial Vision Systems has announced a 400 dot/in digitizing
scanner capable of handling up to 36 in wide paper. It costs $79,000.
%A John Gallant
%T Will IBM Take AI by Storm
%J Computer World
%D SEP 9, 1985
%V 19
%N 36
%P 61+
%K IJCAI-85
%X general article on IBM's role in AI
%T Inference Enhances ART Development Environment
%J Computer World
%D SEP 9, 1985
%V 19
%N 36
%P 62
%X improvements to Inference Corp's Automated Reasoning Tool
include:
1) improved color graphics including
a away of attaching graphics primitives to rules,
2) a pseudo-natural language development enviornment which allows
a developer to build his knowledge-base using an English-like
syntax
3) a mixed initiative processing environment allowing the
expert system to prompt for information while reacting to user
inquiriers
4) separately compilable rule files
%T Software and Services
%J ComputerWorld
%D SEP 9, 1985
%V 19
%N 36
%P 69
%K Lucid Sun Common Lisp
%X Sun Microsystem has announced a version of LUCID, a Common LISP
implementation for its work stations costing $375.00.
%A Sol Libes
%T Bytelines
%J Byte
%D SEP 1985
%P 420
%V 10
%N 9
%X Kurzweil Applied Intelligence speech recognition KVS-3000
%X Kurzweil has introduced a KVS-3000 that can handle 1000 words
continuous speech with 100 per cent accuracy. It is selling at
$3000.00 in quantity and comes in PC, multibus and RS232C versions.
It is speaker adaptive and its performance increases the more
it talks with the same user.
%A Jean Renard Ward
%%A Barry Blesser
%T Interactive recognition of Handprinted Characters for Computer
Input
%J IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications
%V 5
%N 9
%P 24-37
%K Character Recogniton Pencept
%X discusses the human interface issues once you have character
recognition on your computer; i. e. how best to interface handwritten
character recognition with your product.
%T Hitachi to Spend $40 million in U. S. on High-Tech Gear
%J Electronic News
%D SEP 2, 1985
%V 31
%N 1565
%P 10
%K Tektronix
%X Hitachi has spent $700,000 at
Tektronix which includes an undisclosed amount of
"artificial intelligence products."
%T Raytheon Acquires Stake in Lisp Machines
%J Electronic News
%D AUG 26, 1985
%P 20+
%V 31
%N 1564
%K energy venture capital military electronics
%X Raytheon invested 4.5 million dollars into Lisp Machine Inc.
through its new venture capital subsidiary. Lisp Machine Inc. has
raised a total of twelve million dollars in a fourth round of financing.
Raytheon hopes to be using Lisp Machine products in its military
electronics and energy business. Ti currently owns 9 percent
of LMI. other investors include
Abingworth plc, InterVEN, Genesis Venture Capital, Manufacturers Hanover Trust.
%A Eric Bender
%T Artificial Intelligence: On the Road to Reality
%J ComputerWorld
%D AUG 26, 1985
%V 19
%N 34
%K IJCAI-85
%X summary and analysis of events at IJCAI-85
%X Many vendors continued development work up until
the demonstrations themselves and there were more bugs than typical
at a computer conference vendor exhibition.
Beau Sheil of Xerox stated that in order for AI to work at a company,
the company has to have long term horizons, a real clear
idea about its needs and a history of applying technology to solve
those problems.
%A Eric bender
%T IJCAI sees HP, Intellicorp moves in AI programming
%J ComputerWorld
%D AUG 26, 1985
%V 19
%N 34
%P 10+
%K Hewlett-Packard Common Lisp HP 9000 Xerox Palladian Software financial
%X Hewlett-Packard will have a Common Lisp development
environment running on its HP 9000 series 300 family of workstations.
It will have a system called Browsers "that will automatically have
appropriate tools for the task at hand."
Xerox will be announcing a Common Lisp in second
quarter 186. Intellicorp announced a system to allow
personal computers to act as delivery vehicles for expert systems.
Initial versions will use VAX systems as hosts
and IBM PC's and the Macintosh as delivery vehicles.
Palladian Software announced its financial advisor expert system.
It runs on Symbolics and Texas Instruments Lisp Machines and
communicates with IBM and DEC systems. A system with four
work stations runs for $95,000.
%A Eric Bender
%T Symbolics, Xerox offer enhanced AI workstations
%J ComputerWorld
%D AUG 26, 1985
%V 19
%N 34
%P 11
%K Lisp Machine
%X Xerox announced an 1185 which costs $9.995 and runs
Interlisp-D software and serves as a delivery vehicle.
They also announced an 1186 development system with
3.6M of internal memory and 80M of hard disk storage for $15,865.
%T Aion offers AI development system
%J ComputerWorld
%D AUG 26, 1985
%V 19
%N 34
%P 55
%K expert system microcomputer venture capital
%X Aion announced a new expert system for the IBM Pc written
in Pascal. They anticipate selling an IBM-370 version for
first-quarter 1986. They are focussing on the traditional
DP environment.
They received 2.4 million in venture capital.
%T Microcomputers
%J ComputerWorld
%D AUG 26, 1985
%V 19
%N 34
%P 61
%K The Institute for Scientific Analysis Small-X microcomputer
expert system
%X The Instuitute for Scientific Analysis introduced Small-X,
an expert system development tool for the IBM-PC. It costs
$249.95 and can control or exchange data with other applications
running under Microsoft.
%A S. Jerrold Kaplan
%T Designing a Portable Natural Language Database Query System
%J ACM Transactions on Database Systems
%V 9
%N 1
%D MAR 1984
%P 1-19
%A C. Hornsby
%A H. C. Leung
%T The Design and Implementation of a Flexible Retrieval Language
for a Prolog Database System
%J SIGPLAN
%V 20
%N 9
%D SEP 1985
%P 43-51
%X implementation of a database management system in PROLOG
%A Donna Raimondi
%T Ansa offers Paradox IBM-compatible relational DBMS
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 38
%P 12
%D SEP 23, 1985
%K data base system interface microcomputer heuristic query optimization
Ansa Software Paradox Sevin Rosen Management
%X A data base management package which uses machine reasoning to
evaluate user requests and write programs for the user. It uses
query by example, program synthesis and heuristic query optimization
techniques
%A Jeffry Beeler
%T Symantec package out
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 38
%P 12
%D SEP 23, 1985
%K Symantec natural language microcomputer data base system interface
%X a new product which uses natural language to interface with a
database
%T Software and Services
%J ComputerWorld
%V 19
%N 38
%D SEP 23, 1985
%P 50
%K Franz Common Lisp flavors
%X a new release of Franz Lisp, Opus 42, is out which
supports Lisp flavors, functions returning multiple values,
multiple name spaces in the Lisp environment, hash table objects,
history mechanism. It is available for Apollo, Sun, Cadmus, Masscomp,
Tektronix, Harris and Digital equipment Corp. $5,000 first copy,
$1,000 subsequent copies
%A Craig D. Rose
%T R&D Race Tightens for Fifth-Generation Computers
%J Electronics
%D SEP 23, 1985
%V 58
%N 38
%P 30-31
%X Attempts to compare and contrast the Fifth Generation
efforts of Europe, Japan and the U. S.
The Strategic Computing Initiative (SCI) of DARPA will
spend one billion dollars over ten years. Europe's Esprit program
is being funded with 1.2 billion for five years and Britain is
spending $455 million over the same time span for the Alvey project.
Japan's Fifth Generation Project is funded at twenty to thirty
million dollars per year. Japanese companies are spending
in total about five times as much money as ICOT.
The Canadian Society for Fifth Generation computing has requested fourty
million dollars over three years.
%T Machine Vision Maker Raises Three Million Dollars
%J Electronics
%D SEP 23, 1985
%V 58
%N 38
%P 41
%X Itran venture capital inspection General Motors
%X Itran Corp has raised three million dollars in a new round
of venture financing. Itran markets systems that inspects
parts on factory floors. It sells systems to General Motors.
%A Tobias Naegele
%T How Rensing Got His Robot Working
%J Electronics
%D SEP 23, 1985
%V 58
%N 38
%P 42
%K Renco Electronics
%X describes experiences of a small firm in installing robots in
their factory.
%T AI Tools Automate Software Translation
%J Electronics
%D SEP 23, 1985
%V 58
%N 38
%P 59-61
%K Lexeme Michael Shamos computer language translation conversion expert
system
%X Lexeme sells an expert system that translates from one computer
language to another. It supports Ada and C as target language and
accepts input of Fortran, PL/1, Bliss and SPL. They are developing
COBOL, BASIC, Algol, Jovial and CMS-2 versions. They also
handle conversions from one language to another.
There is a separate page on the personalities and stories of the
founders. [Michael Shamos, the president, is also well known
for his work in computational geometry. --Leff] He managed
to pick up a law degree as well as a Ph. D. in computer science!
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Oct-85 0141 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #131
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Oct 85 01:41:37 PDT
Date: Sun 29 Sep 1985 16:38-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #131
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 29 Sep 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 131
Today's Topics:
Seminars - KSL/Symbolic Systems Resources Group (SU) &
Qualitative Simulation of Mechanisms in Diagnosis (UT) &
Purpose-Directed Analogy (GTE) &
Connectionist Parallel Distributed Processing (UCB) &
Processes, Simultaneity and Causality (SRI) &
Theory of Declarative Knowledge (UPenn),
Seminar Series - Software Environments (CSLI),
Conferences - Society for Computer Simulation & SIGIR/SIGDOC Workshop
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Sep 85 11:10:07-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - KSL/Symbolic Systems Resources Group (SU)
KSL/Symbolic Systems Resources Group
Tom Rindfleisch and Bill Yeager
Stanford University
This is the first of several SIGLunches this fall that will summarize work in
each of the five sublabs of the Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory (KSL),
including the Heuristic Programming Project, HELIX Group, Medical Computer
Science Group, Logic Group, and Symbolic Systems Resources Group (SSRG). This
week's talk will consist of a brief overview of the KSL as an AI laboratory and
a survey of SSRG research and development activities.
Since 1980, the computing environment for KSL research has been moving slowly
away from central time-shared mainframes (like the SUMEX 2060 and VAX) toward
networked Lisp workstations. Improvements in workstation performance, falling
prices, better packaging, and a wider vendor selection are now accelerating
this transition. Over the next five years, we are proposing to phase out the
SUMEX research mainframes so that all KSL computing will be workstation-based
-- not only research program development but common tasks like text processing,
mail, file management, and budgeting. This raises several important issues
that will require a community system software effort comparable to that in the
1970's that led to the current TOPS-20 and UNIX environments.
How can the user computing environment be improved using workstation bitmapped
graphics and AI methods for more intelligent systems/applications programs?
How can user displays connect flexibly to workstations -- from home, over
remote networks like ARPANET, and locally over Ethernet?
How can the considerable computing power distributed among many workstations be
combined to support individual user tasks?
What are the impacts on network protocols and services (file servers, gateways,
printing, etc.) of large numbers of workstations?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 85 15:50:05 cdt
From: rajive@sally.UTEXAS.EDU (Rajive Bagrodia)
Subject: Seminar - Qualitative Simulation of Mechanisms in Diagnosis (UT)
Qualitative Simulation of Mechanisms
and
Causal Models in Medical Diagnosis
Ben Kuipers
Friday, 27th September,
Pai 3.38 12 pm
Researchers in the AIM (Artificial Intelligence in Medicine) community
have concluded that expert medical diagnosis requires knowledge in the
form of causal models, to support reasoning about how physiological
mechanisms work and interact. One form of causal reasoning is
qualitative simulation of descriptions of the structure of mechanisms
to yield predictions of their behavior. Qualitative simulation has a
number of interesting mathematical properties, and a fast algorithm.
The knowledge base of mechanism descriptions makes it possible to model
both a healthy and a broken physiological mechanism with minor
perturbations of the same structural description. This talk will review
recent results and open problems in both qualitative simulation and its
application to expert systems in medicine.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 85 10:35:40 EDT
From: Bernard Silver <SILVER@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Purpose-Directed Analogy (GTE)
GTE LABORATORIES INCORPARATED
40 Sylvan Rd, Waltham, MA 02254
TIME: October 3, 10AM
SPEAKER: Smadar Kedar-Cabelli
Laboratory for Computer Science
Rutgers University, NJ
TITLE: PURPOSE-DIRECTED ANALOGY
Existing techniques for analogical reasoning are based on mapping
some underlying causal network of relations between analogous
situations. However, causal relations relevant for the purpose
of one analogy may be irrelevant for another. We describe here
a technique which uses an explicit representation of the analogy
to automatically create the relevant causal network.
NOTE: If you wish to attend this seminar, please contact
Bernard Silver on (617) 466-2663
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 85 14:09:11 PDT
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley.EDU (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Connectionist Parallel Distributed Processing (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, October 1, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
(followed by)
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: David Rumelhart, Institute for Cognitive
Science, UCSD
TITLE: ``Parallel Distributed Processing: Explora-
tions in the Microstructure of Cognition''
Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP) is the name which I and
my colleagues at San Diego have given to the class of
neurally-inspired models of cognition we have been studying.
We have applied this class of "connectionist" models to a
variety of domains including perception, memory, language
acquisition and motor control. I will briefly present a gen-
eral framework for the class of PDP models, show how these
models can be applied in the case of acquisiton of verb mor-
phology, and show how such macrostructural concepts as the
schema can be seen as emerging from the microstructure of PDP
models. Implications of the PDP perspective for our under-
standing of cognitive processes will be discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 26 Sep 85 16:58:54-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Processes, Simultaneity and Causality (SRI)
PROCESSES, SIMULTANEITY AND CAUSALITY
Michael P. Georgeff
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, September 30
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The notion of process is essential for reasoning about the behavior of
multiple agents or single agents in dynamic worlds. In this talk, we
show why reasoning about process is so important, and contrast this
with other approaches in AI which are primarily based on the allowable
behaviors of agents. An algebra of processes based on events is given.
We then show how events can be represented as changes of world state,
and how state properties can be inferred from the model. Interestingly,
no STRIPS-like assumption is involved in the definition of events, thus
allowing a proper model-theoretic semantics. One of the most important
features of the model is a hiding operation. This provides an abstraction
capability that can be used to avoid the combinatorial explosion
typical of other AI approaches. Finally, we introduce a notion of
causality between events and processes. This, together with the
notion of simultaneous actions and hiding operations, allows us to
avoid most of the problems associated with the frame problem.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 85 18:06 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Theory of Declarative Knowledge (UPenn)
TOWARDS A THEORY OF DECLARATIVE KNOWLEDGE
Krzysztof R. Apt, LITP, Universite Paris, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
3:00pm Tuesday 1 Oct, CIS, University of Pennsylvania
We study logic programming with negation from the point of
view of its use for building expert system shells. We
achieve a separation between the declarative and
procedural meaning of the programs. We do this by defining
a class of stratified programs which disallow certain
combination of recursion and negation and to which we
restrict our study. We develop a fixed point theory of
non-monotonic operators and apply it to provide a
declarative meaning of the programs based on model theory.
We also define a backchaining interpretor and show that in
the absence of function symbols it computes a selected
model of a stratified program.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Sep 85 10:35:38-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Series - Software Environments (CSLI)
[Forwarded from the CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
New project meeting on environments
Mondays 1-2 in the trailer classroom, Ventura
[Future meetings will be from 12 to 1:15.]
Beginning Monday, Sept. 30 there will be a weekly meeting on
environments for working with symbolic structures (this includes
programming environments, specification environments, document
preparation environments, "linguistic workstations", and grammar-
development environments). As a part of doing our research, many
of us at CSLI have developed such environments, sometimes as a matter
of careful design, and sometimes by the seat of the pants. In this
meeting we will present to each other what we have done, and also look
at work done elsewhere (both through guest speakers and reading
discussions).
The goal is to look at the design issues that come up in building
environments and to see how they have been approached in a variety of
cases. We are not concerned with the particular details ("pop-up menus
are/aren't better than pull-down menus") but with more fundamental
problems. For example:
What is the nature of the underlying structure the environment supports:
chunks of text? a data-base of relations? a tree or graph structure?
How is this reflected in the basic mode of operation for the user?
How does the user understand the relation between objects (and
operations on them) that appear on the visible representation (screen
and/or hardcopy) and the corresponding objects (and operations) on
some kind of underlying structure? How is this maintained in a
situation of multiple presentations (different views and/or multiple
windows)? How is it maintained in the face of breakdown (system
failure or catastrophic user error in the middle of an edit, transfer,
etc.)?
Does the environment deal with a distributed network of storage and
processing devices? If so, does it try to present some kind of
seamless "information space" or does it provide a model of objects
and operations that deals with moving things (files, functions, etc.)
from one "place" to another, where different places have relevant
different properties (speed of access, security, shareability, etc.)?
How is consistency maintained between separate objects that are
conceptually linked (source code and object code, formatter source
and printer-ready files, grammars and parse-structures generated from
them, etc.)? To what extent is this simply left to user convention,
supported by bookkeeping tools, or automated?
What is the model for change of objects over time? This includes
versions, releases, time-stamps, reference dates, change logs, etc.,
How is information about temporal and derivational relationships
supported within the system?
What is the structure for coordination of work? How is access to the
structures regulated to prevent "stepping on each other's toes"? to
facilitate joint development? to keep track of who needs to do what
when?
Lurking under these are the BIG issues of ontology, epistemology,
representation, and so forth. Hopefully our discussions on a more down-
to-earth level will be guided by a consideration of the larger picture
and will contribute to our understanding of it.
The meeting is open to anyone who wishes to attend. Topics will be
announced in advance in the newsletter. The first meeting will
be devoted to a general discussion of what should be addressed and to
identifying the relevant systems (and corresponding people) within
CSLI, and within the larger (Stanford, Xerox, SRI) communities in
which it exists.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Sep 1985 09:24-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Society for Computer Simulation
Sponsor: Society for Computer Simulation
Dates: October 24-25 1985
Location: General Dynamics Recreation Area
Fee: $25 both day; $15 one day; $10 both days full time students
AI related talks listed below:
Thursday, October 24
8:45 AM Session I
"Adaptive Sequencing Rules in a Shop Floor Control System", Chris Gill,
General Dyanamics
Session II
"Shape Memory Alloy fo Robot Muscles", MIke Zerkus, Jeff Akus,
Martin Spizale, Louisiana Tech University
"Advanced Data and Picture Transformation System",
Dr. V. Devarajan, Y. P. Chen, LTV Corporation
10:30 AM Keynote Address
Keyote address: "Robotics and Intelligent Systems: An Overview"
Dr. George Bekey, University of Southern California
1:30 PM Session IV
"A Symbolic Expert System for the Design of Digital Controllers
for Space Vehicles", Dr. Wolf Kohn, Robert Norsworthy, Lockheed EMSCO
3:15 PM Session VI
"Ultra Sonic Ranging for Robot Sensing: Dr. Troy Henson,
Louisiana Tech University
"A Presentation of Expert Systems at NASA Johnson Space
Center, Dr. Wade Webster, Lockheed EMSCO
Friday, October 25
Session VII
"Exploiting Artificial Intelligence in Simulation"
Walter Strucely, Texas Instruments
"Application of an Expert System in Process Control in Aerospace
Manufactuirng
Bill Skelton, LTV Corporation
9:45 AM
Session X
"General Dynamics Simulation Systems and Artificial Intelligence:
Rich Teichgraeber, General Dynamics
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 85 18:28:58 edt
From: Michael Lesk <lesk%petrus@MOUTON>
Subject: SIGIR/SIGDOC Workshop
[Excerpted from the IRList Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is a proposal for a workshop which, although not yet
formally approved, [Note: Diana Patterson of SIGDOC has signed - Ed]
is very likely to take place in Snowbird, Utah, June 30-July 2, 1986.
Chair: Michael Lesk; Local Arrangements: Lee Hollaar; Treasurer: Karen Kukich.
Attendance will be limited to 75; there will be no formal proceedings,
but a report will be written for some ACM publication; a number of
prominent people (Karen Sparck Jones, David McDonald, Donald Walker,
Patricia Wright, etc.) have indicated interest in attending. Comments
on the workshop, or indications of interest, are welcome. Please
notify the chair at: bellcore!lesk, or lesk%bellcore@csnet-relay, or
(if you have current routing tables) lesk@bellcore. Phone: 201-829- 4070.
NOTE: I will be on vacation Sept 9 - Oct 4; failure to reply
during those dates merely means your message has not been read!! --
Thanks, Michael Lesk
Writing to be Searched:
A Workshop on Document Generation Principles
As computers learn to write English, and others improve at
searching it, they ought to benefit from people who know how to do
these jobs. We're proposing a workshop bringing together AI special-
ists in document generation, information retrieval experts, people who
know how to write manuals, and those who write programs to evaluate
writing.
In recent years there has been a surge of interest in the use of
computer programs that write English.[1,2,3] Expert systems, for exam-
ple, need to explain what they are doing. Programs are making
increasing strides in fluency, domain coverage, and expressive
power.[4,5] In fact, it is remarkable that there has been a long dis-
cussion over the last ten years about whether or not apes have
mastered language, based on utterances such as ``Please tickle more,
come Roger tickle''[6] while computer programs saying things like
``The market crept upward early in the session yesterday, but stumbled
shortly before trading ended''[7,8] have not impressed the public
nearly as much. But even supposing that computers can now write
English, what should they write? [...]
[There followed a long essay about having computers write
computer manuals. -- KIL]
Workshop Specifics.
In this workshop we will bring together subject specialists in
four main areas:
* Artificial intelligence researchers working in natural language
generation;
* Documentation specialists interested in writing style and qual-
ity, and in the definition of a `good' document;
* Text analysis developers, building programs that analyze text
automatically and try to make value judgments about it; and
* Retrieval experts, who know how to build systems for keyword
matching and retrieval.
Another major area that should be represented, but possibly not until
a later meeting, is computer graphics. The value of illustrations,
diagrams, and charts is unquestioned but it is not clear how we can
integrate graphics with text today. [...]
Our best possible outcome, of course, is that the participants
will find something which is not quite a conventional reference
manual, but serves the same purpose and does it better. Whether this
will be a structured document still written in English, or a
question-answering database with an explanation generator, it is
impossible to say. But unless the various groups start talking to one
another, we'll never find out.
Michael Lesk
Bell Communications Research
435 South St., Rm. 2A-385
Morristown, NJ 07960
August 9, 1985
References
1. E. Conklin and D. McDonald, "Salience: The Key to the Selection
Problem in Natural Language Generation," Proc. 20th Meeting ACL,
pp. 129-135, 1982.
2. K. R. McKeown, "The TEXT System for Natural Language Generation:
An Overview," Proc. 20th Meeting ACL, pp. 113-120, Toronto, Ont.,
1982.
3. R. E. Cullingford, M. W. Krueger, M. Selfridge, and M. A. Bien-
kowski, "Automated Explanations as a Component of a Computer-
Aided Design System," IEEE Trans. Sys., Man & Cybernetics, pp.
168-181, 1982.
4. W. C. Mann, "An Overview of the NIGEL Text Generation Grammar,"
Proc. 21st ACL Meeting, pp. 79-84, 1983.
5. A. K. Joshi and B. L. Webber, "Beyond Syntactic Sugar," Proc. 4th
Jerusalem Conf. on Information Technology, pp. 590-594, 1984.
6. S. Chevalier-Skolnikoff, "The Clever Hans Phenomenon, Cuing and
Ape Signing: A Piagetan Analysis of Methods for Instructing
Animals," in The Clever Hans Phenomenon: Communication with
Horses, Whales, Apes and People, ed. Thomas Sebeok and Robert
Rosenthal, vol. 364, pp. 60-93, New York Academy of Sciences,
1981.
7. Karen Kukich, Knowledge-Based Report Generation: A Knowledge-
Engineering Approach to Natural Language Report Generation. Ph.D
Thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1983
8. Karen Kukich, "ANA's First Sentences: Sample Output from a
Natural Language Stock Report Generator," Proc. Nat'l Online
Meeting, pp. 271-80, 1983.
9. G. Salton and M. McGill, Introduction to Modern Information
Retrieval, McGraw-Hill, 1983.
10. Among sellers of free text retrieval systems are ``Cucumber
Information Systems'' (5611 Kraft Drive, Rockville, MD 20852) and
``Knowledge Systems, Inc.'' (12 Melrose St., Chevy Chase, MD
20815).
11. G. Salton, The SMART Retrieval System -- Experiments in Automatic
Document Processing, Prentice-Hall, 1971.
12. G. W. Furnas, T. K. Landauer, L. M. Gomez, and S. T. Dumais,
"Statistical Semantics: Analysis of the potential performance of
key-word information systems," Bell Sys. Tech. J., vol. 62, no.
6, pp. 1753-1806, 1983.
13. Marion O. Harris, "Thoughts on an All-Natural User Interface,"
Proc. Summer USENIX Conf., pp. 343-347, Portland, Oregon, June
1985.
14. L. M. Bernstein and R. E. Williamson, "Testing of a Natural
Language Retrieval System for a Full Text Knowledge Base," J.
Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 235-247, 1984.
15. R. E. Williamson, "ANNOD -- A Navigator of Natural-Language
Organized (Textual) Data," Proc. 8th SIGIR Meeting, pp. 252-266,
Montreal, Quebec, 1985.
16. M. E. Lesk, "Programming Languages for Text and Knowledge Pro-
cessing," Ann. Rev. Inf. Sci. and Tech., vol. 19, pp. 97-128,
1984.
17. Janet Asteroff, "On Technical Writing and Technical Reading,"
Information Technology and Libraries, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 3-8,
March 1985.
18. Christine Borgmann, "The User's Mental Model of an Information
Retrieval System," Proc. 8th SIGIR Meeting, pp. 268-273, Mont-
real, Quebec, 1985.
19. Marilyn Mantel and Nancy Haskell, "Autobiography of a First-Time
Discretionary Microcomputer User," Human Factors in Computing
Systems: Proc. CHI '83 Conference, pp. 286-290, 1983.
20. Bill Swartout, "GIST English Generator," Proc. AAAI-82, pp. 404-
409, Pittsburgh, Penn., 1982.
21. Ariel Shattan and Jenny Hecker, "Documenting UNIX: Beyond Man
Pages," Proc. Summer USENIX meeting, pp. 437-454, Portland, Ore.,
1985.
22. Karen Kukich, "Design of a Knowledge-Based Report Generator,"
Proc. 21st Meeting ACL, pp. 145-50, 1983.
23. E. Voorhees and G. Salton, "Automatic Assignment of Soft Boolean
Operators," Proc. SIGIR Conf., pp. 54-69, 1985.
24. L. L. Cherry and N. H. Macdonald, "The Unix Writer's Workbench
Software," Byte, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 241-248, Oct. 1983.
25. G. E. Heidorn, K. Jensen, L. A. Miller, and R. J. Byrd, "The
Epistle Text-Critiquing System," IBM Systems J., vol. 21, no. 3,
pp. 305-326, 1982.
26. M. O. Harris, Howto: An Amateur System for Program Counseling,
1983. private communication.
27. J. R. Cowie, "Automatic Analysis of Descriptive Texts," Conf. on
Applied Natural Language Processing, pp. 117-123, Santa Monica,
Cal., Feb. 1-3, 1983.
28. M. S. Tuttle, D. D. Sherertz, M. S. Blois, and S. Nelson,
"Expertness from Structured Text? Reconsider: A Diagnostic
Prompting System," Conf. on Applied Natural Language Processing,
pp. 124-131, Santa Monica, Cal., Feb. 1-3, 1983.
29. Patricia Wright, "Manual Dexterity: a user-oriented approach to
creating computer documentation," Human Factors in Computing Sys-
tems: Proc. CHI '83 Conference, pp. 11-18, 1983.
30. T. G. Sticht, "Comprehending Reading at Work," in Cognitive
Processes in Comprehension, ed. M. A. Just and P. A. Carpenter,
Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Oct-85 2226 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #132
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Oct 85 22:26:13 PDT
Date: Mon 30 Sep 1985 23:06-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #132
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 1 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 132
Today's Topics:
Opinion - AI Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1985 05:25 EDT
From: "David D. Story" <FTD%MIT-OZ @ MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: AI hype or .02+.02=.04
Depends on whether you like worth?less gadgets I guess.
SEC apparently doesn't according to a recent article
in Computerworld regarding Paradyne bidding in 1981.
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 85 08:56:41 EDT
From: Herb Lin <LIN@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: SDI/AI/Free and open Debate
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 85 19:44:48 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings at AEROSPACE.ARPA>
SDI (ie. Space Development Initiative) is laying the ground work
for the commercialization of space which we will all take for granted
in 2000 or so.
This is most emphatically NOT the function of the President's SDI, or
even that of the DoD. Maybe we would wish it to be (I would certainly
prefer such a goal to the current one), but it is not. I base my
observation on official statements from the President, General
Abrahmson, Caspar Weinberger and others. If you discount these
statements, then the claim that SDI is for space commercialization is
essentially opinion.
If you are willing to stay off the interstate higways, the
inland waterways, airplanes and other fruits of technology ripened
by close association (computers, and computer networks as has been
pointed out) -- worry about the military and AI and SDI. But upon
close inspection, I think it is better that the military have the
technology and work the bugs out on trivial things like autonomous
tanks BEFORE it is an integral part of an artificial life support
system.
Every study that has investigated the funding of technical R&D has
concluded that spin-off is an economically unsound way to fund it. If
you want to develop spin-offs, then you fund the spin-off directly,
not indirectly. Technology development is a good thing, and it must
be debugged before it gets into wide public use, but using THAT to
justify military spending is to romanticize the military R&D process
more than appropriate.
Maybe the military is the only institution powerful enough and rich
enough to pay for risky R&D. True enough. But that is a social
choice that the nation has made; in my view that is inappropriate, and
it does not have to be that way.
Herb
------------------------------
Date: 24 Sep 1985 10:38 PST
From: Mike Kane <PRODMKT@ACC.ARPA>
Reply-to: PRODMKT@ACC.ARPA
Subject: AI/SDI Hype
I have followed the evolution of AI for several years now, from a mere
academic curiosity, to where it is today. True, I am not a participant,
just an interested observer. The recent exchanges on the net regarding the
commercialization of AI and AI's role in the SDI, have indeed been
stimulating, and are too much to let pass without comment.
The first point I wish to make is for Capt. Jennings to reread his history
of American technology. Case in point: Aircraft. The airplane existed for years
before the military leaders in this country viewed this technology as
anything more than pure circus. Aviation technology in this country, prior
to World War II, was funded and promoted as a purely commercial entity.
Remember Billy Mitchell?
[The Wright brothers did have Army funding for much of their
work, though. -- KIL]
True, after WW II, the military began to completely dominate the aeronautical
industries in this country. But this occurred only after people like
Douglas, Lindbergh, et. al, had proved the technology and commercial viability.
There is a direct paralell with AI here. J. Cugini's comments were
directly applicable I think.
Before AI takes it's place beside data communications, DBMS, etc, as
industry commodity segments, it must find a practical purpose in life.
I seriously doubt whether SDI or other DOD related applications fulfill
this requirement. It may in fact extend the technology, but will AI ever
grow wings and fly away, so to speak, without someone finding a practical,
dollar breeding, reason for it to exist?
This is not intended as a flame directed at academia, but AI must find a
path to the marketplace, if it is to survive. You can't expect DARPA
funding forever.
M. Kane
------------------------------
Date: Wed 25 Sep 85 00:18:07-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSLA.ARPA>
Subject: What does it mean ?
In dousing a recent anti-"AI" flame [AIList V3 #126], Prof.
Minsky asserts, among other things:
To my knowledge, ONLY AI systems, so far, can drive
cars, carry on conversations, and debug electronic
systems. They don't do these jobs very well yet,
but they're coming along -- and have no competition
in those areas from any other kind of software.
The boldness and economy of this sort of response to
criticisms of "AI" have not lost their charm over the years!
But, at the risk of falling into flaming ourselves, let's
take a closer look.
The following clauses are of special interest:
(A) ONLY AI systems, so far, can drive cars,
carry on conversations, ...
(B) They don't do these jobs very well yet
(C) but they're coming along
(D) [they] have no competition in those areas
from any other kind of software
and, from earlier in Prof. Minsky's message:
(E) AI systems are better than other kinds of
software
On hearing an authority of Prof. Minsky's stature assert (A),
the average intelligent citizen (e.g., business magazine
editor, R&D funding officer, corporate manager, housewife,
...) might well conclude:
(F) There exist AI systems which can drive
cars, and carry on conversations
Would Prof. Minsky be comfortable with this inference?
Perhaps the conclusion should be qualified, in a manner
familiar to real-world systems engineers:
(F') There exist AI systems which, while they
CANNOT drive cars or carry on
conversations (in the ordinary meaning
of these phrases), CAN now perform the
essentials of these tasks in such a way
that they can be straightforwardly scaled
up to the real tasks
Do you buy this? Well, then, how about:
(F") There are no AI systems today which can
really drive cars or carry on
conversations, but we are keenly hopeful
that SOMEDAY such systems may exist
Setting these quibbles aside, let's zoom in for an even
closer look at the word "ONLY" in (A) [only AI systems ...]. Our
intelligent citizen might take this to mean:
(G) AI is the ONLY reasonable hope of
achieving sophisticated goals like these
On the face of it, this would seem to conflict with (B) [but not well ...],
given the long history of "AI" research in these areas! But those
with short (long-term) memories may be soothed by the time-honored
refrain (C) [coming along ...], even without quantification.
But we could be flaming up the wrong tree. Maybe (A) is
really just a factual boast in modest disguise:
(H) The nation's biggest AI Labs have been
pretty successful in monopolizing R&D
funds in areas like these. [I.e., only AI
systems do these jobs because researchers
in other disciplines have not been funded
to attempt them. -- KIL]
Whatever the other merits of this interpretation, it
certainly helps us to see what (D) [no competition ...] really means.
We are left with (E) [AI is better ...]. Should our intelligent
citizen believe it? Like Marxist economics, (E) may be a very
difficult thesis to sustain on the factual public record.
Like it or not, we live in a world (the so-called "real
world") that surrounds us with utterly non-"AI" software that
keeps track of payrolls, arranges airline reservations,
manages power distribution grids, guides missiles, allocates
resources, monitors inventories, analyzes radar signals, does
computer animation, assists in mechanical design and
fabrication, manipulates spreadsheets, controls space
vehicles, drives robots, integrates CAT scans, and performs
lots of other mundane tasks. Of course, both (B) [but not well ...]
and (C) [coming along ...] still apply to some extent in many of
these areas, but the existing accomplishments are genuine and
valuable.
In fact, there are some nicely engineered non-"AI" systems
that play world-class chess, and drive both commercial and
military high-performance aircraft in daily operations!
Even though "AI" has been around for about as long as the
rest of computing, its record of real-world deployment is
hardly consistent with (E) [AI is better ...], even now at the crest
of the latest "AI" boom. On the contrary, this record seems rather
skimpy and inconsequential sometimes, doesn't it?
Could it be true that (E) is a kind of modern cult
shibboleth, stimulating to believers but mostly just
mystifying to the uninitiated?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 85 08:21 EDT
From: Attenber%ORN.MFENET@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: AI hype
Here is an outsider's opinion regarding AI hype. The mood of a
field and the tone of the technical presentations are shaped more by
political pressures and events than by the morals of the researchers.
As a grad student in particle physics I felt that people were a little
devious in presenting results or proposals. Fortunately the audience
is always on guard and the question-and-answer sessions tend to be
very spirited. Probably several decades of spectacular successes have
encouraged people to be optimistic, and fierce competition for machine
time and funds encourages people to present their results "in the
best possible light".
As a researcher in particle physics I observe a much more open,
even pessimistic, attitude in oral presentations and publications.
This may be due to disappointing results in the early years of the
field. Speakers tend to rush to present features of the data which
they don't yet understand, and the audience asks questions which
are intended to be constructive. And yet the competition for funds
is very intense. In fact I feel that the current funding squeeze
in plasma physics is partly due to underselling the current
encouraging results.
I would encourage people in AI to be enthusiastic about prospects
for future programs (without, of course, getting caught making
a statement which can't be defended.)
------------------------------
Date: 26 Sep 1985 01:39-EST
From: Todd.Kueny@G.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Observations on Expert Systems
o The existence of expert systems implies practice (refinement) and
physiological learning are not necessarily prerequisites
for becomming an expert.
o An expert system ignores the transmission loss of the
expert => knowledge engineer => program => user data path.
o Expert systems filter out ``feel'' (both phsycial and
mental), ``intuition'', and other ill defined,
illogical quantities experts use when making decsions.
The motivation for these observations is derived from the following
real world experience:
Instead of a computer and some expert system software I will use me.
I will presume I am at least as ``intelligent'' as the computer.
I now select my domain: conoeing in whitewater. I will also
act as my own ``knowledge engineer'' and mentally transcribe
the instructions of the expert (the canoe instructor) into
my memory; again I assume I am at least as good as a computer
knowledge representation and a knowledge engineer. So, I should
be well prepared to canoe down some whitewater rapids. I launch
my canoe and within the first 100 yards or so I am dumped
unceremoniously into the river by a nasty current. . .
Anyone who has been involved in a situation such as this realizes the fallacy
of attempting to become an expert in a relatively short time without
actually experiencing, learning, and practicing within the domain.
If the expert system model of ``becoming an expert'' were valid I
should be able to become an expert merely by studying an expert system.
-Todd K.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 85 20:27:34 edt
From: Brad Miller <miller@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Re: AI hype and Marvin Minsky's reply
In defense of my friend Bill Anderson:
Compare Marvin's posting to Weizenbaum's book "Computer Power and
Human Reason". He makes the point that not only is AI hype, but folks
like Dr. Minsky may be fundamentally deluded [i.e. their world view that
a computer can do anything a person can is incorrect].
Brad Miller
miller@rochester.arpa miller!rochester
University of Rochester CS Dept. Lab Manager
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Oct-85 0030 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #133
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Oct 85 00:30:38 PDT
Date: Thu 3 Oct 1985 11:10-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #133
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 3 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 133
Today's Topics:
Opinion - AI Hype & System Verification
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 85 18:52:47 PDT
From: Hibbert.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: "SDI/AI/Free and open Debate" in AIList Digest V3 #128
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 85 19:44:48 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: SDI/AI/Free and open Debate
... For those interested in the history of technology, most of the
things we take for granted (microelectronics, automobiles, planes,
interstate highway system) were gestated and field tested by the
US Military. ...
If you are willing to stay off the interstate higways, the
inland waterways, airplanes and other fruits of technology ripened
by close association (computers, and computer networks as has been
pointed out) -- worry about the military and AI and SDI. But upon
close inspection, I think it is better that the military have the
technology and work the bugs out on trivial things like autonomous
tanks BEFORE it is an integral part of an artificial life support
system.
Agreed, the military was responsible for most of the advances you cite.
This doesn't do anything towards convincing me that that's the only
possible way for that outcome to have come about, or even that better
things wouldn't have happened in the absence of all the money going for
these ostensibly military purposes.
As a matter of fact, given my belief that ends NEVER justify means, I
don't even agree that having those things is good. (Considering that
people who didn't consent were forced to help pay for them.)
P.S. Why do you think field debugging of autonomous tanks will be less
costly/dangerous than of artificial life support systems? In neither
case will all the bugs be found in simulations and I'd expect
programmers to do better debugging in the midst of doctors practicing
than in the middle of a tank battle.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 28 September 1985 06:53:19 EDT
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cive.ri.cmu.edu
Subject: AI/ES Hype : Some Discussions
Gary Martin posed some interesting questions in AILIST # 126. One
problem lies in the definition of Artificial Intelligence. In recent
issues of AILIST some interesting points were raised as to what
constitutes an Expert System. Similar discussion on AI would be useful
to the AILIST readers.
I understand that Gary Martin worked with the development of many "so
called AI" systems and he feels that these systems did not do what
they were expected to do. One must note that AI has entered the
commercial market only recently and it will, probably, be a few years
before we see any successes/failures. The commercialization of AI
started after the Japanese initiated the fifth generation computing
project. The American press also helped in this endeavor. With all
the publicity given to the subject, people working in the area decided
to sell their (research) products. I guess they have the right to
advertise their products.
I view expert system techniques as a programming philosophy. I like
it and advocate its use. However, I do not claim that these techniques
are AI - just that they evolved from research in AI. As a marketing
strategy many tool builders use different techniques to sell their
product. If people feel that the AI products are sheer crap, they can
always speak up in conferences (such as the one in ES in Govt.
symposium), magazines (I saw one such article in Datamation sometime
ago, written by Gary Martin) - and even write to Consumer Report. Just
because a few people take advantage of the situation and make tall
claims does not mean that the whole field should be criticized. I
have seen some recent Expert System Tools that claim to induce from
examples. These systems are nothing but very good decision table
evaluators. I guess the phrase "induce from examples" is used as a
marketing strategy. This kind of stuff happens in all fields. It is
left to the consumer to decide what to buy (I guess that there are a
lot of consultants who are willing to advise you on this subject).
Sriram
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 85 20:29:22 -0100
From: Gideon Sahar <gideon%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Hype, AI, et al.
Recently a representative of a well known International company
gave a seminar here in Edinburgh, in which we were promised the
moon, earth, and virtually the whole milky way. It was claimed
that with a little work, and some money, a literal pot of gold
is just around the corner.
Now I do not disagree with the basic premise that there is enormous
promise in AI, and I realize that profits are (one) driving force
behind any progress. But I do object to glowing accounts of
successes in AI, which turn out (always!) to be X1/XCONN.
I find hype exasparating and tiring, but in this case it is also
dangerous for the continuing well-being of AI. The glowing promises
are going to be proven impossible to fulfill, and the holders of
the purse strings will draw them tight and plunge AI into another
winter.
So please, dampen down the enthusiasm, and inject some realism
into your reports and salesmanship. Don't forget to mention the
blood, the sweat, and the tears.
Gideon Sahar (gideon%uk.ac.ed.edai@ucl-cs.arpa)
Dept. of AI
University of Edinburgh.
------------------------------
Date: 30-Sep-85 16:00:23-PDT
From: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
Subject: SIFT Verification
The ``AI hype'' problem has been around for some time in the field
of program verification by proof of correctness techniques. In that
field, there has been little progress in the last two or three years,
despite very impressive claims made in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
However, we are now getting some hard evidence as to part of the cause of
the trouble. I have just obtained a copy of ``Peer Review of a Formal
Verification/Design Proof Methodology'', (NASA Conference Publication
2377, NASA Langley Research Center, Scientific and Technical Information
Branch, 1985), which is highly critical of SRI International's
work in the area. The work being evaluated is SRI's verification
of the Software Implemented Fault Tolerance system, a multiprocessor
system intended for use in future aircraft flight control systems.
SIFT was a major effort to utilize mathematical proof of correctness
technology, including automatic theorem provers, on a real problem. This
was a multi-year effort, occupying most of a decade.
Some quotes from the report:
[p. 22]
``Scientific workers are expected to describe their accomplishments
in a way that will not mislead or misinform. Members of the peer review
panel felt that many publications and conference presentations of the SRI
International verification work have not accurately presented the
accomplishments of the project; several panel members, as a result of the
peer review, felt that much of what they though had been done had indeed
not been done.''
``The research claims that the panel considered to be unjustified
are primarily in two categories; the first concerns the methodology
purportedly used by SRI International to validate SIFT, and the second
concerns the degree to which the validation had actually been done.
Many publications and conference presentations concerning SIFT
appear to have misrepresented the accomplishments of the project.''
[p. 23]
``The incompleteness of the SIFT verification exercise caused
concern at the peer review. Many panel members who expected (from the
literature) a more extensive proof were disillusioned. It was the
consensus of the panel that SRI's acomplishment claims were strongly
misleading.''
This sort of thing cannot be tolerated. When someone publishes papers
that make it look as if a hard problem has been cracked, but the results
are not usable by others, it tends to stop other work in the field.
The pure researchers avoid the field because the problems appear to be
solved and someone else has already taken the credit for the solution,
and the system builders avoid the field because the published results
don't tell them enough to build systems. This is exactly what has happened
to verification.
I'm singling out SRI here because this is one of the few cases where a
funding agency has called for a formal review of a research project by
an outside group and the review resulted in findings as strong as the ones
quoted above.
Some people at SRI who have seen this note have complained that I am quoting
the report out of context, so if you are really interested, you should
call NASA Langley (VA) and get the entire report; it's free. NASA
permitted SRI to insert a rebuttal of sorts as an appendix after the
review took place (in 1983), so the 1985 report gives both the SRI position
and that of the review committee.
John Nagle
[As moderator, I felt it my duty to ask for comments from someone
at SRI who knew of this project. I thank John Nagle for acknowledging
that the review committee's findings are disputed, but feel that
additional points in our behind-the-scenes discussion are worth passing
along. John's points about the effect of hype on AI research are
important and well within the scope of AIList discussion. The current
state of the art in automatic verification is also appropriate for
AIList (or for Soft-Eng@MIT-XX or ARMS-D@MIT-MC). I do not know
whether the merits and demerits of this particular verification project
and its peer review are worthy of discussion; I am simply attempting
to pass along as balanced and complete a presentation as possible.
I hope that my editorial decisions do not reflect undue bias on behalf
of my employer, SRI International. -- KIL]
Date: Thu 26 Sep 85 15:05:12-PDT
From: MELLIAR-SMITH@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: John Nagle's AIList Request
The report refered to by John Nagle (Peer Review of a Formal
Verification/Design Proof Methodology, NASA Conference Publication 2377, NASA
Langley Research Center, 1985) is a 50-odd page evaluation of an attempt to
provide a proof for a realistic system. The project in its entirety was, and
still is, beyond the capabilities of our currently available technology, and
thus the proof exercise was incomplete; the proofs achieved were design level
proofs, down to the level of prepost conditions, rather than proofs to the
level of code. The report reviewed what was done, and not entirely negatively.
The main cause for concern was that some descriptions of the work did not make
sufficiently clear precisely what had been done and what the limitations of the
work were. In particular, the first quotation cited by John Nagle continues:
"In many cases, the misrepresentation stems from the omission of facts rather
than from inclusion of falsehood." [...]
A more recent, and very painstaking, peer review of SRI's
work in verification, together with the corresponding work at GE
Research Labs, SDC, and University of Texas, will be published by the
DOD Computer Security Center next month.
Michael Melliar-Smith
Date: 26-Sep-85 16:35:35-PDT
From: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
Subject: Re: SIFT
[...] Unfortunately, previous statements have contained rather strong
claims. The peer review quotes from Meillar-Smith's and Richard
Schwartz's ``Hierchical Specification of the SIFT Fault-tolerant
Flight Control System,'' CSL-123, SRI International, March 1981:
``This paper describes the methodology employed to demonstrate
rigorously that the SIFT computer meets its reliability requirements.''
And from the same authors, in ``Formal Specification and Mechanical
Verification of SIFT'', IEEE Trans on Computers, C-31, #7, July, 1982:
``The formal proof, that a SIFT system in a `safe' state operates
correctly despite the presence of arbitrary faults, has been completed
all the way from the most abstract specification to the PASCAL program.
This proof has been performed using STP, a new specification and verification
system, designed and developed at SRI International. Except where explicitly
indicated, every specification exhibited in this paper has been mechanically
proven consistent with the requirements on SIFT and with the Pascal
implementation. The proof remains to be completed that the SIFT executive
performs an appropriate, safe, and timely reconfiguration in the presence of
faults.''
Those are strong statements. And they just aren't true.
[... you have selected two statements from reports of mine
about SIFT and stated that they are not true. YOU ARE WRONG!
... -- Michael Melliar-Smith]
Unless we make it clear where we are today, future work will founder.
When you fail and admit it, the field moves forward; everyone learns what
doesn't work and what some of the problems are. But when failure is hidden,
new workers are led to make the same mistakes again. I'd like to see
verification work and be used. Excessive claims have seriously damaged
this field. Only recently, though, has solid information debunking these
claims become available. Dissemination of the information in this report
will help those in the field make progress that is real. [...]
John Nagle
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Oct-85 1249 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #134
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Oct 85 12:49:14 PDT
Date: Thu 3 Oct 1985 20:20-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #134
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 4 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 134
Today's Topics:
Queries - Micro LISP & DEC20 LISP & Expert System Tools,
LISP - Franz Functions,
Survey - AI Project Planning,
Bibliography - Connectionism and Parallel Distributed Processing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 3 Oct 85 17:30:30-PDT
From: Robert Blum <BLUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: LISP on micros: need info and refs
I teach a tutorial every year at SCAMC (the largest medical computing
meeting in the US) on AI in medicine. My students invariably want to know
how to run LISP on their micros. I'd like to request information on
the various currently marketed LISPs for micros (their cost, their
speed, quality, facilities). Pointers to review articles would also
be helpful.
Thanks, Bob Blum (BLUM@sumex)
[Has anyone saved past AIList micro-LISP messages in a convenient
form? My archive is not in a convenient form for multimessage
topical searches. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 4 Oct 1985 10:06-EST
From: (Steinar Kj{rnsr|d) <steinar@oslo-vax>
Subject: Common Lisp for DEC20/TOPS20
I have a paper in front of me dated July 1984 describing
avaiable Common Lisps. I'm aware of several new implementations
since July 1984(!), and especially I'm interested in versions
for DEC20/TOPS20 and VAX/UNIX. Does anyone know *IF* and
*WHERE* these versions are avaiable ?
Steinar Kjaernsroed,
Institute of Informatics,
University of Oslo,
NORWAY
------------------------------
Date: Fri 4 Oct 85 08:19:08-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AI software tools
Several months ago I wrote a report on commercial AI software tools
(KEE, ART, S.1, DUCK, and SRL+ ... now called Language Craft). The paper
was basically in two parts : 1) general criteria for evaluating tools,
2) a description and partial evaluation of the five tools. I am now
revising this paper and would welcome input from people. I am especially
interested in comments from people that have used of these software tools
OR another tool not described in my paper, but which you feel is another
good candidate for discussion.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 10:36 EST
From: Atul Bajpai <bajpai%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: QUERY: Expert System Building Tools
Any ideas about what would be the implications (advantages/problems)
of using two (or more) different Expert System Tools (eg. KEE, ART,
S.1, Knowledge Carft etc.) to a single application. Has anyone done this
before? Is it practical to try such a thing? Any and all comments are
welcome. Thanks.
--Atul Bajpai-- (bajpai%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay OR atul@sushi.arpa)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 09:35:06 edt
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher@MIT-HTVAX.ARPA>
Subject: Franz Functions
(1) (getenv '|USER|) will return the user ID (Franz manual section 6).
Then you can either write a C routine that uses ←getpwent
(Unix manual section 3) and link it in using cfasl (Franz section
8.4), or franz code that opens and scans through the file /etc/passwd.
(2) (status ctime). Franz manual section 6.
(3) `plist'. Section 2.
(4) Try closing the file after you write to it, then reopening
it in "a" mode. Avoid filepos.
Incidentally, the mailing list "franz-friends@Berkeley.ARPA"
is a much more appropriate place for questions like this.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Oct 1985 15:12:53-EDT
From: kushnier@NADC
Subject: AI Project Planning Survey
AI PROJECT PLANNING SURVEY
In order to develop a better planning methodology for AI project
management, the Artificial Intelligence group at the Naval Air
Development Center is conducting a survey among readers of AILIST. The
answers to the survey will provide guidelines and performance metrics
which will aid in the ability to "scope out" future AI projects.
A summary of the results of this survey will be provided to the
respondents.
Although complete entries are desired, any information will help.
Response to this survey must be made at no cost to the
Government.
Please respond by 18 Oct 1985.
General Project Information
1. PROJECT NAME: (MYCIN, R1, PROSPECTOR, . . .)
2. NAME OF DEVELOPMENT GROUP:
3. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTACT:
4. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
5. TYPE OF SYSTEM: (Interpretation, Diagnosis, Monitoring, Prediction,
Design, Planning, Control, Debugging, Repair, Instruction)
6. DEVELOPMENT DATES:
7. CONTACT FOR SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION:
8. CURRENT LEVEL OF PROGRESS: (Fully successful, still developing,
demonstrated but not in use, . . .)
Implementation Specifics
9. METHOD OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION: (Frames, production rules,...)
10. IMPLEMENTATION LANGUAGE: (Lisp, Prolog, Ops5, . . .)
11. COMMERCIAL TOOLS USED (if any): (KEE, ART, M.1, . . .)
12. NUMBER OF MAN-YEARS INVESTED:
Knowledge representation:
Knowledge acquisition:
Implementation:
13. HOST COMPUTER: (Vax, Symbolics, IBM-PC, . . .)
14. NUMBER AND AVERAGE SIZE IN BYTES OF RULES, FRAMES, WFFs
OR OBJECTS (where applicable):
Performance Criterion
15. PROGRAM EXECUTION TIME: (Avg. rule firings/task, rules
fired/sec, . . .)
16. AMOUNT OF MEMORY IN BYTES FOR:
Short term memory:
Long term memory:
Procedural memory:
17. IN WHAT WAYS DID THE SCOPE OF THE DOMAIN CHANGE? (Full scope,
rescoping needed,...)
Knowledge Acquisition
18. KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION EFFORT IN MAN-YEARS:
19. NUMBER OF EXPERTS USED:
20. EXPERT SELECTION METHOD:
21. EXPERT INTERVIEWING METHODOLOGY:
Please send your responses to:
Ralph Fink, rfink@NADC.ARPA
Code 5021
Naval Air Development Center
Warminster, PA 18974
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 85 00:51:02 est
From: "Marek W. Lugowski" <marek%indiana.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: A reading list for a "Connectionism and Parallel Dist. Proc." course
After months of brainstorming (er, inaction), here comes at last the
promised reading list for Indiana U.'s planned connectionism course,
78 items long--just right for a semester. IU's a liberal arts school,
after all. :-)
-- Marek
A list of sources for teaching a graduate AI course "Connectionism and
Parallel Distributed Processing" at Indiana University's Computer Science
Department. Compiled by Marek W. Lugowski (marek@indiana.csnet) and Pete
Sandon (sandon@wisc-ai.arpa), Summer 1985.
Ackley, D. H., "Learning Evaluation Functions in Stochastic Parallel
Networks," CMU Thesis Proposal, December 1984.
Amari, S-I., "Neural Theory of Association and Concept-Formation," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 26, pp. 175-185, 1977.
Ballard, D. H., "Parameter Networks: Toward a Theory of Low-Level Vision,"
IJCAI, vol. 7, pp. 1068-1078, 1981.
Ballard, D. H. and D. Sabbah, "On Shapes," IJCAI, vol. 7, pp. 607-612, 1981.
Ballard, D. H., G. E. Hinton, and T. J. Sejnowski, "Parallel Visual
Computation," Nature, vol. 103, pp. 21-26, November 1983.
Ballard, D. H., "Cortical Connections: Structure and Function," University of
Rochester Technical Report #133, July 1984.
Block, H. D., "A Review of "Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational
Geometry"," Information and Control, vol. 17, pp. 501-522, 1970.
Bobrowski, L., "Rules of Forming Receptive Fields of Formal Neurons During
Unsupervised Learning Processes," Biological Cybernetics, vol. 43,
pp. 23-28, 1982.
Bongard, M., "Pattern Recognition", Hayden Book Company (Spartan Books), 1970.
Brown, C. M., C. S. Ellis, J. A. Feldman, T. J. LeBlanc, and G. L. Peterson,
"Research with the Butterfly Multicomputer," Rochester Research Review,
pp. 3-23, 1984.
Christman, D. P., "Programming the Connection Machine," MIT EECS Department
Masters Thesis, 1984.
Csernai, L. P. and J. Zimanyi, "Mathematical Model for the Self-Organization
of Neural Networks," Biological Cybernetics, vol. 34, pp. 43-48, 1979.
Fahlman, S. E., NETL, a System for Representing and Using Real Knowledge ,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1979.
Fahlman, S. E., G. E. Hinton, and T. J. Sejnowski, "Massively Parallel
Architectures for AI: NETL, Thistle and Boltzmann Machines," Proceedings
of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1983.
Feldman, J. A., "A Distributed Information Processing Model of Visual Memory,"
University of Rochester Technical Report #52, December 1979.
Feldman, J. A., "Dynamic Connections in Neural Networks," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 46, pp. 27-39, 1982.
Feldman, J. A. and D. H. Ballard, "Computing with Connections," in Human and
Machine Vision, ed. J. Beck, B. Hope and A. Rosenfeld (eds), Academic
Press, New York, 1983.
Feldman, J. A. and L. Shastri, "Evidential Inference in Activation Networks,"
Rochester Research Review, pp. 24-29, 1984.
Feldman, J. A., "Connectionist Models and Their Applications: Introduction,"
Special Issue of Cognitive Science, vol. 9, p. 1, 1985.
Fry, G., ed., Nanotechnology Notebook, an unpublished collection of published
and unpublished material on molecular computing. Contact either the
editor (cfry@mit-prep.arpa) or Scott Jones (saj@mit-prep.arpa) at MIT
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory for distribution and/or bibliography
information. Contains material by Eric Drexler, Richard Feynman, Kevin
Ulmer and others.
Fukushima, K., "Cognitron: A Self-organizing Multilayered Neural Network,"
Biological Cybernetics, vol. 20, pp. 121-136, 1975.
Fukushima, K., "Neocognitron: A Self-organizing Neural Network Model for
a Mechanism of Pattern Recognition Unaffected by Shift in Position,"
Biological Cybernetics, vol. 36, pp. 193-202, 1980.
Hebb, D. O., The Organization of Behavior, Wiley, New York, 1949.
Hewitt, C., "Viewing Control Structures as Patterns of Passing Messages",
Artificial Intelligence: An MIT Perspective, Winston and Brown, Editors,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1979.
Hewitt, C. and P. de Jong, "Open Systems", MIT Artificial Laboratory Memo #691,
December 1982.
Hewitt, C. and H. Lieberman, "Design Issues in Parallel Architectures for
Artificial Intelligence", MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Memo #750,
November 1983.
Hewitt, C., an article on asynchronous parallel systems not simulable
by Turing Machines or Omega-order logic, BYTE, April 1985.
Hillis, D. W., "New Computer Architectures and Their Relationship to Physics
or Why Computer Science Is No Good", International Journal of
Theoretical Physics, vol. 21, pp. 255-262, 1982.
Hinton, G. E., "Relaxation and its Role in Vision," University of Edinburgh
Ph.D. Dissertation, 1977.
Hinton, G. E. and J. A. Anderson, Parallel Models of Associative Memory,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1981.
Hinton, G. E. and T. J. Sejnowski, "Optimal Perceptual Inference," Proceedings
of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on CV and PR, pp. 448-453,
June 1983.
Hinton, G. E., T. J. Sejnowski, and D. H. Ackley, "Boltzmann Machines:
Constraint Satisfaction Networks that Learn," CMU Department of Computer
Science Technical Report No. 84-119, May 1984.
Hinton, G. E., "Distributed Representations", CMU Department of Computer
Science Technical Report No. 84-157, October 1984.
Hirai, Y., "A New Hypothesis for Synaptic Modification: An Interactive Process
between Postsynaptic Competition and Presynaptic Regulation," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 36, pp. 41-50, 1980.
Hirai, Y., "A Learning Network Resolving Multiple Match in Associative
Memory," IJCPR, vol. 6, pp. 1049-1052, 1982.
Hofstadter, D. R., "Who Shoves Whom Inside the Careenium?, or, What is the
Meaning of the Word 'I'?", Indiana University Computer Science Department
Technical Report #130, Bloomington, Indiana, 1982.
Hofstadter, D, "The Architecture of Jumbo", Proceedings of the International
Machine Learning Workshop, Monticello, Illinois, June 1983.
Hofstadter, D. R., "The Copycat Project", MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Memo #755, Cambridge, Massachusetts, January 1984.
Hofstadter, D. R., Metamagical Themas, Basic Books, New York, 1985.
Hopfield, J.J., "Neural Networks and Physical Systems with Emergent Collective
Computational Abilities," Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, vol. 79, pp. 2554-2558, 1982.
Jefferson, D. E., "Virtual Time", UCLA Department of Computer Scienced
Technical Report No. 83-213, Los Angeles, California, May 1983.
Jefferson, D. E. and H. Sowizral, "Fast Concurrent Simulation Using the Time
Warp Mechanim, Part 1: Local Control", Rand Corporation Technical Report,
Santa Monica, California, June 1983.
Jefferson, D. E. and H. Sowizral, "Fast Concurrent Simulation Using the Time
Warp Mechanim, Part 2: Global Control", Rand Corporation Technical Report,
Santa Monica, California, August 1983.
John, E. R., "Switchboard versus Statistical Theories of Learning and Memory,"
Science, vol. 177, pp. 850-864, September 1972.
Kandel, E. R., "Small Systems of Neurons," Scientific American, vol. 241,
pp. 67-76, September 1979.
Kanerva, P., Self-Propagating Search: A Unified Theory of Memory, Center
for Study of Language and Information (CSLI) Report No. 84-7 (Stanford
Department of Philosophy Ph.D. Dissertation), Stanford, California, 1984.
To appear as a book by Bradford Books (MIT Press).
Kanerva, P., "Parallel Structures in Human and Computer Memory", Cognitiva 85,
Paris, June 1985.
Kirkpatrick, S., and C. D. Gelatt, Jr. and M. P. Vecchi, "Optimization by
Simulated Annealing", Science, vol. 220, no. 4598, 13 May 1983.
Kohonen, T., "Self-Organized Formation of Topologically Correct Feature Maps,"
Biological Cybernetics, vol. 43, pp. 59-69, 1982.
Kohonen, T., "Analysis of a Simple Self-Organizing Process," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 44, pp. 135-140, 1982.
Kohonen, T., "Clustering, Taxonomy, and Topological Maps of Patterns," IJCPR,
vol. 6, pp. 114-128, 1982.
Kohonen, T., Self-Organization and Associative Memory, 2nd edition,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984.
Lieberman, H., "A Preview of Act1", MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Memo #626.
Malsburg, C. von der, "Self-Organization of Orientation Sensitive Cells in the
Striate Cortex," Kybernetik, vol. 14, pp. 85-100, 1973.
McClelland, J. L., "Putting Knowledge in its Place: A Scheme for Programming
Parallel Processing Structures on the Fly," Cognitive Science, vol. 9,
pp. 113-146, 1985.
McClelland, J. L. and D. E. Rumelhart, "Distributed Memory and the
Representation of General and Specific Information," Journal of
Experimental Psychiatry: General, vol. 114, pp. 159-188, 1985.
McClelland, J. L. and D. E. Rumelhart, Editors, Parallel Distributed
Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 1,
Bradford books (MIT Press), Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985 (in press).
McCullough, W. S., Embodiments of Mind, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
1965.
Minsky, M. and S. Papert, Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational
Geometry, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1969.
Minsky, M., "Plain Talk about Neurodevelopmental Epitemology", MIT Artificial
Intelligence Lab Memo #430, June 1977.
Minsky, M., "K-Lines: A Theory of Memory", MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Memo #516, June 1979.
Minsky, M., "Nature Abhors an Empty Vaccum", MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Memo #647, August 8, 1981.
Mozer, M. C., "The Perception of Multiple Objects: A Parallel, Distributed
Processing Approach", UCSD Thesis Proposal, Institute for Cognitive
Science, UCSD, La Jolla, California, August 1984.
Nass, M. M. and L. N. Cooper, "A Theory for the Development of Feature
Detecting Cells in Visual Cortex," Biological Cybernetics, vol. 19,
pp. 1-18, 1975.
Norman, "Categorization of Action Slips", Psychological Review, vol. 88, no. 1,
1981.
Palm, G., "On Associative Memory," Biological Cybernetics, vol. 36, pp. 19-31,
1980.
Plaut, D. C., "Visual Recognition of Simple Objects by a Connection Network,"
University of Rochester Technical Report #143, August 1984.
Rosenblatt, F., Principles of Neurodynamics, Spartan Books, New York, 1962.
Rumelhart, D. E. and D. Zipser, "Feature Discovery by Competitive Learning,"
Cognitive Science, vol. 9, pp. 75-112, 1985.
Sabbah, D., "Design of a Highly Parallel Visual Recognition System," IJCAI,
vol. 7, pp. 722-727, 1981.
Sabbah, D., "Computing with Connections in Visual Recognition of Origami
Objects," Cognitive Science, vol. 9, pp. 25-50, 1985.
Smolensky, P., "Schema Selection and Stochastic Inference in Modular
Environments", Proceedings of the AAAI-83, Washington, 1983.
Theriault, D. G., "Issues in the Design and Implementation of Act2", MIT
Artificial Intelligence Lab Technical Report #728, June 1983.
Touretzky, D. S. and G. E. Hinton, "Symbols Among the Neurons: Details of
a Connectionist Inference Architecture," IJCAI, vol. 9, pp. 238-243,
1985.
Uhr, L., "Recognition Cones and Some Test Results," in Computer Vision
Systems, ed. A. R. Hanson and E. M. Riseman, Academic Press, New York,
1978.
Uhr, L. and R. Douglass, "A Parallel-Serial Recognition Cone System for
Perception: Some Test Results," Pattern Recognition, vol. 11, pp. 29-39,
1979.
Van Lehn, K., "A Critique of the Connectionist Hypothesis that Recognition
Uses Templates, not Rules," Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference
of the Cognitive Science Society, 1984.
Willshaw, D. J., "A Simple Network Capable of Inductive Generalization,"
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, vol. 182, pp. 233-247, 1972.
A list of contacts known to us that have taught or are interested in
teaching a similar course/seminar:
J. Barnden, Indiana U. Computer Science
G. Hinton, CMU Computer Science
D. Hofstadter, U. of Michigan Psychology
J. McClelland, CMU Psychology
D. Rumelhart, UCSD Psychology
P. Smolensky, U. of Colorado Computer Science
D. Touretzky, CMU Computer Science
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Oct-85 0032 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #135
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Oct 85 00:32:49 PDT
Date: Sun 6 Oct 1985 22:55-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #135
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 7 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 135
Today's Topics:
Query - TIMM Expert System Tool,
Psychology & Logic - Probabilistic Counterexample to Modus Ponens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 4 Oct 85 23:49:55-EDT
From: Richard A. Cowan <COWAN@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: Expert System Tool
Does anyone know anything about TIMM, an "expert system tool" put out
by General Research Corp? I hear it costs $50,000 or so. I'd be
interested to hear what a tool could do that costs that much money,
especially in comparison to KEE.
Don't want to hear much; just send a "thumbs up/thumbs down" reply
directly to cowan@mit-xx.
Thanks,
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 85 20:07:27 PDT
From: Hibbert.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
In a recent issue of AIList, John McLean cited an article about
inconsistencies in public opinion that apparently said:
Before the 1980 presidential election, many held the two beliefs
below:
(1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not
Ronald Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
(2) A Republican will win the election.
Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
(3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
I would say the problem with this analysis is that people believed,
instead of statement 1, the following similar statement:
(1a) If a Republican wins the election and the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
People may have been willing to say that they believed #1, but that's
only because they didn't know the difference bewtween 1 and 1a.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 14:11:34 edt
From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: Re: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
Chris Hibbert says that the purported counterexample to modus ponens I reported
rests on a distinction between
(1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
and
(1a) If a Republican wins the election and the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
He says that
People may have been willing to say that they believed #1, but that's
only because they didn't know the difference bewtween 1 and 1a.
I would like to see some further discussion of this since I'm afraid that
I don't see the difference between (1) and (1a) either. Certainly there
is no difference with respect to inferential power as far as classical
logic is concerned.
John
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 13:24:56 PDT
From: Hibbert.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
Oops. I didn't think through very clearly what I had in mind. (And
definitely didn't say clearly what I was thinking.) I'll try again.
People's thinking may have been closer to probabilities rather than
classical logic. (Since most people don't understand either in any
formal way.) I'd like to claim that people believed something more like
the following:
(1b) If a Republican wins the election, then if the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will probably be John Anderson.
(2b) A Republican will probably win the election.
without believing:
(3b) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will probably be
Anderson.
And these beliefs are entirely consistent. (Given that peoples
standards for what constitutes a high probability are remarkably
inconsistent.)
Thanks John for making me think out more clearly what I had in mind.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: 2 Oct 85 08:33:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms>
Subject: A (supposed) Counterexample to Modus Ponens
> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 85 10:57:18 edt
> From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
>
> In the most recent issue of The←Journal←of←Philosophy, there is an
> article by Vann McGee that presents several counterexamples to modus
> ponens. I am not sure whether to count them as counterexamples or as
> cases where we hold inconsistent beliefs. If the latter view is right,
> it should be of interest to those who model belief systems. [...]
I think this is just a problem with imprecisely stated beliefs:
surely the reasonable interpretation is that one believes (1) in
the simple sense that it's (almost certainly) true, but one
believes: (2') it is *probable* that a Republican will win the election.
After all, if you believed it was *certain* that "a Republican
wins the election" was true (maybe because you woke up the
morning after the election and someone told you: a Republican
has won), you would then believe (3). "Normal" rules of logic
don't work with probabilistic statements in lots of cases, eg:
I believe:
(1) the die will not come up as a 1.
(2) the die will not come up as a 2.
...
(6) the die will not come up as a 6.
but I certainly don't believe the conjunction of (1)-(6).
Of course, (1)-(6) should really be stated as:
(1) the die will (probably) not come up as 1, etc.
So, I consider these cases as neither true counterexamples to modus
ponens, nor as examples of inconsistent beliefs.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 16:40:49 edt
From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: Modus Ponens
I agree that probability is the way to go in modeling beliefs. It is easy
to construct a distribution where the probabilities for (1) and (2) are
both quite high but where the probability of (3) is quite low even though
(3) follows from (1) and (2). Hence if believing p means that one assigns
a high probability to it, it is possible to believe (1) and (2) without
believing their logical consequence.
John
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 18:28:03 PDT
From: albert@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU (Anthony Albert)
Subject: Re: Counterexample to modus ponens
(1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
(2) A Republican will win the election.
Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
(3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
I don't think the given example is a counter-example of modus-ponens
or of contradictory belief systems. It is not modus-ponens because
the statements are not true or false, but are beliefs. You cannot make
a statement that is true or false about the future.
As far as beliefs, a non-contradictory set could be:
1) If a Republican wins then Reagan will win.
2) If Reagan doesn't win then a Republican won't win.
3) Unless a Democrat wins, a Republican will win.
A belief X can always be qualified, usually by an all things being equal
type of default qualification. The given example ignores these implicit
conditions and so leads to a contradiction.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Oct-85 0219 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #136
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Oct 85 02:18:58 PDT
Date: Sun 6 Oct 1985 23:26-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #136
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 7 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 136
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Higher-Order Logic Features in Prolog (UPenn) &
Cognitive Science and Computers (UCB) &
The Programmer's Apprentice: KBEmacs (CMU) &
Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (SU) &
Planning Under Uncertainty using Simulation (SU) &
Aggregation in Qualitative Simulation (MIT) &
Conflict in Problem Solving (MIT) &
Introspection (SU) &
Compact Lisp Machine (SMU),
Seminar Series - IBM Yorktown Projects (Rutgers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 85 10:44 EDT
From: Dale Miller <Dale%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Higher-Order Logic Features in Prolog (UPenn)
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Restivo@SU-SCORE.]
A student of mine is holding a seminar at the University of Pennsylvania
that might be of interest to the Prolog bboard readers.
-Dale Miller
Joint Mathematics / Computer Science
LOGIC COLLOQUIUM
Introducing Higher-Order Logic Features into Prolog
Gopalan Nadathur
Monday 30th September 1985
4:40 p.m., DRL 4E17
This talk reports work being undertaken towards a doctoral dissertation
under the supervision of Prof. Dale Miller. This work is motivated by a
desire to examine whether certain features afforded by higher-order logics
are useful in a computational setting.
In this talk we shall present a language that is similar to that of Horn
Clauses of first-order logic except that first-order terms are now replaced
by typed lambda-calculus terms. We shall discuss a theorem-prover based on
higher-order unification for this logic. We shall also attempt to motivate
the usefulness of this language for specifying and performing computations.
We are interested in extending this language by permitting suitably
restricted occurrences of predicate variables, and we shall conclude our
talk by a brief discussion of the issues involved in doing so.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 12:46:31 PDT
From: admin@ucbcogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Cognitive Science and Computers (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, October 8, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Terry Winograd, Computer Science, Stanford University
TITLE: "What Can Cognitive Science Tell Us About Computers?"
Much work in cognitive science rests on the assumption that
there is a common form of "information processing" that under-
lies human thought and language and that also corresponds to
the ways we can program digital computers. The theory should
then be valid both for explaining the functioning of the
machines (at whatever level of "intelligence") and for under-
standing how they can be integrated into human situations and
activities.
I will argue that theories like those of current cognitive
science are based on a "rationalistic" tradition, which is
appropriate for describing the mechanics of machine operation,
but is inadequate for understanding human cognitive activity
and misleading as a guide to the design and application of
computer technology. The emphasis will be on looking at
alternatives to this tradition, as a starting point for under-
standing what computers really can do.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Oct 1985 1410-EDT
From: Sylvia Brahm <BRAHM@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - The Programmer's Apprentice: KBEmacs (CMU)
SPEAKER: Richard C. Waters (AIL, MIT)
TOPIC: The Programmer's Apprentice: A Session with KBEmacs
WHEN: Friday, October 18, 1985
WHERE: Wean Hall 4605
TIME: 1:30 P.M.
The Knowledge-Based Editor in Emacs (KBEmacs) is the current demonstra-
tion system implemented as part of the Programmer's Apprentice project.
KBEmacs is capable of acting as a semi-expert assistant to a person who
is writing a program -- taking over some parts of the programming task.
Using KBEmacs, it is possible to construct a program by issuing a series
of high level commands. This series of commands can be as much as an
order of magnitude shorter than the program it describes.
KBEmacs is capable of operating on Ada and Lisp programs of realistic
size and complexity. Although KBEmacs is neither fast enough nor robust
enough to be considered a true prototype, both of these problems could
be overcome if the system were to be reimplemented.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 1 Oct 85 08:40:19-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning (SU)
DAY October 1, 1985
EVENT Computer Science Colloquium
PLACE Skilling Auditorium
TIME 4:15
TITLE Belief, Awareness, and Limited Reasoning
PERSON Dr. Joe Halpern
FROM IBM Corporation
BELIEF, AWARENESS, AND LIMITED REASONING
Classical possible-worlds models for knowledge and belief suffer from the
problem of logical omniscience: agents know all tautologies and their
knowledge is closed under logical consequence. This unfortunately is not a
very accurate account of how people operate! We review possible-worlds
semantics, and then go on to introduce three approaches towards solving the
problem of logical omniscience. In particular, in our logics, the set of
beliefs of an agent does not necessarily contain all valid formulas. One of
our logics deals explicitly with awareness, where, roughly speaking, it is
necessary to be aware of a concept before one can have beliefs about it,
while another gives a model of local reasoning, where an agent is viewed as a
society of minds, each with its own cluster of beliefs, which may contradict
each other. The talk will be completely self-contained.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 1 Oct 85 14:27:13-PDT
From: Alison Grant <GRANT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Planning Under Uncertainty using Simulation (SU)
Medical Information Sciences Colloquium
Thursday, October 3, 1985
Stanford University Medical Center
Room M-114
1:15-2:15 P.M.
Speaker: Curt Langlotz, MIS Program
Title:
Planning under uncertainty
using probabilistic and symbolic simulation
Artificial intelligence research has largely concentrated on
solving two kinds of planning problems: (1) problems for which there
is certainty about the consequences of action and for which the
planning goals can be met completely (e.g., robot movement between
rooms in a building), and (2) problems for which explicit guidelines
exist for the construction of plans (e.g., the ONCOCIN, MOLGEN, and
ATTENDING programs). However, many planning problems are
characterized by a lack of explicit plan construction guidelines,
goals that are difficult to satisfy completely, and actions whose
consequences cannot be predicted with certainty. This talk will
describe an architecture for planning in such situations and will
outline the motivations behind its design. One key component of this
new architecture is the ability to predict the consequences of plans.
A simulation architecture is currently under development to make these
predictions. It will also be described, along with the motivations
for rejecting existing simulation techniques (both qualitative and
deterministic) in the domain of cancer therapy planning.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1985 16:21 EDT
From: Peter de Jong <DEJONG%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA>
Reply-to: Cog-Sci-Request%MIT-OZ
Subject: Seminar - Aggregation in Qualitative Simulation (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Thursday 3, October 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"The Use of Aggregation in Qualitative Simulation"
Daniel S. Weld
MIT AI Lab.
I introduce a technique called aggregation which has several
applications to the problem of qualitative simulation and envisioning:
- It can simplify reasoning by dynamically creating more abstract
process descriptions of the types of change occurring in a system.
- It can enable the application of powerful continuous analytic
techniques such as limit analysis to systems whose descriptions
include discrete processes.
- It can direct the reformulation of quantities to more abstract
representations.
Aggregation works by searching the simulation history structure to find
cycles of repeating processes. Once cycles have been detected, a more
abstract continuous process, equivalent to the net effect of the cycle,
is created. Analysis now proceeds on the continuous process.
Aggregation correctly handles cycles that contain other cycles.
A program called PEPTIDE has been written to test these ideas in the
domain of molecular genetics. Paper tests have also been done in the
domains of digital electronics and xerography.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 30 Sep 85 18:18:03-EDT
From: Michael Eisenberg <DUCK%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Conflict in Problem Solving (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Andre Boder is scheduled to give a talk at the next ideas seminar,
TOMORROW, Tuesday Oct. 1, at 4:30. The talk is scheduled to
be held at the 3rd floor conference room in NE43.
Title: What Is a Conflict in Problem Solving?
I will address the question of why people have difficulty in
problem-solving, arguing that in most cases, a conflict between
incompatible ideas may be evoked. The conjecture is based on the
analysis of familiar-schemes brought to bear in the problem.
I will show that the relation between these schemes may generate
incompatible representations of the same situation. Conflicts
result from difficulty in reducing these incompatibilities.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 3 Oct 85 07:50:26-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Introspection (SU)
SIGLUNCH, Friday, October 4, Chemistry Gazebo, 12:05-1:00.
Introspection
Michael R. Genesereth
Logic Group
Knowledge Systems Laboratory
Stanford University
Abstract: Introspection is a significant part of human mental
activity. We introspect whenever we think about how to solve problem,
whenever we decide what information we need to solve a problem,
whenever we decide that a problem is unsolvable.
By its nature, the process of introspection involves both descriptive
and prescriptive metaknowledge. Over the past years, logicians and AI
researchers have devoted considerable attention to autoepistemic
sentences (involving terms like KNOW). By comparison, little attention
has been paid to prescriptive metaknowledge (involving terms like OUGHT).
This talk introduces a semantics for such knowledge in the form of
constraints on the process of problem solving. It demonstrates the
computational advantages of introspection, and analyzes the
computational fidelity and cost of various introspective
architectures. Finally, it discusses the potential for practical
application in logic programming and building expert systems.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Oct 1985 09:08-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Compact Lisp Machine (SMU)
Speaker: Lawerence E. Gene Matthews
Associate Director of the Computer Science Laboratory
Texas Instruments, Dallas
Date: Wednesday, October 16, 1985
Time: 11:30 AM Luncheon
12:15 Program
Place: Richardson Hilton, SW corner of N. Central Expressway & Campbell
The Compact LISP Machine (CLM) development program is the first of
several DARPA programs intended to provide embedded symbolic computing
capbilities for government applications. As one of many contacts
funded under the Strategic Computing Program the CLM will provide
a ruggedized symbolic computer capability for insertion of AI and
robotics technology in awide range of applications.
A description of the four-module CLM system architecture is presented.
Starting with the CLM development goals, a brief system overview and
discussion of advanced software development and maintenance tools are
covered. System and module packaging are described including options
available beyond the scope of the current contract. Each of the four
modules under development are described starting with the CPU module,
which contains the 40 Mhz VLSI CPU chip, and its companion map/cache
module. The module developed for providing physical memory is
described followed by a discussion of the Multibus I/O module which
supports communication between the high performance system bus and
Multibus I. The VLSI LISP processor chip is next described with a
simplified block diagram and packaging information. Finally, some
information on preliminary predicted performance is covered.
Luncheon reservations 995-4440 Monday October 14 $7.00
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 85 13:43:21 EDT
From: Chidanand Apte <Apte.Yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Seminar Series - IBM Yorktown Projects (Rutgers)
[Forwarded from the Rutgers BBoard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
IBM talks at Rutgers-IBM AI exchange seminar, 10th Oct., Hill Center.
Members of IBM Research from the T.J. Watson Research Center will be
presenting six talks at the 3rd annual Rutgers-IBM AI exchange seminar,
on 10th October 1985, at the Rutgers Computer Science dept. Preliminary
titles and abstracts:
"A representation for complex physical domains"
Sanjaya Addanki
We are exploring a system, called PROMPT, that will be capable of
reasoning from first principles and high level knowledge in complex,
physical domains. Such problem-solving calls for a representation that
will support the different analyses techniques required (e.g.
differential, asymptotic, perturbation etc.). Efficiency considerations
require that the representation also support heuristic control of
reasoning techniques. This talk lays the ground work for our effort by
briefly describing the ontology and the representation scheme of PROMPT.
Our ontology allows reasoning about multiple pasts and different
happenings in the same space-time. The ontology provides important
distinctions between materials, objects, bulk and distributed
abstractions among physical entities. We organize world knowledge into
"prototypes" that are used to focus the reasoning process.
Problem-solving involves reasoning with and modifying prototypes.
"YES/FAME/IDV: An initial approach to a planning consultant for financial
marketing problems"
Chidanand Apte/ Jim Griesmer/ John Kastner/ Yoshio Tozawa
The YES/FAME (Yorktown Expert Systems for Financial and Marketing
Expertise) project is investigating interactive consultants to aid in the
financial marketing of computing technology. Significant expertise
seems to be required in the preparation of a recommendation to a customer
of a technical solution that meets his computing requirements over a
period of time, coupled with a plan for acquiring this technology under
financial terms and conditions that best suit the customer's needs and
concerns. Expertise is also required in generating a convincing financial
argument that will enable the "selling" of this plan. We present in this
talk an overview of an initial demonstration version (YES/FAME/IDV) of a
knowledge based system that illustrates these capabilities for a small
subset of the overall problem.
"Logical extensions of logic programming based on intuitionistic logic"
Seif Haridi
Logic Programming is widely known as programming using Horn clauses. We
extend this paradigm to handle more general relations than Horn clauses.
Based on principles from first order intuitionistic (constructive) logic
we show a much more expressive language with a complete execution
mechanism that is able to handle general first order queries, iterative
and recursive statements, and positive and negative queries with equal
strength. The language has Horn clauses as a subset, and its interpreter
behaves as efficient as a Horn clause (PROLOG) interpreter on that
subset.
"PLNLP: The programming language for natural language processing"
George Heidorn
This talk describes research being done at Yorktown to provide advanced
tools for building knowledge-based systems that involve a large amount
of natural language processing. PLNLP is a programming language based on
the augmented phrase structure grammar formalism that is particularly
well-suited for specifying the processing of natural language text. A
large, broad-coverage English grammar has been written in PLNLP, and
implementations in LISP/VM and PL.8 are currently being used in
applications doing text-critiquing, machine translation, and speech
synthesis. One of these systems, CRITIQUE, will be used as a concrete
illustration of the power of the language.
"YSCOPE: A shell with domain knowledge for solving computer performance
problems"
Joseph Hellerstein
Solving computer-performance problems requires two types of knowledge:
knowledge of the computer system and insights from queueing theory. We
describe the Yorktown Shell for Computer-Performance Experts (YSCOPE)
which is a special-purpose shell that incorporates a knowledge of
queueing theory to facilitate building computer-performance expert
systems.
"Interactive classification in knowledge representations"
Eric Mays
A classifier for a structured representation language allows
semi-automatic maintenance of a knowledge base. However, problems, such
as detecting and recovering from inconsistencies, arise when editing a
KB which has been updated by classifier operations. This talk will
address preliminary investigations along these lines.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Oct-85 0053 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #137
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Oct 85 00:53:36 PDT
Date: Tue 8 Oct 1985 23:09-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #137
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 9 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 137
Today's Topics:
Queries - AI Machines &
Formal Semantics of Object-Oriented Languages &
Knowledge Representation,
AI Tools - Lisp for Macintosh & TIMM
Opinion - Social Responsibility,
Expert Systems - Aeronautical Application,
Games - Hitech Chess Performance,
Bindings - Information Science Program at NSF
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 85 15:20:34 EDT
From: "Srinivasan Krishnamurthy" <1438@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET>
Subject: Do I really need a AI Machine?
Dear readers,
I work at COMSAT LABS, Maryland. We are getting into AI in a big way
and would like comments, suggestions and answers to the
following questions,to justify a big investment on a AI machine.
* What are the specific gains of using a AI Machine (like symbolics)
over developing AI products/packages on general purpose
machines like - VAX-11/750-UNIX(4.2BSD), 68000/UNIX etc.
* How will an environment without AI Machines effect a major
development effort.
* How is the HW Architecture of Symbolics, TI Explorer
different from VAX.
* What are the limitations/constraints of general purpose HW
when used for AI applications.
* Survey results of AI HW Machines. (if available)
* Pointers to other relevant issues.
Please message me at:
Mailnet address:Vasu@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET
Arpanet address: Vasu%NJIT-EIES.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
My sincere thanks in advance.
..........Vasu.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 11:06:40 edt
From: "Dennis R. Bahler" <drb%virginia.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: request: formal semantics of OOL's
Does anyone have pointers to work done on
formal specification and/or formal semantic definition of
object-oriented languages or systems such as Smalltalk-80?
Dennis Bahler
Usenet: ...cbosgd!uvacs!drb Dept. of Computer Science
CSnet: drb@virginia Thornton Hall
ARPA: drb.virginia@csnet-relay University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
------------------------------
Date: Mon 7 Oct 85 17:27:03-PDT
From: MOHAN@USC-ECLC.ARPA
Subject: knowledge representation
Hi,
I am looking for a short list of introductory and survey type articles
on Knowledge Representation.
I am also looking for any work done on representing visual scenes so
that a system could reason about them and answers queries etc.
Minsky, M.:A Framework for Representing Knowledge, in Winston,P.H.
(ed.) "The Psychology of Computer Vision" is a typical paper on the type of
work I am interested. Since I have just started reading on this subject,
I am presently interested in all related topics (except the CAD/CAM
type of reasoning). What I am looking for is an introduction to this big
field: papers which have presented the key ideas and some surveys which can
give me an idea of the type of work being done in such areas.
Thanks,
Rakesh Mohan
mohan@eclc.arpa
[The October 1983 issue of IEEE Computer was a special issue on knowledge
representation, as was the February 1980 issue of the SIGART Newsletter.
Technical Report TR-1275 of the University of Maryland Department of
Computer Science (issued May 1983) is the proceedings of an informal
workshop on "Representation and Processing of Spatial Knowledge". There
were also several papers on image-to-database matching in the April 9-11,
1985, SPIE Arlington, VA, conference on Applications of AI (SPIE volume
548). Vision researchers generally seem happy with networks of
frames, although other representations are in use (e.g., connectionist
coarse coding, logic clauses). I have sent a fairly extensive list
of vision citations to Rakesh and to Vision-List@AIDS-UNIX. -- KIL ]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 12:02 EDT
From: Carole D Hafner <HAFNER%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp for Macintosh
There is a new magazine out called MacUser. The premier issue, which
is available at newsstands, contains a review of ExperLisp for the
Macintosh. The review says it's good but buggy.
There is also a version of Xlisp by David Betz available through the
public domain software networks. I got a copy from the Boston Computer
Society, and when I tried to open it on my 128K Mac, the computer crashed
(i.e., the screen went crazy and strange noises occurred).
Perhaps Xlisp only runs on the 512K Mac, or else I got a bad version.
Carole Hafner
hafner@northeastern
------------------------------
Date: 8 Oct 85 12:22 EDT
From: Dave.Touretzky@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: TIMM
There's been some talk about AI hype in this digest, but not too many folks
have stood up and pointed to actual examples. Cowan's inquiry about TIMM
affords an excellent opportunity, so here goes.
As far as I can tell, TIMM is the most colossal ripoff in the expert
systems business. I got a demo last year at AAAI-84 from Dr. Wanda
Rappaport, who I believe is one of the developers. Basically, TIMM
works by comparing the facts of a situation with a set of stored
templates, called training instances. The underlying data structure
looks like a frame, i.e. it has named slots. Each training instance
consists of a frame with some or all of the slots filled in. After
you've given TIMM enough training examples, you tell it to "generalize",
which causes it to do some computation on the training set to extract
regularities and relationships between slot values. Then, to have TIMM
solve a problem, you give it a frame with some of the slots filled in,
and it fills in the rest of the slots.
TIMM is a mere toy, in my opinion, because it doesn't provide adequate
facilities for expressing knowledge either procedurally or declaratively.
You can't write explicit IF/THEN rules, as in OPS5 or EMYCIN. You can't
build data structures, i.e. it's not a real frame system with inheritance
and demons and Lisp data objects that you create and pass around and do
computation on. Nor can you write logical axioms and feed them to a general
purpose inference engine, like Prolog's resolution algorithm. Many, perhaps
most kinds of knowledge can not be conveniently expressed as training
instances, but that's all you get with TIMM.
At IJCAI-85 I watched a General Research sales person trying to sell TIMM
to a couple of AI novices. She was repeating the usual set of General
Research outlandish claims, viz. that TIMM is good for ANY expert system
application you can think of, that it doesn't require any expertise in
knowledge engineering to create "expert systems" with TIMM, that domain
experts can sit down and create their own non-trivial systems without
assistance, and so on. (See their ad on page 38 of the Fall '85 issue of AI
Magazine: "Experts in virtually any field can build systems with TIMM, and
do it without assistance from computer or AI specialsts.") I find General
Research Corp.'s arrogance simply galling. How would they use TIMM to do
VLSI circuit design, as TALIB does, to configure a Vax, like R1 does, or to
generate and sift through a large set of plausible analyses of mass
spectrogram data, as Dendral does? All of these tasks require significant
amounts of computation, yet all TIMM can represent is training instances.
Finally I asked the sales person how TIMM would represent the following
simple piece of domain knowledge:
"A certain disease has twenty manifestations. If a patient has at least
four of these, we should conclude that he has the disease."
This knowledge can be expressed by a single rule in OPS5, but can't be
represented at all in TIMM. First the sales person was going to put in one
training instance for every possible case, but C(20,4) is greater than
5000, so that's impractical. Finally she decided she'd write a Fortran
program to ask the user if the patient had each of the 20 manifestations,
sum up the "yes" answers, and return the conclusion to TIMM. (TIMM is
written in Fortran and has the ability to call external Fortran routines.)
The point she seemed to miss is that any nontrivial expert reasoner is
going to need data structures and computations that can't be expressed as a
small set of training instances.
TIMM costs roughly $47K for the Vax version, and roughly $9K for the IBM PC
version. General Research boasts that TIMM is in use in several Fortune
500 companies, but I haven't heard any claims about successful, up and
running, NONTRIVIAL applications. Not surprising.
-- Dave Touretzky
PS: Due to the nature of the above comments, I feel compelled to include
the usual disclaimer that the above opinions are solely my own, and may not
reflect the official opinions of Carnegie-Mellon University or AAAI.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 85 09:32:15 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: An Application of Expert Systems
An application of expert systems that came to mind would be to auto-pilot
systems for commercial aircraft. The recent crash at Manchester airport
might not have been so serious if the reverse thrust had not been applied.
It had been suggested that this resulted in a spray of aviation fuel over
the fuselage of the aircraft. Whether this can be avoided in future by a
change in design or if a real-time expert-system would have been any
better than the pilot's decision, which of course was ``correct'', is a
matter for the deeper examination. It seems to me that information about
possible outcomes of such an action could be made available to the pilot.
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 85 11:03:53 cdt
From: ihnp4!gargoyle!toby@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU (Toby Harness)
Subject: Social Responsibility
Re: AIList Digest V3 #132
Something I saved off usenet, about a year ago:
It's sad that computers, which have so much potential, have so much of
it invested in the purposes of the authorities. I wonder if some day
we'll be looking back at what we did in the 1980's the way many atomic
physicists ended up remembering the 1930's.
Jim Aspnes (asp%mit-oz@mit-mc)
Toby Harness Ogburn/Stouffer Center, University of Chicago
...ihnp4!gargoyle!toby
------------------------------
Date: 6 October 1985 2023-EDT
From: Hans Berliner@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Computer chess: hitech
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Hitech won its first tournament, and one with 4 masters in it. It
scored 3 1/2 - 1/2 to tie for first in the Gateway Open held at the
Pittsburgh Chess Club this week-end. However, on tie break we were
awarded first place. En route to this triumph, Hitech beat two
masters and tied with a third. It also despatched a lesser player in
a brilliancy worthy of any collection of games. One of the games
that it won from a master was an absolute beauty of positional and
tactical skill. It just outplayed him from a to z. The other two
games were nothing to write home about, but it managed to score the
necessary points. I believe this is the first time a computer has
won a tournament with more than one master in it.
We will have a show and tell early this week.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 1 Oct 85 13:50:21-CDT
From: ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: Information Science Program at NSF - Staffing Changes
Beth Adelson has been appointed to the position of Associate Program Director,
Information Science Program, effective August 15, 1985. Dr Adelson has been at
Yale University since 1983, as a Research Associate in the Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory. She holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University. Dr.
Adelson has published numerous articles in the areas of cognitive science and
artificial intelligence. Recent works include papers on software design <<IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering>> and the acquisition of categories for
problem solving <<Cognitive Science>>.
Joseph Deken has been appointed to the position of Program Director,
Information Science Program, effective September 3, 1985. Dr. Deken was most
recently Associate Professor at the University of Texas at Austin, with a
joint appointment in the Department of Business and the Department of Computer
Sciences, and taught from 1976 to 1980 at Princeton University. His Ph.D. in
mathematical statistics is from Stanford University. Dr. Deken is the author
of several books on computing, the most recent of which is <<Silico Sapiens:
The Fundamentals and Future of Robotics>>, which will be Published by Bantam
books in January 1986. His other writing includes <<Computer Images: State of
the Art>> (Stewart, Tabori, and Chang, 1983), <<The Electronic Cottage>>
(William Morrow, 1981), and numerous articles on statistics and statistical
computing.
Program announcements and other information about the Information Science
and Technology programs at NSF are available from:
Division of Information Science and Technology
National Science Foundation
1800 G St. NW
Washington, D.C. 20550
Correspondence may be addressed to the attention of Dr. Adelson or
Dr. Deken as appropriate.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Oct-85 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #138
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Oct 85 02:29:04 PDT
Date: Tue 8 Oct 1985 23:29-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #138
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 9 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 138
Today's Topics:
Update - G. Spencer-Brown Seminar,
Seminars - Robot Legged Locomotion (GMR) &
What is a Plan? (SRI) &
Animating Human Figures (UPenn) &
Inheritance and Data Models (UPenn),
Conferences - 4th Int. Conf. on Entity-Relationship (ER) Approach &
Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 11:17:52 PDT
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown Seminar
Was this some kind if joke? I could not find any company called UNI-OPS
nor a Walter Zintz at (415)945-0048. The Miyako Hotel has no
seminar on The Laws of Form, only a management association meeting.
Has someone erased the distinction between G. S.-B.'s existence and
non-existence?
--Charlie
From: william@aids-unix (william bricken)
No hoax, although a possible unfortunate typo: the phone number of
UNI-OPS is (415)945-0448.
The seminar was cancelled at the last minute by SB himself (according
to Zintz). Totally in character. Thus the existential dilemma.
Zintz is working on re-establishing it, and is compiling a mailing
list of those interested in the Laws of Form.
I have developed an automated theorem prover using SB's stuff, and
am encouraged by its applications to LISP program representation,
optimization, and verification.
William Bricken
Advanced Information & Decision Systems
201 San Antonio Circle, #286
Mountain View, CA 94040
(415) 941-3912
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 10:00 EST
From: "S. Holland" <holland%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Robot Legged Locomotion (GMR)
General Motors Research Laboratories
Warren, Michigan
ROBOTS THAT RUN
BALANCE AND DYNAMICS IN LEGGED LOCOMOTION
Dr. Marc H. Raibert
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA
Monday, October 21, 1985
Balance and dynamics are key ingredients in legged locomotion. To study
active balance and dynamics we have built a series of machines that balance
themselves as they run. Initial experiments focused on machines that
hopped on one leg, but later work generalized the approach for two- and
four-legged machines. A very simple set of algorithms provides control for
hopping on one leg, running on two legs like a human, and trotting on four
legs. We have begun to use these results from legged machines to improve
understanding of running in animals.
Marc Raibert received a B.S.E.E. from Northeastern University in 1973, and
a PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1977. Since 1980
Professor Raibert has been on the faculty of Carnegie-Mellon University,
where he is an Associate Professor of Computer Science and a member of the
Robotics Institute. He is currently exploring the principles of legged
locomotion.
-Steve Holland
------------------------------
Date: Tue 8 Oct 85 13:57:58-PDT
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - What is a Plan? (SRI)
WHAT IS A PLAN?
Lucy Suchman
Intelligent Systems Lab, Xerox PARC
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, October 9
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Researchers in AI have equivocated between using the term "plan" to
refer to efficient representations of action, and to the actual data and
control structures that produce behavior. But while these two uses of
the term have been conflated, they have significantly different
methodological implications. On the first use, the study of plans, as
internal representations of actions and situations, is an important
companion to the study of situated actions, but essentially derivative.
On the second use, plans as the actual mechanisms that produce behavior
are foundational to a theory of situated actions.
In this talk I will argue in support of the first use of "plans," to
refer simply to efficient representations of actions. Situated actions,
on this view, are the phenomena to be modelled, whereas the function of
plans in the generation of situated actions is taken to be an open
question. The interesting problem for a theory of situated action is to
find the mechanisms that bring efficient representations and particular
environments into productive interaction. The assumption in classical
planning research has been that this process consists in filling in the
details of the plan to some operational level. In contrast with this
assumption, I will present evidence in support of the view that situated
action turns on local interactions between the actor and contingencies
of his or her environment that, while they are made accountable to a
plan, remain essentially outside of the plan's scope.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 85 12:12 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Animating Human Figures (UPenn)
ANIMATING HUMAN FIGURES IN A TASK-ORIENTED ENVIRONMENT: AN EVOLVING
CONFLUENCE OF COMPUTER GRAPHICS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
Norman I. Badler
Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
Tuesday, October 8, 1985 Room 216 Moore
A system called TEMPUS is outlined which is intended to graphically simulate
the activities of several simulated human agents in a three-dimensional
environment. TEMPUS is a task simulation facility for the design and
evaluation of complex working environments. The primary components of the
TEMPUS system include human body specification by size or statistical
population, 3-D environment design, a human movement simulator and task
animator, a user-friendly interactive system, real-time motion playback, and
full 3-D color graphics of bodies, environments, and task animations. Research
efforts in human dynamics control and natural language specification of
movements will also be described. Recent efforts to link computer graphics and
artificial intelligence will be discussed, especially as they relate to future
plans of NASA and the Space Station.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 85 12:12 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Inheritance and Data Models (UPenn)
INHERITANCE, DATA MODELS AND DATA TYPES
Peter Buneman
Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
Thursday, October 10, 1985, 216 Moore
The notion of type inheritance (subsumption, ISA hierarchies) has long been
recognised as central to the development of programming languages, databases
and semantic networks. Recent work on the semantics of programming languages
has shown that inheritance can be cleanly combined with functional programming
and can itself serve as a model for computation.
Using a definition of partial functions that are well behaved with respect to
inheritance, I have been investigating a new characterization of the relational
and functional data models. In particular, I want to show the connections of
relational database theory with type inheritance and show how both the
relational and functional data models may be better integrated with typed
programming languages.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 17:30:00 cdt
From: Peter Chen <chen%lsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: 4th Int. Conf. on Entity-Relationship (ER) Approach
Title of the Conference:
4th International Conference on Entity-Relationship (ER) Approach
(See advertisement in Communications of the ACM, Sept. 1985
or the IEEE Computer Magazine, Sept. 1985)
Major Theme:
The use of entity/relationship concept in knowledge representation
Sponsor:
IEEE Computer Society
Date:
October 28-30, 1985
Location:
Hyatt Regency Hotel at O'Hare airport, Chicago
(312) 696-1234, $74 Single, $84 Double
Keynote Address:
Roger Schank, Yale
Invited Addresses:
Donald Walker, Bell Comm. Research
Eugene Lowenthal, MCC
Tutorial Sessions (on the first day -- Monday):
1. ER Modeling: A tool for analysis
2. AI and Expert systems
3. The Analyst's Round Table
4. Database Design
Paper Sessions (on the next two days):
Knowledge representation, database design methods,
Query and manipulation languages, Entity-Relationship analysis,
expert systems, modeling techniques, integrity theory, etc.
Panel Sessions:
1. Mapping Specifications to Formalisms:
Leader: John Sowa, IBM
Panelist: Sharon S. Salveter, Boston Univ.
Roger Schank, Yale
Peter Freeman, UC-Irvine
Peter Chen, Louisiana State Univ.
2. Knowledge engineering and Its Implications
Leader: Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Panelists: Amil Nigan, IBM
Earl Sacerdoti, Tecknowledge
3. Microcomputer DBMS Derby
Leader: Rod Zimmerman, Standard Oil of California
4. Practical Applications of ER Approach
Leader: Martin Modell, Merrill Lynch
Panelists: Suresh Gadgil, " "
Tom Meurer, ETA International
Harold Piskiel, Goldman Sachs
Elizabeth White
For more information, contact the registration chairperson:
Prof. Kathi Davis
Computer Science Department
Northern Illinois University
Dekalb, IL 60115
(815) 753-0378
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1985 21:12 EDT
From: MEYER@MIT-XX.ARPA
Subject: Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
Announcement and Call for Papers
Symposium on
Logic in Computer Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 16-18, 1986
THE CONFERENCE will cover a wide range of theoretical and
practical issues in Computer Science that relate to logic in
a broad sense, including algebraic and topological
approaches. To date, many of these areas have been dealt
with in separate conferences and workshops. It is the hope
of the Organizing Committee that bringing them together will
help stimulate further research.
Some suggested, although not exclusive topics of interest
are: abstract data types, computer theorem proving and
verification, concurrency, constructive proofs as programs,
data base theory, foundations of logic programming,
logic-based programming languages, logic in complexity
theory, logics of programs, knowledge and belief, semantics
of programs, software specifications, type theory, etc.
Organizing Committee
J. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A. Chandra (Chair) D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
The conference is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society,
Technical Committee on Mathematical Foundations of
Computing, and in cooperation with ACM SIGACT and ASL
(request pending).
PAPER SUBMISSION. Authors should send 17 copies of a
detailed abstract (not a full paper) by Dec. 23, 1985 to the
program committee chairman:
Albert R. Meyer - LICS Program
MIT Lab. for Computer Science
545 Technology Square, NE43-315
Cambridge, MA 02139.
(617) 253-6024, ARPANET: MEYER at MIT-XX
The abstract must provide sufficient detail to allow the
program committee to assess the merits of the paper and
should include appropriate references and comparisons with
related work. The abstract should be at most ten
double-spaced typed pages. The time between the paper due
date and the program committee meeting is short, so late
papers run a high risk of not being considered. In
circumstances where adequate reproduction facilities are not
available to the author, a single copy of the abstract will
be accepted.
The program committee consists of R. Boyer, W. Damm, S. German,
D. Gries, M. Hennessy, G. Huet, D. Kozen, A. Meyer, J. Mitchell,
R. Parikh, J. Reynolds, J. Robinson, D. Scott, M. Vardi, and
R. Waldinger.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by Jan.
24, 1986. Copies of accepted papers, typed on special forms
for inclusion in the symposium proceedings, will be due
March 31, 1986.
The general chairman is A. K. Chandra, IBM Thomas J. Watson
Research Center, P.O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598,
tele: (914) 945-1752, CSNET: ASHOK.YKTVMV at IBM. The local
arrangements chairman is A. J. Kfoury, Dept. of Computer
Science, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, tele: (617)
353-8911, CSNET: KFOURY at BOSTONU.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Oct-85 1256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #139
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Oct 85 12:56:39 PDT
Date: Wed 9 Oct 1985 10:09-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #139
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 9 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 139
Today's Topics:
Corrections - AI at GE & Attenber's Research Field,
Opinion - AI Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Oct 85 11:29 EDT
From: WAnderson.wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Correction: Intellectual Honesty & the SDI
In a message posted in AIList Digest on Friday, 20 Sep 1985, Volume 3,
Number 125, I commented about statements made in two papers I picked up
at the GE exhibit at IJCAI-85.
In view of subsequent discussions with people at GE I wish to state that
the authors of these papers are NOT in any way connected with GE. It
was not my intent to cast aspersions on work done by GE. I wish to
correct any misconceptions people may have about the type and quality of
research at GE from my message.
Bill Anderson
People interested in GE AI R&D, may contact
Dr. Larry Sweet
K1-5C13
General Electric Company
Corporate Research and Development
Schenectady, NY 12301
Dr. Sweet is the manager of the AI group here.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 85 12:24 EDT
From: Attenber%ORN.MFENET@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: typographic error
In case anyone cares, the second paragraph of my unintelligible
note of Sep.25 should have started "as a researcher in plasma physics"
not "as a researcher in particle physics". Sorry.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 85 08:57:33 EDT
From: George J. Carrette <GJC@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: ai hype vs profitable use
Observations I've been able to make (from inside and out) of the
activities of LMI's process control division may be interesting here.
(1) They call it PICON(tm) for Process Intelligent Control.
The world "artificial" hardly ever comes up. The purpose is to
more intelligently control the industrial process.
(2) The first installations at Exxon and Texaco were in place for
months before they even told anyone.
(3) Promise of profits were never made. The marketing was as an
ALARM condition detector/advisor. More subtle and possibly dangerous
conditions could be detected than with existing technology, and
more ALARM conditions could be handled at once, with more intelligent
selection of danger priorities. The purpose is of course to avoid
the 3-MILE-ISLAND-EFFECT.
(4) Once in place it was the customers that realized for themselves
that with the more intelligent modeling and flexibility in PICON
they could optimize the control of the process more closely,
and could start to save a percent or two in cost or get a percent or two
higher yield. Obviously in oil refineries this can translate into
big paydirt far above the cost of a few lispmachines and development costs.
The "downplaying" the PICON people have had to do is of course caused
by all the previous and continuing ai hype. This is probably why
they dont use the term AI very often.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Oct 85 09:39 PDT
From: allmer.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: AI Hype
Does anyone really expect truth in advertising?? Whenever I read a blurb
about some new "fully compatible" DBMS I always hear that click, you
know, what do they mean by "fully-compatible". So I don't see the point
for ranting on about the "AI Hype". It seems to me that if there was
nothing more than hype, there wouldn't be an AIList, or AIList
Moderator, no one would want to learn any "AI techniques" or take any "AI
courses", no one would spend millions of $$$$ to get "AI Systems", etc.
There's got to be more to AI technology than the hype, or this is the
greatest scam in history (Mr. Guiness, where are you?). At the Expert
Systems panel for IJCAI85, Terry Winograd, (how's that for
name-dropping), made mention of the "illusion of the label 'expert
system'", that because we choose to call them that, they should be
as-good-as/better than 'experts' when they are finished, sort of a
"magical black-box" mentality. To sell the concept, one does not call
their proposed system "idiot savant", or "limited-domain model", even
though that is what the buyer ends up with. You just have to understand
what is meant by the terminology of the "hype".
Doug Allmer
------------------------------
Date: 4 Oct 1985 1203-PDT (Friday)
From: jeff@isi-vaxa.ARPA (Jeffery A. Cavallaro)
Subject: AI, SCI, and SDI
After observing the various discussions regarding the place or state
in today's SCI/SDI-hyped environment, I think that it might be wise to
mention a chain of events that I believe has gone virtually unnoticed
in the AI community. The opinions expressed here are based on my
connections within the REAL research world (academia, not the defense
contractor flops referred to as IR&D), and the defense/aerospace sector
over the past 5 or so years. (Limited compared to some I admit)
About 5 years ago, when DARPA was still being referred to as ARPA, DARPA's
commonly stated goal was to increase America's strength by promoting
raw research that would trickle into the ECONOMIC sector. That may seem
like a rather empty statement based on today's activities, but that
was really the way it was. (Enter Dick Cavett).
ACADEMIA (5 YEARS AGO):
Around the same time (5 years ago), the various VLSI research groups around the
nation had their own mini-SCI, it was called the Silicon Compiler Project.
It may not have gotten the same attention, because the funding stakes
were probably not as high as AI today. It can easily be stated that
SCP was a success.
Meanwhile, the research AI groups of the day were constantly complaining that
they were spinning their wheels. The results of their work were constantly
being blocked from entering the marketplace for a variety of rights and
economic reasons.
DEFENSE/AEROSPACE (5 YEARS AGO):
In defense/aerospace, VLSI technology is basically unheard of. Companies
like TRW (Torrance Rubber Works), HUGHES, and the like, were more interested
in off-the-shelf solutions from large vendors such as DEC, IBM, etc.
These vendors, in turn, had representatives participating in SCP at
various research institutions.
AI was a different story. Defense contractors had AI projects (and funds)
coming out of their ears. One of the largest such project was BETA-LOCE,
an in-the-field battle management-type system. All such projects, without
many exceptions, were unqualified FAILURES.
TODAY (Exit Dick Cavett):
Sitting in meetings at ISI today, where the goals of SCI/SDI are being
stated, is like sitting in a status meeting at TRW as little as 2
years ago.
VLSI, having been successful, has now obtained a firm place in defense/
aerospace. Due to the strong success and firm base achieved while it
was in the researcher's hands, VLSI is proving to be an excellent tool
now available to the real world.
AI projects in defense/aerospace have hit hard times. SCI is now on hand.
I believe that one of the unspoken goals of SCI (and SDI) is to seriously
shift emphasis of AI projects back to the research institutions, hoping
that they can achieve success similiar to VLSI.
But, a funny thing is happening. The barriers to their work have been
lifted, but the AI world is still complaining. They are disatisfied
with the end user (as if Defense wasn't actually the end user all along).
The VLSI researches didn't seem to have the same qualms. But then again,
maybe they weren't faced with SDI-type goals.
In conclusion (finally), the AI research community is currently in an
EXCELLENT position. They now have the attention (which, in a way, is just as
important as funds) that they have desired for a long time. Of course,
careful consideration is needed, but continued complaining and temper
tantrums of "We can't do that in the foreseeable future, so I don't even
want to try!!" will simply be detrimental to ALL parties involved.
(Oh, am I going to get jumped on for this one!!!)
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 85 13:18 EDT
From: Jeffrey R Kell <JEFF%UTCVM.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Hype and success/failure
The 'hype' of AI in terms of systems to carry on conversations or drive
cars or whatever is largely based on an idealistic projection of what we
have achieved in the directions we want to follow. It began with the
stereotyped image of a computer as a thinking being when in fact it was
a primitive set of vacuum tubes. The AI image suggests that we can do
just about anything; that we can eventually achieve that sort of goal.
AI researchers realize their current successes, albeit not on such a
grand scale, with a guarded skepticism. If the shortcomings of any AI
project are stressed, the image sways in the other direction - maybe AI
can do nothing.
The relative success/failure of such projects seems to revolve around a
gap between the ideal and the practical. A 'pure' AI system built with
'pure' AI processes is almost doomed to certain shortcomings whether in
speed, size, usability, correctness, completeness, or what have you.
Some practical (traditional) methodologies must be employed to narrow
the scope of the project. Universal problem solvers were certainly not
a practical success, but they did lay the groundwork for expert systems
which have been successful. But the balance between AI and traditional
methods varies, and disciples of 'pure' AI will argue that many expert
systems are not AI at all. Perhaps not, from a purist view, but they
would not have been possible without the conceptual contributions from
the AI field. It is THESE forms of contributions that will be of the
most lasting value, whether you view them as an idealistic success or
not.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1985 23:55 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #132
I was not planning to prolong this discussion, but I can't resist
pointing out the disgraceful lengths that Gary Martins will go to
prove himself right. If you will examine my statement and then
Martins', you'll [note] an astonishing performance: he takes two
of my sentences, ONE OF WHICH CAREFULLY QUALIFIES THE OTHER,
breaks each of them into clauses and than attacks each clause by
itself! I see no room in a professional discussion for that degree of
intellectual and rhetorical dishonesty. Talk about "hype!"
Then he has the bad taste to talk about
"utterly non-'AI' software" that keeps track of payrolls, arranges
airline reservations, manages power distribution grids, guides
missiles, allocates resources, monitors inventories, analyzes radar
signals, does computer animation, assists in mechanical design and
fabrication, manipulates spreadsheets, controls space vehicles, drives
robots, integrates CAT scans, and performs lots of other mundane
tasks. and about nicely engineered non-"AI" systems that play
world-class chess.
The latter "non-AI" chess programs are, of course, essentially the AI
chess programs of the 1960's, based on Shannon. Samuel, and McCarthy's
tree-pruning heuristics and plausible move generators. The robot
drivers are mostly based on the early MIT, SRI, and Stanford
prototypes. Many of the aircraft control systems are based on the
adaptive algorithms developed in that general community in the same
period, and everyone knows the origins of much of computer graphics in
the early work of Sutherland, Knowlton, and many others in the AI
community. As for those missile guiders, the roots of that whole
field now called "pattern recognition" have similar origins. And I'm
pretty sure that the first practical airline reservation was designed
by Danny Bobrow of the BBN AI group around 1966.!
I'm not claiming that AI set the stage for accounting programs, and
some of the others. But don't you agree that Martins could have made
himself a better case by mentioning a few first-rate programs that
didn't have substantial roots in the AI of 15 to 20 years ago. If
there's anything wrong with the present-day AI hype, it's simply that
some people may be led to expect various goodies in 3 years instead of
15 -- and perhaps that's what we ought to tell people.
Time to take a course in the history of AI, Gary.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 15:54:22 mdt
From: ted%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: ai/military flame
When did the military manage to take credit for automobiles????
Or for that matter how do they manage to take credit for debugging
and field testing the interstate highway system when there was a
civilian highway system in place before the interstates and as
far as I know, the only connection was that internal defence is
a standard rationale for better internal transportation?
Minsky's comments about what ai can do and other software
can't are very illuminating when compared with the real
world in the form of the first milestone test of arpa's
autonomous land vehicle in denver this spring. one might
think that this would have provided a perfect example of
the way that ``ai software can ... drive a car''.
unfortunately for true fans, the ai approach to driving the
vehicle (line extraction, motion field analysis and so on)
turned out to be very difficult (read as late) to implement
so that the prime contractor (who is very capable in conventional
software) implemented a VERY conventional system which selected
``gray'' pixels from the television image and managed to steer
the vehicle toward the center of mass of the gray. doesn't
this sound more like an example of conventional software doing
something (not very well, but literally good enough for government
work) that ai type software failed to do???
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 14:09:20 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Mega-Hype
A comment from Vol 3 # 128:-
``Since AI, by definition, seeks to replicate areas of human cognitive
competence...''
This should perhaps be read in the context of the general discussion which
has been taking place about `hype'. But it is still slightly off the mark
in my opinion.
I suppose this all rests on what one means but human cognitive competence.
The thought processes which make us human are far removed from the cold
logic of algorithms which are the basis for *all* computer software, AI or
otherwise. There is an element in all human cognitive processes which
derives from the emotional part of our psyche. We reach decisions not only
because we `know' that they are right, but also because we `feel' them to
correct. I think really that AI must be seen as an important extension to
the thinking process, as a way of augmenting an expert's scope.
Gordon Joly (now gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
(formerly gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Oct-85 2331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #140
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Oct 85 23:31:00 PDT
Date: Wed 9 Oct 1985 21:13-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #140
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 10 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 140
Today's Topics:
Query - Prolog on Macintoshes and IBM-Style PCs,
AI Tools - Prolog vs. Lisp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 17:38:09 mdt
From: ted%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: prolog's on macintoshes and ibm-style pc's
Currently I know about arity prolog and prolog-2. These are
reasonably-featured prolog interpreter/compiler packages that
run on the ibm pc. Does anyone know of other packages which
are available on the pc or the macintosh???
------------------------------
Date: 05 Sep 85 18:29:55 PDT (Thu)
From: Sanjai Narain <Narain@rand-unix.ARPA>
Subject: Response to Hewitt
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
>Prolog (like APL before it) will fail as the foundation for
>Artificial Intelligence because of competition with Lisp.
>There are commercially viable Prolog implementations written
>in Lisp but not conversely.
For the same reason, Lisp should have failed as a foundation for
computing because of competition with assembly language.
There are commercially viable implementations of Lisp in assembly
language but not conversely.
>LOGIC as a PROGRAMMING Language will fail as the foundation
>for AI because:
>1. Logical inference cannot be used to infer the decisions
> that need to be taken in open systems because the decisions
> are not determined by system inputs.
>>2. Logic does not cope well with the contradictory knowledge
>> bases inherent in open systems. It leaves out
>> counterarguments and debate.
>>3. Taking action does not fit within the logic paradigm.
1. Hewitt clearly states in his recent BYTE article that
traditional notions of computation as defined, for example,
by Turing machines or recursive functions cannot model the behavior
of open systems. Hence even Lisp is inadequate for such modeling
(by his reasoning).
2. The notion of contradiction (i.e. inconsistency) is well
understood in logic.
3. The statement is too vague for debate. What do the words
"action" and "fit" mean? Certainly, if action can be modeled
by an effective procedure, it can be modeled by logic, cf. 1.
-- Sanjai Narain
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5-Sep-85 13:40:43 PDT
From: (Tom Khabaza) mcvax!ukc!warwick!cvaxa!tomk@Seismo
Subject: On Hewitt's "Prolog and logic programming will fail"
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I have read with interest the discussion following Carl Hewitt's
"Prolog will fail as the foundation for AI and so will Logic
Programming". I particularly enjoyed Vijay Saraswat's reply, most
of which I agree with. However, I would like to add a few comments:
In some ways I was surprised by the original message; I should
have thought that if AI has taught us anything, it is that to solve
a given problem, we need a good representation language. Why anyone
might think that logic is the BEST representation language for every
problem is beyond me. (No Kowalskiist flames please, I know the
arguments, and I don't regard the case as proven.)
On the other hand, we don't yet know what the limits of logic
programming are; researchers in the field are constantly coming up
with new techniques. There is convincing evidence that logic
programming is better than conventional programming for some kinds
of task, at least with regard to ease and clarity (though probably
not yet efficiency).
But I think the basis of the original comment goes deeper than the
virtues and vices of logic programming. As I understand it (and I
wasn't around at the time) some earlier AI programming languages,
such as perhaps micro-Planner and its successors, WERE expected to
become a "foundation" for AI. Perhaps this was because people still
had hopes for the notion of some "ultimate" representation language,
or family of languages.
AI is older and perhaps more cynical now; I don't think we expect
some single foundation to the field in the form of a representation
language. Logic programming may be very useful for some parts of
AI; for example some kinds of rule based systems, but I don't expect
it to be the best tool for all kinds of AI programming. In fact my
personal opinion is that logic programming will find its forte in
more conventional Computer Science, where formal specification is a
more practical proposition than in the relatively exploratory
activity of AI programming.
But I will say this in its favour: logic programming is IMPORTANT.
Logic programming is as different from conventional programming as
programming is from not programming at all. I have met people who
have given up on Prolog because it was difficult for them and they
(rightfully) considered themselves competent programmers - and so
thought it must be Prolog's fault! (I don't mean to imply that
anyone who has posted in this discussion is such a person.) But
logic programming is different in fundamental ways; it's worth
presevering to get to the bottom of it, and as logic programming
languages improve, it will become even more so.
So for all you computer people out there, USE Prolog, and study
how other people have used it. It really is worth it.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 85 10:41:27 bst
From: William Clocksin <wfc%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@ucl-cs>
Subject: Lisp/Prolog
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I received issues 36 and 37 late owing to netproblem somewhere
between Stanford and Cambridge. I am puzzled by this Lisp/Prolog
debate started by Carl Hewitt. I use both Prolog and Lisp, and
have never felt the need to use one exclusively. I suppose they
are like screwdrivers and chisels; both are roughly the same,
but for slightly different purposes; to a person unfamiliar with
one of them, the other one might seem redundant. I am also
puzzled about the question of a "foundation" for AI. How can a
language be a "foundation" for anything? Was Latin a "foundation"
of Western civilisation? Seen any fundamental native speakers
lately? Besides, does AI deserve to have foundations attributed
to it anyway?
Another problem is this question about logic. Prolog is a
programming language. It was inspired by logic, but it is not
programming in logic. Proponents of using logic do have a problem
matching impedance with the real world. But Prolog is to logic
as Lisp is to lambda calculus. Those who advocate programming in
lambda calculus have the same problem as those who advocate
programming in pure logic. If Prolog can be said to have any
connection with logic, it is as the FORTRAN of logic programming.
Prolog is useful because you can grow data structures that have
actual variables in them, and because it is easy to define
nondeterministic methods. I know how Prolog searches for a solution
just as I know how flow of control happens in Lisp, say. I am not
disappointed with Prolog's strict strategy just as I am not
disappointed with Lisp's inability to run programs backwards, say.
I take it as it comes, and it is useful for some things. Talking
hypothetically about the "ideal" language is another topic entirely,
and it only muddies the water to bring Prolog and Lisp into it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 25 Sep 85 11:22:32-PDT
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA%sri-candide@sri-marvin>
Subject: Prolog vs. Lisp (again!)
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I humbly confess my incompetence at the debating style Carl
Hewitt is using in the Prolog vs. Lisp discussions, which
seems to consist in ignoring the FACTUAL points of other
contributions and just continuing to repeat the same OPINIONS.
It is a FACT that no practical Prolog system is written entirely
in Lisp: Common, Inter or any other. Fast Prolog systems have
been written for Lisp machines (Symbolics, Xerox, LMI) but their
performance depends crucially on major microcode support (so
much so that the Symbolics implementation, for example, requires
additional microstore hardware to run Prolog). The reason for
this is simple: No Lisp (nor C, for that matter...) provides the
low-level tagged-pointer and stack operations that are critical
to Prolog performance.
The fact that Lisp is not good enough as an implementation
language for Prolog should not be considered as a weakness of Lisp,
BECAUSE Lisp was not designed for such low-level operations in the
first place. In fact, NO ``high-level'' programming language that I
know of provides those kinds of operations, and for the very simple
reason that, being high-level languages, they have no business in
exploring the recesses of particular machine architectures. ALL
fast Prolog systems that I have seen (some of which I helped
implement) rely on a careful exploitation of the underlying machine
architecture.
By the same argument, the fact that Lisp cannot be efficiently
implemented in Prolog cannot be the basis of a valid criticism of
Prolog. Prolog is not a systems programming language, and in any
case a good Lisp implementation must be carefully coupled to the
underlying machine architecture -- so much so the the fastest Lisps
rely on specialized architectures!
It seems clear to me that no single existing programming language
can be said to provide a ``foundation'' for AI. In fact, the very
notion of a programming language providing a foundation for a
scientific subject seems to me rather misguided. Does Fortran
provide a ``foundation'' for physics? The relation between AI
problems, formal descriptions and programming concepts is far too
subtle for us to expect a ``foundation'' for AI in a mere
programming language.
The crusading tone of Hewitt's comments is also rather
unsettling. AI researchers will use whatever language they
feel most comfortable with for the problem they are working
on, without need for any guidance from on high as to the
ultimate suitability of that language. If more researchers use
Prolog, is that a threat to Lisp users? If I do a piece of AI
research using Prolog, will it not be judged according to its
content, independently of programming language?
That kind of battle might be very important for AI software
companies, but surely we should not let marketing hype get in
the way of our research. I am sitting at a Sun workstation typing
this, with a Prolog window just to the right. Will my research be
useless to someone who sits at a Xerox 1109? If I walk down the
corridor and write a Lisp program on a Symbolics machine (as I
have done and surely will continue to do), will THAT work have
a different value? If I decide to use Hoare's CSP for the
navigation component of our robot, will I be then outside
AI, because I am not using an ``official'' AI language?
With respect to Rick McGeer's points: there are some elegant ways
of compiling Prolog into Lisp, particularly into those statically
scoped variety (or into other statically-scoped languages such as
Algol-68...). I have reason to believe that a compiler along these
lines would produce code considerably faster than the 100 LIPS he
reports, even though still much slower than what is attainable with
a lower-level implementation. [...]
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 85 10:29 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp and Prolog
[Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
PROLOG/LISP = LISP/C
I'd like to amplify a point of view Clocksin put forth in V3
#39 in the great LISP vs. PROLOG debate. Prolog (and Logic
Programming in general) and Lisp are both tools which are suited
for different tasks. Luckily, none of us is being forced to use
one to the exclusion of the other.
I've had to give more than my share of introductory AI talks over
the years. When the discussion gets around to Lisp I usually point
out that Lisp is especially attractive for experimental programming
situations, i.e. where you know what you want to accomplish but do
not yet have all of the details as to algorithms, data structures,
etc. worked out. Once you've worked out the last detail, you can
re-implement your system in C, if you like, and gain the benefits
of a faster and smaller system.
Along these lines, I think that the slogan "Prolog is to Lisp as
Lisp is to C" is not too inaccurate. I think that Prolog is even
better suited to initial, experimental and exploratory attempts to
attack a problem computationally. I find that it is a very
convienent paradigm in which to get started. Once I have a better
idea of how to reprent a problem and how to manipulate the
representation, I can re-implement it in Lisp and gain a faster
more steamlined system.
-- Tim
------------------------------
Date: 9 Oct 85 12:56 PDT
From: Kahn.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Prolog vs Lisp
Apropos the long debate started by Carl Hewitt:
As co-author of LM-Prolog, the best performing Prolog implemented in
Lisp, I thought some performance numbers might be useful. Naive
reverse runs at 10K Lips on a CADR Lisp Machine with special micro-code
support, primarily for unification and trailing. Without any micro-code
support it runs 2 to 3 times slower. While there are much faster
Prologs available, I would argue that LM-Prolog is commercially viable
without the micro-code. There have been sales of the 3600 version of
LM-Prolog despite the fact that it is not supported by micro-code.
But part of Fernando's counter to Carl was that a serious Prolog
implementation needs sub-primitives that Lisp does not provide. It is
true that LM-Prolog even without micro-code relies on Zeta-Lisp's
sub-primitives to manipulate pointers and create invisible pointers.
This makes de-referencing variables very fast. While I don't have any
figures I don't think that is so important, at least for the naive
reverse benchmark. In other words I believe a pure Common Lisp
implementation of Prolog on say a 3600 would run 3 or 4 times slower
than Symbolics Prolog (which is fully micro-coded). Depending upon how
important a factor of 3 or 4 is, one evaluates differently Carl's claim
that Lisp is good for implementing Prolog (and not vice versa).
I think part of this whole debate is confused with the larger debate of
single paradigm vs multi-paradigm languages. My feeling is that while a
single paradigm system is elegant that too often it doesn't fit the
problem well and ackward cliches are used. For example, it is widely
believed that for some kinds of problems object-oriented programming is
most appropriate because it encasulates state and behavior so well.
Concurrent Prolog advocates in such situations program objects in a
complex cliche of tail recursive predicates where one argument is a
stream of messages. No serious object-oriented language requires that
each method list all the instance variables in the head and their new
values again at the end of each "method" (the tail recursive call). I
am not happy with the argument that goes -- well some problems are best
programmed with Lisp, others with Prolog, others with SmallTalk, and
still others with Ops5. Any significantly large problem is going to
have sub-problems that are best handled by different paradigms.
The debate should not be Lisp vs. Prolog but how can we combine Lisp and
Prolog (and Smalltalk and ...) in a coherent well-integrated fashion.
Its not easy. LM-Prolog was one attempt at doing this, as well as
ICOT's ESP, Prolog-KR and LogLisp. I tried to integrate Prolog with
Loops. None of these integrations are perfect but I think this is the
direction to go for BUILDING TOOLS for BUILDING REAL APPLICATIONS. The
CommonLoops effort at Xerox represents to me the best effort to date to
build a tight integration of two paradigms (object and
procedure-oriented).
In contrast, to what I just said I think the single paradigm approach
can be a great research strategy. Much of the Logic Programming
community is caught up in the game of finding out how far can one go
with logic programming. Can one write simulators, text editors,
graphics, operating systems, embedded languages, and so on in Prolog
or a language like it? It is rightfully considered cheating to
"escape to Lisp" or jump into some object-oriented subsystem. Their
purpose is to explore the paradigm itself -- its uses, its
limitations, to stretch it and pull it in new directions not to build
real applications. When building real applications the question is
not can this or that be done in Prolog, we all know that everything
can be written in Prolog, but what language can give the best support
for building the application in the most fitting way.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Oct-85 0121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #141
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Oct 85 01:21:35 PDT
Date: Wed 9 Oct 1985 21:20-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #141
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 10 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 141
Today's Topics:
Psychology & Logic - Counterexample to Modus Ponens,
AI Tools - DO you really need an AI machine?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 14:07 EDT
From: Stephen G. Rowley <SGR@SCRC-PEGASUS.ARPA>
Subject: Formal Logic
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 85 14:11:34 edt
From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: Re: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
(1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
(1a) If a Republican wins the election and the winner is not Ronald
Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
I would like to see some further discussion of this since I'm afraid that
I don't see the difference between (1) and (1a) either. Certainly there
is no difference with respect to inferential power as far as classical
logic is concerned.
There's no difference. (At least, not logically. Interpreting people's
judgements about probabilities from natural language statements is an
extremely subtle art, as I believe Chris said in a reply.)
[Notation: -> means "implies", ~ means "not", & means "and", | means
"inclusive or".]
Let R = "a Republican wins the election"
RR = "Ronald Reagan wins the election"
JA = "John Anderson" wins the election"
[1] R -> [ ~RR -> JA ]
[1a] [ R & ~RR ] -> JA
Of course, p -> q is the same as ~p | q. Then [1] and [1a] both
transform to
~R | RR | JA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 17:39:03 edt
From: pugh@GVAX.CS.CORNELL.EDU (William Pugh)
Subject: Re: A Counterexample to Modus Ponens
>> In a recent issue of AIList, John McLean cited an article about
>> inconsistencies in public opinion that apparently said:
>>
>> Before the 1980 presidential election, many held the two beliefs
>> below:
>>
>> (1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not
>> Ronald Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
>>
>> (2) A Republican will win the election.
>>
>> Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
>>
>> (3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
>>
Just to throw my two bits in:
First, from probability, some background:
P(x) is the probability of x
& P(x|y) is the probability of x given that y is true.
And by Bayes' theorem,
P(x) P(y|x)
P(x|y) = -----------
P(y)
The beliefs stated above can be rephrased as follows:
Let RW stand for "A Republican wins"
Let RR stand for "Ronald Reagan wins"
Let JA stand for "John Anderson wins"
(1) P( ~RR => JA | RW) = 1
(2) P(RW) = 0.96 (for the sake of argument - high at any rate)
and we wish to find
(3) P(JA|~RR)
well, from Bayes' theorem,
P(JA) P(~RR|JA) P(JA)
P(JA|~RR) = --------------- = -------
P(~RR) P(~RR)
For example, if P(JA) = 0.01 and P(RR) = 0.95,
then P(JA|~RR) = 0.2
Note that we have not used 1 at all, and made the (obvious)
assumption (similar to 1) that if Anderson wins, Reagan can not win.
Now, to try to figure out what went wrong in the original example,
consider:
Given P(A|B) and P(B),
P(A&B) = P(A|B)P(B)
HOWEVER, P(A&B) <= P(A)
since P(A) = P(A&B)/P(B|A)
THEREFORE, if
A=>B with high probability
and A with high probability
THEN, B with high probability
Now, going back to our example, we see the the original
conclusion:
>> (3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
is almost certainly true. Although non-obvious, this is because
(3) is true if Reagan wins.
The problem, therefore, is that people do not use the
"standard" definition of implication. By "if A then B"
people tend to think "given that A is true, B is true" - if
A is false, the validity of the statement is not
verified one way or the other.
You can find more on Bayesian Inference in "Introduction to
Artificial Intelligence" by Charniak and McDermott, or in many
other sources.
I have not yet figured out how to make Bayesian Inference work
with this style of implication, but it is obvious that it
requires some form of special treatment. I'll let you know
if I figure anything out.
Bill Pugh
Cornell University
..{uw-beaver|vax135}!cornell!pugh
607-256-4934,ext5
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 85 13:03 EDT
From: Carole D Hafner <HAFNER%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: More on Modus Ponens
Several ideas have been proposed to explain the fact that many people
in 1980 would agree to the following:
1. If a Republican wins the election then if it is not RR then it will be JA.
2. A Republican will win the election.
But they would not agree to the apparent logical consequence:
3. If RR does not win the election then JA will win.
Does this mean that modus ponens is not a rule of common sense reasoning? NO.
The problem is due to the fact that "a republican" in the
first sentence has an "intensional" meaning, while in the second it
had (to most people) an extensional meaning.
In other words, people believed:
(there-exists X) [win(X,election) & party(X,republican)]
and not
(forall X) [win(X,election) --> party(X,republican)]
It is the second interpretation of the indefinite noun phrase that
gives rise to the conclusion in (3).
Carole Hafner
hafner@northeastern
------------------------------
Date: Tue 8 Oct 85 10:26:00-PDT
From: EDWARDS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Equivocation (?) in "failure" of modus ponens
As far as I have been able to determine, in conversation with Todd
Davies and Marcel Schoppers, the apparent failure of modus ponens rests
on a subtle point about the understanding of "if-then".
If all conditionals are taken as truth-functional, then most people
would have believed the premises *and* the conclusion:
(1) If a Republican wins then if Reagan doesn't win then Anderson will
win.
(2) A Republican will win.
Therefore,
(3) if Reagan doesn't win then Anderson will win.
For (3), when read truth-functionally, is equivalent to:
(4) Either Reagan will win or Anderson will win
which in turn follows truth-functionally from:
(5) Reagan will win
which most people believed.
The problem is due to the fact that (3) is not normally understood
truth-functionally; it is understood as a counterfactual, setting up a
possible situation (or "mental space"--Fauconnier, *Mental Spaces*) in
which Reagan doesn't win and asking what assumption will make that
situation most like the actual one. The assumption most people would
make, given such a situation, is that the Democrats will win; so they
believed (6), not (3):
(6) If Reagan doesn't win, then the Democrats will win.
The really interesting question here is whether (1) and (2) are
understood truth-functionally. If they were, then the alleged failure
of modus ponens would rest on a simple equivocation. But I don't
think they are. (1) is a counterfactual just like (3) and (6). The
problem is that (3) is understood quite differently when it appears as
the consequent of (1) than when it appears alone. The antecedent of
(1) sets up a mental space in which a Republican wins, by hypothesis.
This affects the understanding of (3) in a way in which a mere factual
belief that a Republican will win (such as is expressed in (2)) does
not. It rules out the consideration of a Democratic victory even in a
counterfactual situation. So when the antecedent of (3) sets up
another mental space inside the first--where it is presupposed that
Reagan doesn't win--the consequent of (6) is ruled out. Inside the
second mental space, *by hypothesis*, a Republican wins but Reagan
doesn't win. Thus, Anderson's victory is the only conclusion
available.
Note that a factual belief with 100% certainty, that a Republican
will win, would have much the same effect as the antecedent of a
counterfactual. If (2) were believed, not merely as very likely but
with absolutely unshakable confidence, then (3) should follow, even if
(1) is only believed with moderate confidence. Thus those who
attributed the problem to difficulties about probability were in a way
right, though this misses the point about understanding of the
conditionals.
This does pose a problem for classical treatments such as David
Lewis's *Counterfactuals*. According to Lewis, modus ponens applied
to a counterfactual conditional is valid. The argument attributed to
McGee seems to refute this.
P.S.: I write the above without having read Van McGee's article, on
the basis of conversations and reading AIList. I intend to get to
McGee's article in the near future.
------------------------------
Date: 9 Oct 85 10:55:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: DO you really need an AI machine?
> Date: Sun, 06 Oct 85 15:20:34 EDT
> From: "Srinivasan Krishnamurthy" <1438@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET>
> Subject: Do I really need a AI Machine?
>
> Dear readers,
> I work at COMSAT LABS, Maryland. We are getting into AI in a big way
> and would like comments, suggestions and answers to the
> following questions,to justify a big investment on a AI machine.
>
> * What are the specific gains of using a AI Machine (like symbolics)
> over developing AI products/packages on general purpose
> machines like - VAX-11/750-UNIX(4.2BSD), 68000/UNIX etc.
>
... [more questions follow]
Well, I'm not qualified to give detailed answers, but let me
rave mildly over some personal experience and indulge in a
little heresy in hopes of provoking some discussion:
So we're gonna do an expert systems project. So we got a Symbolics 3600,
so that me and one other guy can develop an expert system.
problem no. 1 - Geez, what a learning curve, when coming off
VAX/VMS - I mean, sure, ya gotta learn expert system techniques,
ya gotta learn Common Lisp, but I also gotta learn another file
system and operating system (which is somehow never quite
referred to as such), I gotta learn an editor with more features
than I could use in a million years, I gotta learn window
navigation -- after 3 months, I have 12 dense pages of cheat
sheets, and am just getting to the point of adequacy (operationally
defined as: not getting caught inside the inspector and being unable
to figure out how to get out short of a boot-up).
problem no. 2 - We've got one screen and one keyboard - even with
only two people, it's surprising how often our schedules don't mesh.
Cugini's tentative hypothesis of hardware-sharing: the number of
people wishing to use a shared single-user system at any time is even.
problem no. 3 - So now we've got an AI lab, and whenever I wanna do
something I actually have to STAND UP AND WALK to the machine
(which may or may not be occupied anyway) - so I find myself
conversing with VMS, whose terminal sits conveniently to my right -
and login takes maybe 20 seconds, as opposed to a 3-minute boot-up.
problem no. 4 - and of course we don't have the Symbolics netted
to the VAX yet (or ever?), and so you can kiss data-sharing good-by.
Where should the (English) documentation for our expert system reside?
On the VAX, where I've got editors, formatters (eg runoff), and laser
printers already, or on the Symbolics, where the code lives, but which
at this point has no hard-copy output? What if I get some good Lisp
code over our beloved ailist? Do I key it in at the Symbolics?
Well, you get the idea - there's more to doing expert systems than
telling the forklift where to place your AI machine. Let me forestall
some rebuttals by saying, sure I know some things we're doing wrong,
and yeah, we should net the Symbolics to the VAX and yeah, we should
buy a 3640 or whatever for additional users. But point 1 is there's
a larger-than-I(-and-maybe-you)-suspected investment in
hardware, software, and time to be able to exploit these "power
tools" of AI.
Point 2 is it's not so clear when you need all that performance
that an AI workstation is giving you. If PC's are seen as an
adequate delivery vehicle for an expert system, the assumption
would seem to be that you need performance during development -
but that doesn't seem right either - how fast does an editor
have to be? When you're doing logical testing (as opposed to
performance testing), wouldn't you be dealing with *smaller*
amounts of data, than in operational mode? Why would it not make
more sense to develop code on a relatively small system and
then use the performance of a 3600 for large-scale logic-crunching,
just as you might develop FORTRAN code on a PC, and then run it
on a CYBER? I'm willing to believe I'm wrong about this, but I
don't understand why.
Point 3 is that the reason a lot of CompScis deride PL/I and
embrace, say, Pascal, is that PL/I is big, complicated, clumsy,
gives you everything you ever wanted and several that you didn't,
etc etc, whereas Pascal is small, elegant, well-designed, etc etc.
Any analogies here?
I should say that the Symbolics itself *is* fast, reliable,
and well-documented (but complicated) so I'm not complaining
about Symbolics per se. This is a generic complaint.
So now I'm using VAX LISP (which - shame! - does not yet have
complex numbers, but is otherwise pretty good), and I find that
the less-sophisticated editor is powerful enough for me, there
are reasonable tools for tracing, debugging, pretty-printing,
and I haven't yet been slowed down by performance problems.
What am I missing here? Why am I happier on (sneer) a VAX than
on a glamorous Symbolics? (Replies implying coarse sensitivity
on the part of the writer will be, of course, be given the most
serious consideration and then dismissed).
Needless to say, these are my own utterly idiosyncratic views,
and in no way reflect the policy, de jure or de facto, of the
National Bureau of Standards, the Department of Commerce, or the
entire Federal Government.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Oct-85 1202 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #142
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Oct 85 12:02:18 PDT
Date: Thu 10 Oct 1985 09:26-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #142
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 10 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 142
Today's Topics:
Seminars - AI Meets Natural Stupidity (CSLI) &
Learning Expert Knowledge (UT) &
Interactive Modularity (UCB),
Seminar Series - Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (CSLI),
Conference - Logic in Computer Science
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Oct 85 16:51:08-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - AI Meets Natural Stupidity (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, October 10, 1985
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall ``Artificial Intelligence Meets Natural Stupidity''
Conference Room by Drew McDermott
Discussion led by Roland Hausser, U. of Munich
McDermott discusses three `mistakes', or rather bad habits, which are
frequent in A.I. work. He speaks from his own experience and cites
several illuminating and amusing examples from the literature. In this
TINLunch I will be discussing his thoughts on treating reference in
A.I., which are discussed in the section entitled `unnatural
language'. --Roland Hausser
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 85 16:01:56 cdt
From: rajive@sally.UTEXAS.EDU (Rajive Bagrodia)
Subject: Seminar - Learning Expert Knowledge (UT)
Machine Learning for
Acquiring Expert Knowledge
by
Bruce Porter
noon, Friday 11th, Pai 3.38
An important effort in Artificial Intelligence is the construction of
Expert Systems, but this effort is stymied by the problem of acquiring
knowledge to guide problem solving and reasoning. This talk reviews
efforts in Machine Learning to automate knowledge acquisition and
describes our current approach to the problem.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 16:48:25 PDT
From: admin@ucbcogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Interactive Modularity (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A
TIME: Tuesday, October 15, 11:00 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Ronald M. Kaplan,
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center and Center
for the Study of Language and Information,
Stanford University
TITLE: ``Interactive Modularity''
Comprehensible scientific explanations for most complex
natural phenomena are modular in character. Phenomena are
explained in terms of the operation of separate and indepen-
dent components, with relatively minor interactions. Modular
accounts of complex cognitive phenomena, such as language pro-
cessing, have also been proposed, with distinctions between
phonological, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic modules, for
example, and with distinctions among various rules within
modules. But these modular accounts seem incompatible with
the commonplace observations of substantial interactions
across component boundaries: semantic and pragmatic factors,
for instance, can be shown to operate even before the first
couple of phonemes in an utterance have been identified.
In this talk I consider several methods of reconciling
modular descriptions in service of scientific explanation with
the apparent interactivity of on-line behavior. Run-time
methods utilize interpreters that allow on-line interleaving
of operations from different modules, perhaps including addi-
tional "scheduling" components for controlling the cross-
module flow of information. But depending on their mathemati-
cal properties, modular specifications may also be transformed
by off-line, compile-time operations into new specifications
that directly represent all possible cross-module interac-
tions. Such compilation techniques allow for run-time elimi-
nation of module boundaries and of intermediate levels of
representation. I will illustrate these techniques with exam-
ples involving certain classes of phonological rule systems
and structural correspondences in Lexical-Functional Grammar.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Oct 85 16:51:08-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Series - Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
COMMON SENSE AND NON-MONOTONIC REASONING SEMINARS
Organized by John McCarthy and Vladimir Lifschitz
Computer Science Dept., Stanford University
A series of seminars on Common Sense and Non-monotonic reasoning
will explore the problem of formalizing commonsense knowledge and
reasoning, with the emphasis on their non-monotonic aspects.
It is important to be able to formalize reasoning about physical
objects and mental attitudes, about events and actions on the basis of
predicate logic, as it can be done with reasoning about numbers,
figures, sets and probabilities. Such formalizations may lead to the
creation of AI systems which can use logic to operate with general
facts, which can deduce consequences from what they know and what they
are told and determine in this way what actions should be taken.
Attempts to formalize commonsense knowledge have been so far only
partially successful. One major difficulty is that commonsense
reasoning often appears to be non-monotonic, in the sense that getting
additional information may force us to retract some of the conclusions
made before. This is in sharp contrast to what happens in
mathematics, where adding new axioms to a theory can only make the set
of theorems bigger.
Circumscription, a transformation of logical formulas proposed by
John McCarthy, makes it possible to formalize non-monotonic reasoning
in classical predicate logic. A circumscriptive theory involves, in
addition to an axiom set, the description of a circumscription to be
applied to the axioms. Our goal is to investigate how commonsense
knowledge can be represented in the form of circumscriptive theories.
John McCarthy will begin the seminar by discussing some of the
problems that have arisen in using abnormality to formalize common
sense knowledge about the effects of actions using circumscription.
His paper Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense
Knowledge is available from Rutie Adler 358MJH. This paper was given
in the Non-monotonic Workshop, and the present version, which is to be
published in Artificial Intelligence, is not greatly different. The
problems in question relate to trying to use the formalism of that
paper.
The seminar will replace the circumscription seminar we had last
year. If you were on the mailing list for that seminar then you will
be automatically included in the new mailing list. If you would like
to be added to the mailing list (or removed from it) send a message to
Vladimir Lifschitz (VAL@SAIL).
The first meeting is in 252MJH on Wednesday, October 30, at 2pm.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 9 Oct 85 16:51:08-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: LICS Conference
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
LICS CONFERENCE
A new conference, LICS, (an acronym for ``Logic in Computer
Science'') will meet in Cambridge, Mass, June 16-18, 1986. The topics
to be covered include abstract data types, computer theorem proving
and verification, concurrency, constructive proofs as programs, data
base theory, foundations of logic programming, logic-based programming
languages, logics of programs, knowledge and belief, semantics of
programs, software specifications, type theory, etc. For a local copy
of the full call for papers, contact Jon Barwise (Barwise@CSLI) or
Joseph Goguen (Goguen@SRI-AI), members of the LICS Organizing
Committee.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Oct-85 2231 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #143
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Oct 85 22:31:09 PDT
Date: Sun 13 Oct 1985 20:43-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #143
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 143
Today's Topics:
Queries - Autonomous Vehicles & YAPS & Prolog vs. OPS5 & ES Tools &
Franz Lisp Behavior,
Bindings - Symbolics Lisp Machine Mailing List,
Corrections - Verification Peer Review & TIMM Expert System,
AI Tools - Workstations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: C. Ian Connolly <Connolly@GE-CRD>
Subject: Autonomous Vehicles
Apropos a recent AILIST entry: Does anyone have more information
on the DARPA Autonomous Vehicle demo that Waxman, et al (I think -
correct me if I'm wrong) gave earlier this year?
I'd *love* a review, if anyone was there that can send one out on
this list. What speeds were it capable of, what methods were used,
etc...?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 85 18:30:49 EDT
From: "Srinivasan Krishnamurthy" <1438@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET>
Subject: YAPS - Commercial Version Info.
Dear Folks!
Does anybody have information on the Commericial Availability
of a Production System called "YAPS"? This was developed at the
University of Maryland and funded by the Goddard Space Flight
Center. I can't seem to find the right people to talk to at
Maryland, regarding this system. Any leads will be greatly
appreciated...
Thanks in Advance.
.....Vasu
------------------------------
Date: 10 Oct 85 10:02:58 PDT (Thursday)
From: Cornish.EIS@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Prolog vs. OPS5
Can anyone provide me with a compare-and-constrast discussion of Prolog
vs. OPS5. To use an analogy from this list, are they both screwdrivers
or both chisels ?
Jan
------------------------------
Date: Thu 10 Oct 85 08:53:24-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: es tools query
My list of major commercial AI software tools includes:
(1) S.1., (2) KEE, (3) ART, and (4) Knowledge Craft
There is also DUCK which seems to be more like an enhanced logic
programming language than the kind of tools (1)-(4) represent.
There is TIMM which was blasted on this list recently.
One other candidate appears to be KES or KES2. Do you have any comments
on this system? Is it a strong competitor to the other major tools?
mark
------------------------------
Date: 10 Oct 1985 14:37-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: franz lisp ?
The following demonstrates that enabling the trace facility causes
return values from lisp functions consisting of prog bodies to be set to
nil. Is this supposed to happen and what does one do about it?
% cat blah1.l
(defun Blah (x y z a)
(prog (v)
(setq y (add 3 5))
(return 1)
))
% lisp
Franz Lisp, Opus 38.79
-> (load "blah1.l")
[load blah1.l]
t
-> (setq A (Blah 3 5 7 9))
1
-> (step e)
[autoload /usr/lib/lisp/step]
[load /usr/lib/lisp/step.l]
t
-> (setq B (Blah 3 5 7 9))
(setq B (Blah 3 5 7 9))
(Blah 3 5 7 9)
3
5
7
9
(prog (v) (setq y (add 3 5)) (return 1))
(setq y (add 3 5))
(add 3 5)
3
5
8
8
(return 1)
1
nil
nil
nil
->
------------------------------
Date: Fri 11 Oct 85 12:43:55-PDT
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Symbolics lisp machine mailing list ??
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The Symbolics Lisp Users' Group has a mailing list SLUG@R20.UTexas.ARPA.
This can be read from the BBoard SYMBOLICS-LISP-USERS on Sumex. Send
mail to SLUG-Request@R20.UTexas.ARPA to get on the list.
There is also BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC which may be of some interest (also a
BBoard on Sumex), as well as {Bug,Info}-TI-Explorer@Sumex for TI Explorers.
Again, use the -Request convention for getting added.
-- Rich
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 21:38:01 PDT
From: Dick Kemmerer <dick@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU>
Subject: Peer Review
A colleague forwarded a copy of AIList Digest #133 to me. In this
issue Michael Melliar-Smith's response to John Nagle's SIFT verification
message contains a reference to a verification study that is being
sponsored by the DoD Computer Security Center. I am the PI for this
study and would like to comment that the reference is somewhat
misleading. In particular, the study group did not look at the SIFT work.
Also, the suite of tools that we reviewed were the enhanced HDM tools (most of
which have been developed since the SIFT work).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 85 12:22:01 edt
From: decvax!linus!raybed2!gxm@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU (GERARD MAYER)
Subject: TIMM Correction
I'd like to point out the only error I found in Touretzky's article about TIMM.
According to the General Research technical and sales people at the IJCAI-85
booth TIMM CANNOT call any external functions: Fortran or otherwise. I found
this amazing and asked several of their people the same question. I have sent
a synopsis of my review of TIMM, KEE, ART, etc. to Cowan directly.
Gerard Mayer
Raytheon Research Division
uucp ..linus!raybed2!gxm
------------------------------
Date: 10 Oct 85 11:01:17 PDT (Thu)
From: Jeff Peck <peck@sri-spam>
Subject: RE: do you REALLY need a AI machine?
Funny how when you say a "lisp machine" some people just assume you
mean "Symbolics". My experience has been that you can avoid most of
the problems John Cugini complained about by chosing an alternate
vendor. For instance, with a $100K investment (equivalent to your
first 3600) you can buy 3 or 4 Xerox lisp machines. So, now you can
put one in each programmers office (and not have to walk down the hall
to an occupied machine), no standing in line. The Xerox machines
network to VAX/VMS or Unix file servers, so sharing is easy. The
Xerox user interface is so transparent that you can learn it in a day
or two (the editor in about 5 minutes). And, although the Xerox may
be 1/3 the speed of a 3600, as John points out, "who cares" when you
are just building and exploring? If you get into serious production
of large systems, then move it to a Symbolics, or a Cray. If you are
doing Research on AI technology, you may also want the faster system,
but most industrial labs seem to be more into applications development.
(Also, the Xerox machines support (or soon will) both Quintus Prolog,
and CommonLisp, integrated with the InterLisp-D environment).
As for a VAX <how fast does an editor need to be?> it's never fast
enough. If all you do is editing, maybe; but where are the graphics?
And timesharing LISP is a serious development problem: "Is my program
stuck, or is someone else just compiling something?" For $250K, you
can do a lot better with personal workstations.
This is not intended to be a plug for Xerox, and of course, these
are just my personal observations.
j. peck
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 20:56:49 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings>
Subject: Big Lisp Machines
We, as are you, are involved in applying AI to our jobs. We
have 5 PC-AT's and a Symbolics (which we got from another organization).
The PC's are much more useful, and a VAX would be ideal. The basic
reason is that PC-AT's and VAXEN are not that much slower than the big
machines, and cost less, and are compatible with alot more applications
programs and peripherals. Most applications need a big data base to
work of, and the AI portion is relatively small.
If you already have a great deal of LISP code already written,
and you already have VAXEN and ethernet, then a big machine might be OK.
My advice is to purchase AT's and micro-vax II's with your bucks, and
I sincerely doubt you will regret it.
Jed Marti (ARPA: marti@rand-unix.arpa ATT:213 393-0411) published
a benchmark of many machines (including a Symbolics 3600, VAX 11/780, 750)
running REDUCE problems (a symbolics math package). I think the 780 was
a tad faster than the 3600 and the 750 a tad slower (~10%).
If you are working on the part of COMSAT which flies satellites,
I would like to find out what you are doing -- that's what we are using
AI (planning to use AI) for.
Hope these comments help,
Richard Jennings,
Air Force Satellite Control Facility
Sunnyvale CA 95051
ATT: 408 744-6427
ARPA: jennings@aerospace
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 85 16:38 EST
From: "Christopher A. Welty" <weltyc%rpicie.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: AI Workstations
I don't intend to offend anyone, but after reading John
Cugini's response to Srinivasan Krishnamurthy's query about AI machines
I was a little taken aback.
The reason one gets an AI machine is because it is the most powerful
AI/ES development tool around. It provides the developer with facilities
that make the entire system development process a hundred times easier
(this number may vary depending on what system you are coming from).
Of course you have to learn how to use it. Some people look forward to
the chance to learn something new, others prefer to know only one or
two systems and hail them as the ultimate. Those who prefer to learn
know that each different system has a use that makes it helpful for
certain applications, and a hinderance in others.
If you really make an effort to learn how to use an AI workstation,
you will find (especially if you've had to do development on other systems)
that you will be far more productive, and you will be doing things more in
the way they should be done. We all know that it is often easier to cheat
than to do things the right way, and often times cheating makes later
development more difficult. With the extensive support environments for
AI/ES that these workstations provide, doing things the right way is made
easier (almost easier than cheating).
From Mr. Cugini's statement, his objections to the workstations seemed
no more than laziness...and that seems no reason to dissuade others from
getting them. If you are really getting into AI "in a really big way," an
AI workstation is a must. You won't know what your missing if you never
get one, and if you do (and take the time to learn it) you won't know how
you did without it.
-Christopher A. Welty
RPI/CIE Systems Mgr
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Oct-85 2355 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #144
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Oct 85 23:54:15 PDT
Date: Sun 13 Oct 1985 20:58-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #144
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 144
Today's Topics:
News - Grace Murray Hopper Award,
Intelligence & Learning - An Appreciation of Our Own Make-up,
Archive Services - BITNIC Server for Recent Issues &
VPI Full Archive (Micro LISP Search)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 10 Oct 85 22:49:02-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Grace Murray Hopper Award
From the October issue of CACM:
Cordell Green of Kestrel Institute was chosen "for establishing a
theoretical basis for logic programming and providing a resolution
theorem proven to carry out a programming task by constructing the
result which the computer is to compute. For proving a constructive
technique correct and for presenting an effective method for
constructing the answer; these contributions providing an early
theoretical foundation for Prolog and logic."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 11:42:41 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: ``An Appreciation of Our Own Make-up''
>From the Guardian newspaper, 10 October 1985:-
``What he (Alan Kay) would like to see AI people trying to
build is "not superhumans or humans, but mammals," contrivances
that can explore and learn but do not have to use language or
learn differential calculus." Ultimately, he asserts, "the basic
end of AI research is an appreciation of our own make-up." ''
I find the idea that these "contrivances" do not have the need
to make use of language rather strange, since there must be some
form of communication required between us and them and that will
be termed language.
The more important message of the short quote is the repetition
of the idea that intelligence is learning, starting from square
one and building a model of the world that is in one's view,
and the view from the chip must be through the language of data.
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 85 12:01 EDT
From: Henry Nussbacher <HJNCU%CUNYVM.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Database service available for back issues of Ai-List
This is to announce that some new services have been added to the
inter-network server running at Bitnic. Certain selected Arpanet
digests are now being loaded into a Spires database and are therefore
searchable from anywhere as long as you can send RFC822 mail.
If you are interested in using this service, send a piece of mail to:
DATABASE%BITNIC.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
or
DATABASE%BITNIC.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
and have as the first 3 lines of your file (case does not matter):
help
help arpanet
help design
The server will send back to you 3 help files describing how to use the
internet server, how to search Arpanet digests and how the whole thing
was designed. Read over the section on "Signup" carefully before making
further use of the Database server.
Presently, the following 5 Arpanet forums are being loaded into the
Database:
Name Retention Period
============= ================
Ai-List 2 months
Info-Ibmpc 2 months
Info-Mac 2 months
Info-Graphics 3 months
Info-Nets 3 months
The retention period is set for a short duration in order to see if
Bitnic can handle the volume of data that needs to be stored in Spires.
This service was initialized on October 4th, 1985 so currently there
are just a few items available in the Database.
Example of search command:
FIND TEXT UNIX (IN INFO-IBMPC TABLE
would find all entries in Info-Ibmpc that contain the word UNIX.
An entry is just the section within a "digested" digest that makes
reference to the word UNIX. For further details read over the
help files.
Henry Nussbacher (Hank@Bitnic.Bitnet)
Bitnet Development and Operations Center
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 18:39 EST
From: Ed Fox <fox%vpi.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: reply to query on micros and LISP
From: france (Robert France)
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 14:35:52 edt
To: fox, sharan
Subject: Re: chance to do a useful search
Ken: Robert Blum on 3 Oct asked for information on "currently
marketed LISPs for micros" including pointers to review articles.
While our new system that will classify and work with components of
messages is not yet ready, our adaptation of the SMART system is
running and ready for queries just like this. Robert France did
a search with the following results. Feel free to publish in
AIList or to send directly to Blum. Send other queries along too!
I need then for experimentation, and only request that the
author of the query be willing to tell me which messages are
relevant to the question. Thanks, Ed Fox
[At the risk of having this message show up in all future searches,
I've decided to pass it along. I deleted one false hit (a query
from Rene Bach), and I remember at least one other very lengthy
Lisp review that was not found. -- KIL]
←←←←←←←
.I 418
.W Tuesday, 20 Sep 1983
.V Volume 1
.U Issue 59
.D Mon, 19 Sep 1983 11:41 EDT
.N
.A WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
.S Micro LISPs
.B
For a survey of micro LISPs see the August and Sept issues of
Microsystems magazine. The Aug issue reviews muLISP, Supersoft LISP
and The Stiff Upper Lisp. I believe that the Sept issue will continue
the survey with some more reviews.
Dan
←←←←←←←
.I 1113
.W Thursday, 8 Mar 1984
.V Volume 2
.U Issue 27
.D Tue 6 Mar 84 15:48:55-PST
.N Sam Hahn
.A SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
.S IQLISP Source
.B
The source for IQLisp is:
Integral Quality, Inc.
P.O. Box 31970
Seattle, WA 98103
(206) 527-2918
Claims to be similar to UCI Lisp, except function def's are stored in cells
within identifiers, not on property lists; arg. handling is specified in the
syntax of the expression defining the function, I/O functions take an explicit
file argument, which defaults to the console; doesn't support FUNARGS.
IQLisp does provide:
32kb character strings,
77000 digit long integers,
IEEE format floating point,
point and line graphics,
ifc to assembly coded functions,
31 dimensions to arrays,
Costs $175 for program and manual, PCDOS only.
I've taken the liberty to include some of their sales info for those who may
not have heard of IQLisp. It's fairly new, and they claim to soon make a
generic MSDOS version (though probably without graphics support).
←←←←←←←
.I 1264
.W Thursday, 12 Apr 1984
.V Volume 2
.U Issue 45
.D 11 Apr 1984 0206 PST
.N Reply-to: LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA
.A Larry Carroll <LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA
.S micro LISP review
.B
There's a good article in the April issue of PC Tech Journal
about three micro versions of LISP: IQ LISP, muLISP-82, and
TLC LISP. It gives a fair amount of implementation detail,
contrasts them, and compares them to their mini and mainframe
cousins. The author is Bill Wong, who's working on his PhD in
computer science at Rutgers. [...]
Larry Carroll
Jet Propulsion Lab.
larry@jpl-vlsi
←←←←←←←
.I 1317
.W Sunday, 22 Apr 1984
.V Volume 2
.U Issue 51
.D 20 Apr 84 22:22:44 EST (Fri)
.N Wayne Stoffel
.A wes%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
.S Review of LISP Implementations
.B
Re: Bill Wong's article on three LISP implementations
He also wrote a series on AI languages that appeared in Microsystems. All
were 8-bit CP/M implementations.
August 1983, muLisp-80, SuperSoft Lisp, and Stiff Upper Lisp.
December 1983, XLISP, LISP/80, and TLC Lisp.
January 1984, micro-Prolog.
W.E. Stoffel
←←←←←←←
.I 1326
.W Wednesday, 25 Apr 1984
.V Volume 2
.U Issue 52
.D Sun 22 Apr 84 22:11:14-PST
.N Sam Hahn (Samuel@Score
.A Reply-to: SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
.S Another microcomputer Lisp
.B
In line with the previous mentions of microcomputer implementations of Lisp,
how about this pointer:
I saw in the current (May) issue of Microsystems an advertisement for
Waltz Lisp, from ProCode International. "Waltz Lisp is not a toy. It is the
most complete microcomputer Lisp, including features previously available only
in large Lisp systems. In fact, Waltz is substantially compatible with Franz
... and is similar to MacLisp and Lisp Machine Lisp."
Does anyone know anything about Waltz? How about a review?
[further claims: functions of type lambda, nlambda, lexpr, macro
built-in prettyprinting and formatting
user control over all aspects of the interpreter
complete set of error handling and debugging functions
over 250 functions in total ]
They're at POBox 7301, Charlottesville, VA 22906.
←←←←←←←
.I 1753
.W Wednesday, 1 Aug 1984
.V Volume 2
.U Issue 98
.D 28 Jul 1984 2132-CDT
.N
.A Usadacs at STL-HOST1.ARPA
.S LISP in Aztec C, Public Domain
.B
Ref: AI Digest, V2 #90 "LISP in Aztec C", is available from
SIMTEL20 via FTP. MICRO:<SIGM.VOL118>
A.C. McIntosh, USADACS@STL-HOST1.
←←←←←←←
.I 2512
.W Sunday, 20 Jan 1985
.V Volume 3
.U Issue 5
.D Thu 17 Jan 85 00:33:35-PST
.N Sam Hahn
.A SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
.S Lisp for PC
.B
If you're using PC's and looking for a Lisp, I'd suggest
TLC-Lisp, from The Lisp Company. I myself have not used GCLisp,
but have been quite impressed with TLC-Lisp, which has a compiler,
an object-class system, packages, auto-load entities,
and costs less than half what GCLisp costs.
TLC is John Allen's (The Anatomy of Lisp) company, located in
Redwood Estates, CA. I have no connection with TLC except as
a customer.
-- sam hahn
←←←←←←←
.I 2773
.W Friday, 8 Mar 1985
.V Volume 3
.U Issue 31
.D Thu 7 Mar 85 08:44:14-PST
.N Ken Laws
.A Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA
.S The Artificial Intelligence Report
.B
Ted Markowitz recently asked about newsletters. [...]
The following are the topics covered in back issues of The
Artificial Intelligence Report. I'm told that back issues
are still available, but I don't know the price. [...]
Vol. 1, No. 3, March, 1984
AI and the Personal Computer: Expert systems, natural
language, LISP; [...]
Vol. 2, No. 3, March, 1985
LISP on the PC: TLC LISP, GCLISP; [...]
[...]
This newsletter was the first one mentioned in AIList. Since
that time, it has moved from Los Altos to:
Artificial Intelligence Publications
Suite Three
3600 West Bayshore Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303 - 4229
U. S. A.
(415) 424-1447
-- Ken Laws
←←←←←←←
You might try using other keywords (names of micros?) or going further.
-- Robert
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂14-Oct-85 0125 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #145
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Oct 85 01:24:52 PDT
Date: Sun 13 Oct 1985 21:08-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #145
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 145
Today's Topics:
Opinion - Military Support & AI Hype & CS and AI Definitions,
AI Tools - Workstations & Lisp vs Prolog Implementation Facts,
Call for Papers - IEEE Systems, Man and Cybernetics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 10 Oct 85 12:07:50-PDT
From: Rich Alderson <ALDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: military flame
Like it or not, the military CAN take credit for the interstate highway system,
and the "civilian highway system in place before the interstates" as well--at
least, I ASSUME that you are referring to the U. S. highway system. Both were
built under the mandate of the Constitution of the United States (Philadelphia,
1787), which did not view "internal defence [as] a standard rationale for
better internal transportation" but rather saw good internal transportation as
vital to both the internal and external defense of a nation.
Please note that the above is not a matter of opinion. My own opinions are
just that, and I've had enough grief in my life for expressing them publicly.
Obviously, I make NO claim to represent anyone else's opinions if I refuse to
state my own.
Rich Alderson
------------------------------
Date: Thu 10 Oct 85 10:12:48-PDT
From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA
Subject: AI Hype is unavoidable
Part of the problem of AI hype is unavoidable: it is a result of
the definition of the field, which assumes that, once the problem
is defined, its solution is trivial.
Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science represent two
complementary approaches to the use of computers. AI is problem
oriented, and CS is solution oriented. In CS, one assumes that
the problem is (or is capable of being) well understood, and the
task is to design a good (clean, efficient, fast, etc.) solution
to the problem. In AI, the underlying assumption is that the
solution will be trivial once the problem is understood, and that
the task is to understand the problem.
These two approaches are reflected in the names of the field.
Computer Science is the science of using computers, a clear,
hard, objective definition about the use of a tool to solve
problems. Artificial Intelligence is concerned with the
simulation of intelligence, a fuzzy, open, subjective definition
about the study of the problem of simulating a human behavior
called intelligence for which there is no clear, generally
accepted definition.
Each field encounters problems when its assumption is violated.
In CS, programming disasters can result if you start coding
before you have defined the problem. Therefore, CS has developed
structured programming, programming specifications, etc. tools to
insure that the problem *is* well defined before the solution is
attempted.
In AI, trouble starts when, after the problem is understood, the
solution is *not* trivial in terms of computer performance, such
as execution time and memory space. Then, you start hacking the
algorithms in order to get results in a finite amount of time and
memory, hoping that you are not betraying your understanding of
the problem. Therefore, AI has developed extensive editors,
debuggers, windows, etc. in an attempt to insure that the
implementation of the solution remains trivial.
I believe that much of the AI hype problem stems from the
unstated assumption of trivial solutions. Profound and
impressive insights expressed as toy problems typically do not
"scale up" to the real world. An AI researcher involved in this
situation is embarrassed but not humiliated: the original
research on the problem is still valid; there is just a
"temproary problem in creating a practical solution." This
obviously creates frustration for the customers who thought they
were buying a solution of the problem rather than an
understanding of it.
If the above is true, the problem of AI hype will not go away
until the field develops enough solid understanding of the
problem of intelligence to change its name from AI to a solution
oriented name, like Machine Learning, etc. We are probably in
the same position now that physical science was before Galileo
and Newton when it was called Natural Philosophy - full of
metaphysics, passionate argument, and conflicting data (i.e.,
where the action is).
Dave Wyland
------------------------------
From: CONNOLLY CHRISTOPHER IAN <CONNOLLY@ge-crd.arpa>
Subject: AI Definition and Tools
1) I can't help but think that a cause of the recent arguments on AI
hype rests in the question "What is AI?". Note that I say >>**"A"**<<
cause. Definitions, anyone?
2) AI Machines - My observation is that the startup time on a 3600 without
help is quite long. There are a few people here who have taken a Symbolics
Lisp course and seem to have picked up on the stuff much more quickly (2 or
3 months?). Once you know how to use the machine though, I think it's a
far better programming environment than VAX/VMS. I've seen nothing on a
VAX that parallels the Window Debugger (wherein the entire stack can be
dissected), the Inspector (wherein your data structures can be dissected),
and the Flavor Examiner (wherein your data types can be inspected). The
latter two are also a great help when you have no source. I think it speeds
up my programming by a factor of 5, at least. Anyway, that's yet another
opinion...
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 85 12:28:27 EDT
From: George J. Carrette <GJC@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp vs prolog, implementation facts
Actually, all three of the Symbolics, LMI, and TI lispmachines give
the lisp-level system programmer access to extremely low level data
type and stack operations, there is no need to go to microcode for
that sort of thing. The LM-PROLOG that I maintain from time to time in
the Symbolics and LMI environment creates its own datatypes by the
usual lisp punning techniques, fooling with locatives, forwarding
pointers and the internals of CDR-CODED lists without needing
microcode support, and amazingly keeping a good deal of
transportability. Such is the ubiquity of certain hacks of lispmachine
implementation. Microcode is used, optionally, only for hand-coding
functions that are also written in lisp. The LM-PROLOG technique is
in the class of CONTINUATION PASSING techniques of prolog
implementations, as described for example in a chapter of Sussman and
Ablesons "Structure and Interpretation ..." book. This kind of
technique has more overhead associated with creation of real function
evaluation frames and such, (at least on a simple stack-machine) and
observably gets about 1/2 or 1/3 the BENCHMARK performance of a lower-level
machine-model implementation such as described by Warren. Overall
performance of a practical prolog "expert-system" may depend more
on virtual memory performance considerations of course rather than
what happens in the register-usage-mostly situation of some benchmarks.
Also consider that commercial systems put into production often have
assembly language coding of important subroutines, so high-level/low-level
language interface issues are important. The continuation passing
technique provides a more natural and efficient interface to
"assembly language" (i.e. LISP on a LISPMACHINE) than other models.
When talking about a commercial lispmachine it is important to think in
terms of LISP as a COMPUTER ENGINEERING technique rather than as having
anything to do with AI programming in particular.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Oct 1985 11:04-EDT
From: milne@wpafb-afita
Subject: call for papers - IEEE SMC
CALL FOR PAPERS
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN AND CYBERNETICS.
SPECIAL ISSUE ON
Causal and Strategic Aspects of Diagnostic Reasoning
Papers are solicited for a special issue of IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man and Cybernetics that will be devoted to the topic, "Causal and Strategic
Aspects of Diagnostic Reasoning." Dr. Robert Milne, Army Artificial
Intelligence Center will be the guest editor of the special issue.
While it is expected that the research to be reported will be typically
backed up by concrete analyses or system building for real-world diagnostic
problems, the intent is to collect the most sophisticated ideas for
diagnostic reasoning viewed as a generic collection of strategies. Articles
should attempt to describe the strategies in a domain-independent manner as
much as possible. Articles that merely describe a successful diagnostic
expert system in a domain by using well-known languages or strategies will
typically not be appropriate. Papers reporting on psychological studies,
epistemic analyses of the diagostic process, elucidating the strategies of
first-generation expert systems, descriptions of specific diagnostic systems
that incorporate new ideas for diagnostic reasoning, learning systems for
diagnosis are some examples that will be appropriate. It is expected that
most articles will typically concentrate on some version or part of the
diagnostic problem, so it is important that the paper state clearly the
problem that is being solved independent of the implementation approaches
adopted.
Papers will be reviewed carefully by referees selected by the Transactions
Editorial Board. Five copies of the manuscript should be submitted to Dr.
Robert Milne at the following address by January 15. It will be helpful if
people who intend to submit manuscripts for consideration can let the guest
editor know of their intent as soon as possible via arpanet or telephone.
Submit papers by January 15th, 1986 to:
Dr. Robert Milne
US Army AI Center
HQDA DAIM-DO
Washington, D.C. 20310-0700
phone:(202)-694-6913
arpa: milne@wpafb-afita
Author's Timeline:
15 January 1986 Papers Due
15 April 1986 Notificationo of acceptance/rejection
1 June 1986 Final Manuscripts due
November 1986 Publication
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂14-Oct-85 2254 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #146
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Oct 85 22:53:42 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Oct 1985 21:20-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #146
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 15 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 146
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - YAPS Info,
Bindings - Scheme Mailing List,
Opinion - Scaling Up,
Psychology & Logic - Modus Ponens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 Oct 85 15:58:27 EDT (Mon)
From: Liz Allen <liz@tove.umd.edu>
Subject: YAPS info
In response to the question about obtaining YAPS: YAPS is available
from the Univ of Maryland along with some other packages like a
flavors package. They run under Franz Lisp (we supply a slightly
hacked version of Opus 38.91) and on Vaxes running Berkeley Unix.
For more information, send mail to me.
-Liz
liz@tove.umd.edu or liz@maryland.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 85 20:37:24 EDT
From: Hal Abelson <HAL@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Scheme mailing list
Scheme@MIT-MC.ARPA is a network-wide mailing list for discussions
concerning the Scheme dialect of Lisp -- both as a vehicle for
investigating language development and as a vehicle for teaching
about computer science. To be added to the list, please send mail to
Scheme-Request@MIT-MC.ARPA. Remote sites with many entries are
encouraged to set up local distribution lists..
------------------------------
Date: Mon 14 Oct 85 07:50:00-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Subject: Scaling Up
In a recent issue of AIList [#145], Dave Wyland expresses a rather
common epistemological error, in his attempt to defend "AI" as we know
and love it today -- hype and all !
Mr. Wyland seems to think that finding problem solutions which "scale up"
is a matter of manufacturing convenience, or something like that. What
he seems to overlook is that the property of scaling up (to realistic
performance and behavior) is normally OUR ONLY GUARANTEE THAT THE
"SOLUTION" DOES IN FACT EMBODY A CORRECT SET OF PRINCIPLES.
To put it more simply, if the solution doesn't scale up, then it just
plain isn't a solution, even if the inventor feels he has made a lot
of "profound and impressive insights". The point is, these insights
aren't very profound or impressive (except perhaps to IJCAI referees)
if they fail the scaling test.
This principle is generally understood by persons with real engineering
backgrounds, but seems to come as news to "AI" folks.
G.R. Martins
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 16:43 EST
From: Mukhop <mukhop%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Non-contradictory set of beliefs and dependencies
> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 18:28:03 PDT
> From: albert@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU (Anthony Albert)
> Subject: Re: Counterexample to modus ponens
>
> As far as beliefs, a non-contradictory set could be:
>
> 1) If a Republican wins then Reagan will win.
> 2) If Reagan doesn't win then a Republican won't win.
> 3) Unless a Democrat wins, a Republican will win.
>
Beliefs 1) and 2) of this non-contradictory set are one and the same as far
as inferential power is concerned:
P => Q <=> ~Q => ~P
Also, this set of non-contradictory beliefs does not include the notion
that Reagan (or a Republican) will probably win. It merely states that
Reagan's chances are better than his Republican opponent.
Getting back to the original set of statements:
> (1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not Ronald
> Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
>
> (2) A Republican will win the election.
>
> Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
>
> (3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
>
My perception of the commonly held beliefs at that time is:
a) There are three contestants in the election.
b) Ronald Reagan has the highest probability of winning.
c) John Anderson has the lowest probability of winning.
d) John Anderson and Ronald Reagan are the only Republicans contesting
the elections.
The second statement in the original set ("A Republican will win the
election") was a commonly held belief, arrived at from:
- Ronald Reagan has the highest probability of winning, and
- Ronald Reagan is a Republican.
(Of course, John Anderson increased the odds in favor of a Republican)
If the assumption is now made that Ronald Reagan will not win the election,
then one can no longer make the assumption that a Republican will win.
The conclusion,
" If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson,"
can no longer be made.
It seems that the dependencies of the belief structures need to be
taken into account in order to avoid contradictions. If it was
reasonable to believe that a Republican would win, irrespective of
the chances of Ronald Reagan, then it would be reasonable to believe:
"If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1985 21:09 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Republicans and Probability
About Republicans and probability.
That paradox comes from all those causes -- ambiguities, shifts in
meanings from "intension" to "extension," and so forth. In my view,
adult psychology is too complicated to treat in terms of such simple
mathematical models as deduction and probability. You've heard my
complaints about logic too often to repeat, and surely everyone has
read the critiques of Kahnemann and Tversky about applications of
probabilistic models to human beliefs and reasoning.
I suggest another, simple example to examine. If you tell a "typical"
person that "Most A's are B's" and that "Most B's are C's," then the
most common inference is that "Most A's are therefore C's." More
sophisticated people may say --"No, not most, but at least 26 percent
of A's are C's, because they'll notice that "most" might mean 51
percent. Very few people will recognize that it is possible that no
A's are C's, or be able to construct a counterexample.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 85 13:39:09 edt
From: pugh@GVAX.CS.CORNELL.EDU (William Pugh)
Subject: Bayesian inference or nested assumptions
Continuing on the subject of the Modus Ponens example, I have
worked out some results on using Bayesian Inference for nested
assumptions:
Notation:
A|B means assuming B is true, A is true
if B is false, the statement is neither
true nor false, it is untested.
P(X) - the probability of X
e.g. P(A|B) = the probability of A being true,
given that B is true
For the original example:
>> (1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not
>> Ronald Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
>>
>> (2) A Republican will win the election.
>>
>> Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
>>
>> (3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
>>
Let RW stand for "A Republican wins"
Let RR stand for "Ronald Reagan wins"
Let JA stand for "John Anderson wins"
We have:
1) P((JA|~RR)|RW) = 1
2) P(RW) = very high
3) P(JA|~RR) = ??
Well, nested assumptions don't really work with the normal
Bayesian calculations, so we first have to convert (1) to
a normal form.
To convert to a normal form, P((A|B)|C) = P(A|(B&C))
You can show this formally, but informally in English:
Assuming that C, then assuming that B, then A
is the same as
Assuming that C and B, then A
Alright, so now we have P(JA|(~RR&RW)) = 1. What can we do
with this??
P(JA)P((~RR&RW)|JA)
P(JA|(~RR&RW)) = -------------------
P(~RR&RW)
P(JA)P(RW|JA)P(~RR|(RW&JA))
= ---------------------------
P(RW)P(~RR|RW)
P(JA)P(RW|JA)P(~RR|(RW&JA))
so P(JA|(~RR&RW))P(RW) = ---------------------------
P(~RR|RW)
P(JA)
(since there can be only one winner) = ---------
P(~RR|RW)
Which, by other real world knowledge, you can reduce to P(RW).
Side note: I was explaining this problem to a friend who
does not have a background in logic. I when I told her that
A => B is true when A is false, she said "That's stupid... No
wonder logicians have trouble with the real world." :-)
One moral of this story: Be careful of "if" in english - it
oftens means something other than the standard logical meaning.
Bill Pugh
Cornell University
..{uw-beaver|vax135}!cornell!pugh
607-257-6994
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 85 20:02:19 -0200
From: Eyal mozes <eyal%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Counter-example to Modus Ponens
>> Before the 1980 presidential election, many held the two beliefs
>> below:
>> (1) If a Republican wins the election then if the winner is not
>> Ronald Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
>> (2) A Republican will win the election.
>> Yet few if any of these people believed the conclusion:
>> (3) If the winner is not Reagan then the winner will be Anderson.
> I would say the problem with this analysis is that people believed,
> instead of statement 1, the following similar statement:
> (1a) If a Republican wins the election and the winner is not
> Ronald Reagan, then the winner will be John Anderson.
In classical philosophical logic, a conditional proposition (i.e., a
proposition of the form 'if A then B') asserts the necessity of a
certain sequence between two statements; the truth of 'if A then B'
does not depend on the truth of A and of B, but on the connection
between them - whether B's truth FOLLOWS NECESSARILY FROM A's truth.
For example, the statement 'if you are alive, then you are now reading
an ARPANET message' is FALSE; the condition and the consequent are both
true, but the consequent does not follow necessarily from the condition
(you could be alive and still be doing something else now).
Now, let us look at the meaning of (1a), (2) and (3).
(1a) asserts that if the winner is a Republican but not Reagan, it
follows necessarily that it will be Anderson. Given that there were
only two Republican candidates, (1a) is true, and everyone knew it is
true. The actual results of the elections determined the truth of the
two components (both turned out to be false), but made no difference
about the necessary connection between them.
(2) is a simple categorical proposition; before the elections, many
people believed it is true, others believed it is false; it turned out
to be true.
(3) asserts that if the winner is not Reagan, it FOLLOWS NECESSARILY
that it will be Anderson. This is obviously false, and I doubt if
anyone ever believed it. Again, the actual results of the elections
determined the truth of the two components (both turned out to be
false), but made no difference about the lack of any necessary
connection between them.
Given the classical logical interpretation, then, (3) does not follow
from (1a) and (2). People who believed (1a) and (2) but not (3) were
perfectly consistent (and they were also correct).
This example demonstrates one of the serious weaknesses of predicate
calculus. Predicate calculus has no way to express necessary
connections (mainly because its originators, Russell and Whitehead,
held a philosophy which denies the existence of such connections); the
result is the truth-functional interpretation of conditional
propositions, which leads to such anti-common-sense results as making
(3) follow from (1a) and (2).
As for (1), I'm not sure about its meaning, but it certainly doesn't
mean exactly the same as (1a). As far as I know, in all discussions, by
classical logicians, of conditional propositions or of Modus Ponens,
they only dealt with the case in which both components of the
conditional are simple categorical propositions. It is an interesting
question whether Modus Ponens remains valid in other cases as well (and
this, of course, depends on what exactly such 'multiple-conditional'
propositions mean).
Eyal Mozes
BITNET: eyal@wisdom
CSNET and ARPA: eyal%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.ARPA
UUCP: ..!decvax!humus!wisdom!eyal
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Oct-85 0023 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #147
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Oct 85 00:23:17 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Oct 1985 21:28-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #147
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 15 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 147
Today's Topics:
Reviews - Canadian Artificial Intelligence 4 and 5 &
Spatial Data Handling and Graphics Interface Conferences,
Seminars - Intelligent Electronic Mail (MIT) &
Connectionist Learning (GTE) &
Connectionist Learning (SU) &
Probabilistic Interpretation of Certainty Factors (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 Oct 1985 10:59-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Canadian Artificial Intelligence 4
Summary of Canadian Artificial Intelligence 4, June 1985
Should CSCSI/SCEIO Attempt to Influence National Policy
(discusses whether their organization should work to influence national
policy on AI within the Canadian government.)
AI Research Spending and politics
Discusses Canadian research spending and talent shortage. The Canadian
AI group has been active in opposition to Star Wars.
Discussion of an episode of Magnum P. I. which featured an AI researcher
who developed some formula that would tip the balance in favor of
whoever had it. The formula was "3 bracket prompt semicolon."
The Canadian National Research Council is starting an inventory of
Canadian robotics research
Announcement of Babbage and Lovelace's BASIC package to expand other
BASIC programs to do natural language parsing. Runs on an IBM PC
with 64 to 96 K.
French Article on AI and Cognitive Science at the University of Montreal
Canadian Companies
Applied AI Systems, Kanata Ontario doing consulting, marketing of
software, custom software.
Review of LOGICware which sells MPROLOG.
Book reviews of "The Comercial Application of Expert System Technology"
"Artificial Intelligence: Bibliographic Summaries of the Select
Literature Volume I", "L'Intelligence Artificielle: promesses et
Realities"
Humorous Article: A Brief Review of Ignorance Engineering
Simon Fraser University AI tech report list
------------------------------
Date: 12 Oct 1985 11:44-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Canadian Artificial Intelligence 5
Summary of Canadian Artificial Intelligence 5, September 1985
"Canada Prominent in IJCAI Awards" Reports on AIers prominent at
IJCAI: Levesque (Computers and Thought), Best Paper to Fagin and
Halpern and Professor Randy Goebel who stumped the band in
a taping of Mr. Carson's televison show, The Tonight Show.
"NSERC Proposes Major Increase in Research Funding" NSERC
is the Canadian science funding organization
Michel Pilot has started his own AI consulting service
Coast Mountain Intelligence specializes in Resource
Applications. They completed an expert system on the choice
of statistical packages for geophysical data. They are working
on expert systems for forest management and interpretation of
snow profiles for avalanche predictions
Xerox Announces Low Cost Workstations
Workshop Report: Theoretical Approaches to Natural Language
Understanding
Workshop Report: Workshop on the Foundations of Adaptive Information
Processing
Canada Conquers Los Angeles: mentions Canadians prominent at IJCAI-85
Directory of Candian AI businesses
Reviews of:
Human Foundations of Advanced Computing Technology:
The Guide to the Select Literature from the Report Store
Readings in Knowledge Representation
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence by Eugene Charniak and Drew McDermott
Artificial Intelligence Applications for Business Management
Artificial Intelligence Applications for Manufacturing
Obituaries for Jeffrey Robert Sampson, Daniel Louis Shalom Berlin
Donald Grant Kuehner and David Julian Meredith Davies
Tech Report Lists from
University of Calgary, University of Montreal, University of Toronto,
McGill University, University of Alberta, Simon Fraser University
------------------------------
Date: 14 Oct 1985 12:32-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: AI at conferences
International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling at the University
of Zurich, August 1984
Order from Symposium Secretariat, Department of Geography,
University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190 CH-8057 Zurich,
Switzerland. Price 30 dollars
Data Structures for a Knowledge-Based Geographic Information System
D. J. Perquet
Symbolic Feature Analysis and Expert Systems
B. Palmer
Autonap -- An Expert System for Automatic Map Name Placement
H. Freemand, J. Ahn
Knowledge Based Control of Search and Learning in a Large Scale GIS
T. R. Smith M. Pazner
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Graphics Interface 85, 11th Conference of
Candian Man-Computer Society Montreal May 27-31
Robotics and CAD/CAM Section
Non-rigid Motion
A. R. Dill and M. D. Levine
McGill University
Electronic Assembly by Robots
C. Michaud, A. S. Malowany, M. D. Levine
McGill University
Lo Cost Geometric Modelling System for CAM
W. G. Ngai and Y. K . Chan
Chinese Univeristy of Hong Kong
Panel- Computer Graphics in Environmental Design Artificial Intelligence
Generative Design in Architecture Using an Expert System
E. Chang University of Victoria
Knowledge Engineering Application in Image Processing
K. Mikame, N. Sueda, A. Hoshi, S. Ohoniden Toshiba, Japan
Visual Perception
L. Scholl
Laura Scholl and Associates USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 13:49 EDT
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Intelligent Electronic Mail (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Communications Forum
Making Electronic Mail More Intelligent
October 31, 1985
Thomas Malone, MIT
Kenneth Mayers, Digital Equipment Corporation
Electronic messaging has become a familiar feature of the
office environment and a key element in office automation
strategy for many organizations. As these systems spread, many
issues must be dealt with, such as accomodating evolving user
requirements, responding to rapid expansion, controlling junk
mail, and incorporating alternative technologies. One of the
central challenges is how to enhance messaging features so that
users are not swamped by information overload.
This forum will present the experience of Digital Equipment
Corporation, one of the pioneering users of electronic mail, and
will describe some recent innovative research at MIT which uses
artificial intelligence technology to improve the user's ability
to sort incoming messages by relevance and urgency and to route
outgoing communications to the most appropriate people within the
organizations.
4:00 - 6:00
Bartos Theater for the Moving Image
The Wiesner Building
(Center for Arts and Media Technology)
(Building E15 Lower Level)
20 Ames Street
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
For further information call 617-253-3144.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 85 11:31:01 EDT
From: Bernard Silver <SILVER@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Connectionist Learning (GTE)
GTE LABORATORIES INC
MACHINE LEARNING SEMINAR
TITLE: Learning by Statistical Cooperation
in Connectionist Networks
SPEAKER: Prof. Andrew G. Barto
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
TIME: 2pm, Wednesday, October 23
PLACE: GTE Laboratories Inc
40 Sylvan Rd
Waltham MA 02254
Since the usual approaches to cooperative computation in networks of
neuron-like computating elements do not assume that network components
have any ``preferences," they do not make substantive contact with game
theoretic concepts, despite their use of some of the same terminology.
In the approach I describe, however, each network component, or adaptive
element, is a self-interested agent that prefers some inputs over others
and ``works" toward obtaining the most highly preferred inputs. I
describe some of our work with an adaptive element that is robust enough
to learn to cooperate with other elements like itself in order to
further its self-interests. It is argued that some of the long-standing
problems concerning adaptation and learning by networks might be
solvable by this form of cooperativity, and computer simulation
experiments are described that show how networks of self-interested
components that are sufficiently robust can solve rather difficult
learning problems. A secondary aim of this talk is to suggest that
beyond what I explicitly illustrate, there is a wealth of ideas from
game theory and allied disciplines such as mathematical economics that
can be of use in thinking about cooperative computation in both nervous
systems and man-made systems.
For more information contact Bernard Silver (617) 466-2663
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 85 05:45:36 pdt
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Seminar - Connectionist Learning (SU)
THE COMPUTATION, COGNITION, & NEUROSCIENCE JOURNAL CLUB
AND SPORADIC SEMINAR SERIES
presents:
"From Classical Conditioning to Cognitive Computations"
Richard S. Sutton
GTE Fundamental Research Laboratory
Date: Mon, Oct. 28 Time: 12:00-1:15 Place: Room 100, Jordan Hall
One attractive aspect of connectionist models is their ability to make
contact with a wide range of fields from neuroscience to cognitive
science and AI. In this talk I will review the status of the
"connectionist connection" between such fields and present some of my
own work as an example of a case in which pursuing it has been fruitful.
I will present a sequence of three closely-related connectionist
learning models. The first was presented by Sutton and Barto in 1981 as
a real-time model of classical conditioning consistent with many
behavioral phenomena including blocking, conditioned inhibition, the ISI
dependency, higher-order conditioning, and serial-compound effects. The
second model is the result of changes made to the first in trying to use
it in an AI learning problem. Remarkably, the modified model is not
only very effective on the AI problem, but is also a better match to the
classical conditioning data than the first model. I am currently
working on a third model that is able to reproduce the
animal learning phenomena of latent learning and sensory
preconditioning. The AI goal for this model is to build a system that
can learn about and then reason about its environment. The model shows
promise of being simultaneously very successful as all of 1) a model of
classical conditioning, 2) an aid to AI machine learning systems, and 3)
a model of simple forms of inference and planning.
*****************************************************************************
The CCNJCS↑3 was formed in response to a growing interest among
members of the Psychology, Computer Science, and Neuroscience
departments at Stanford in learning about recent advances in the
study of computational approaches to modelling the relationship
between cognition and neuroscience. In addition to organizing
seminars, we also arrange journal club meetings in which graduate
students and post-docs meet to read and discuss current research
articles dealing with: The neural substrates of learning and memory,
computational models of neuronal processes, and the neural bases
of cognitive behavior.
For more information, contact Mark Gluck (gluck%su-psych@sumex-aim).
------------------------------
Date: Mon 14 Oct 85 07:52:23-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Probabilistic Interpretation of Certainty Factors (SU)
SIGLUNCH will be held at the Chemistry Gazebo at 12:05-1:00 p.m.
Probabilistic Interpretations for MYCIN's Certainty Factors
David Heckerman
I will show that the original definition of certainty factors (CF's)
is inconsistent with the "defining desiderata" of the CF combination
functions. I will then show that if this inconsistency is removed by
redefining CF's in terms of the desiderata then CF's have
probabilistic interpretations. In other words, I will show that
certainty factors are nothing more than transformed probabilistic
quantities. The construction of the interpretation provides insights
into the assumptions made when propagating CF's through an inference
net. For example, it can be shown that all evidence which bears
directly on a hypothesis must be conditionally independent on the
hypothesis and its negation. After presenting the interpretations,
I will discuss several ramifications of the correspondence between
CF's and probabilities.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1555 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #148
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 15:52:00 PDT
Date: Fri 18 Oct 1985 14:05-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #148
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 18 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 148
Today's Topics:
Queries - Go & VMS vs. UNIX for AI & KR Languages for Semantic Nets &
Common Lisp Compiler/Interpreter for VAX/750(ULTRIX),
Literature - Foreign Language Abstracting,
Applications - ALV Demo,
AI Tools - YAPS & AI Machines
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 15-Oct-85 22:02-EDT
From: David Nicol <cscboic%BOSTONU.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: the ancient oriental game of Go
I am in the process of writing a program to mediate a Go game, and hopefully
will be able to write an algorithm or two for playing.
If anyone has done any thinking towards algorithms to play Go, or maybe
has one already, I would appreciate very much hearing from you.
Cscboic@bostonu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 85 11:50 EST
From: "Christopher A. Welty" <weltyc%rpicie.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: VMS vs UNIX for AI development
I know this may set people at each others throats, but it is a
legitimate concern of mine, so here goes:
What experience has there been out there with AI (mainly ES)
development on VMS? We use both UNIX and VMS here at RPI, and I have
found in my experience that VMS makes it more difficult to do work,
and UNIX makes it easier. But there seems to be a number of people
(who don't even work for DEC) that swear by VMS. There must be some rational
reason for this. I don't really want to see a discussion of the Operating
Systems themselves (as that is another Newslist), just what support
they offer for development of Expert Systems (mainly LISP, but feel free
to add other languages). I know what UNIX offers, let me hear (see) what
VMS offers.
-Christopher Welty
RPI / CIE Systems Mgr.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 85 1615 WEZ
From: U02F%CBEBDA3T.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (Franklin A. Davis)
Subject: Query: Languages for knowledge rep using semantic nets?
We are interested in knowledge representation using semantic nets
and frames, and we would like to know who has experience with
special languages for this purpose. Furthermore, are there
distributors for such software packages? Thanks in advance.
Regards, Franklin Davis <U02F@CBEBDA3T.BITNET>
Institut fuer Informatik und angewandte Mathematik
Universitaet Bern
Laenggassstrasse 51
CH-3012 Bern
Switzerland
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 85 9:24:26 EDT
From: "Srinivasan Krishnamurthy" <1438@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET>
Subject: Common Lisp Compiler/Interpreter for VAX/750(ULTRIX)
Dear Readers,
Can somebody give me details about a CommonLisp Compiler
and interpreter for a VAX/750 running ULTRIX? Heard that
KEE and Knowledge Craft(KC) work only on VMS, want to port
it to the above enviornment. Any ideas, leads are welcome.
Please message me directly at the following net addreses:
Mailnet: srini@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET
Arpanet: srini%NJIT-EIES.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
USMAIL: S Krishnamurthy
COMSAT LABS, NTD.
22300 Comsat Drive.
Clarksburg, MD-20871
(301)428-4531
Thanks in advance.
Srini.
------------------------------
Date: 17 Oct 1985 0744-PDT (Thursday)
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Last call for assistance: helping with foreign language abstracting
I would like to thank all of the people who responded for my first
call for people to help in the translation/abstraction of foreign
language documents. I have been travelling quite a bit during the
past five weeks, so next week, I will have a chance to lay the
groundwork for determining what journals to monitor and where to
post information.
For those of you who missed this earlier posting: I am seeking people
interested in monitoring foreign language technical documents with
an eye to post significant new articles to various bulletin boards.
This would be prior to translation, and would hopefully speed translation
of potentially significant papers in: AI, graphics, and so forth.
Languages which are particularly critical are Eastern Asian: Japanese and
Chinese, perhaps French, and other western European languages. We have
a few people of each, but it would help to spread the load out.
If you are interested, or want to hear more, send me mail to a UUCPnet/ARPAnet
gateway listed below.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center [Rock of Ages Home for ...]
eugene@ames-nas.ARPA
UUCP: {ihnp4,hao,hplabs,nsc,cray,research,decwrl}!ames!amelia!eugene
------------------------------
Date: 8 Oct 1985 1205-PDT
From: LAWS at SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Ogling Overseas Technology
From the EE's Tools & Toys column,
IEEE Spectrum, Volume 22, No. 10, 10/85, p. 85
The latest research results being published outside the United States
may not be as difficult to monitor as one might think. The U.S. Dept.
of Commerce publishes a weekly newsletter called Foreign Technology
that abstracts new reports and papers from outside the U.S. that are
available through the National Technical Information Service. Each
abstract lists the report's title, author(s), date, and NTIS publication
number, along with a brief synopsis.
Topics that the Commerce Department tracks in the newsletter are:
biomedical technology; civil, construction, structural, and building
engineering; communications; computer technology; electro and optical
technology; energy; manufacturing and industrial engineering; materials
sciences; physical sciences; transportation technology; and mining and
minerals technology.
An annual subscription to the weekly newsletter, which is indexed
every January, costs $90 in North America. To subscribe or to request
subscription prices for other areas, write to U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield,
VA 22161; telephone (703) 487-4630.
------------------------------
Date: 17 Oct 1985 20:51:51 EDT
From: Spacely's Space Sprockets <MMDA@USC-ISI.ARPA>
Subject: ALV DEMO
In response to the recent post regarding the Autonomous Vehicle demo:
The Autonomous Land Vehicle project, sponsored by DARPA through the
Army ETL, is part of DARPA's Strategic Computing Program, sort of
the US's answer to Japan's Fifth Generation effort. Martin Marietta
Denver Aerospace ( the Advanced Automation Technology Section ) is
the prime contractor of the project -- we are actually developing the
system and performing the demos. The project started in late '84
(actually early '85 for most of us), and the first demo was in May '85.
We have another demonstration set for next month, and will have about
one per year for the next four years, I believe, each demo being more
ambitious.
The May demo was a preliminary road-following demonstration, with
the main point being that we actually got the vehicle going, hardware mounted,
some communications figured out, and made it follow a road autonomously.
It traversed a 1 km track of road at a speed of about 3 km/h (yep, pretty
slow). The vision system (based on a Vicom image processing computer)
produced scene models about every 3 seconds for the navigator/pilot
to interpret and control the vehicle. The scene model is basically 3D
road centerpoints.
In November, the vehicle will travel about 5 times as far at speeds up to
10 km/hr and handle things such as shadows on the road, intersecting roads,
and sharp curves. We will also be using an ERIM laser range scanner as well
as the camera we used in May to provide road images. In later demos we will
avoid obstacles, go over cross-country terrain, and other neato tricks.
Martin Marietta is officially the integrator of this project, and other
universities and companies also have research contracts -- University of
Maryland, Carnegie-Mellon University, SRI, AI&DS, Hughes, Honeywell,
and maybe some others that I'm not aware of. So far, most of the work
contributing to the demos has been done here at Martin Marietta. These other
folks will be contributing a lot in the future.
A paper describing the project and the May configuration will come out soon
in the proceedings of the SPIE Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Computer
Vision (Sept. '85) [1].
Matthew Turk
MMDA@USC-ISI.arpa
[1] Lowrie, Thomas, Gremban, Turk
The Autonomous Land Vehicle Preliminary Road-following Demonstration
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1985 09:29-EDT
From: Hans.Tallis@ML.RI.CMU.EDU
Subject: YAPS
Srinivasan,
I'm working at Mitre for the summer (tallis@mitre) and we have a
version of YAPS which is source-code runnable under Franz,
Lambda Zetalisp and Symbolics Zetalisp. Since YAPS is
practically public domain, Liz Allen at Maryland probably
wouldn't mind our giving you a copy. Send mail if you're
intersted.
--Hans
------------------------------
Date: 14 Oct 1985 23:48:39-BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%svga@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: DO you really need an AI machine?
Mon Oct 14 23:47:48 BST 1985
To John and Srinivasan,
At Sussex University we have been involved in AI teaching and
research for many years. Being British we have a relatively
small budget, and for this reason we have resisted going for
machines like Symbolics, since a wonderful tool is not much
use if you have to spend most of your time queueing up to use
it. Instead we have mostly been using VAXen for a range of AI
projects.
But we did not like the AI software available, so we developed
our own - POPLOG.. We've found that with suitable software 10
to 14 AI MSc students can be kept happy most of the time on a
4 Mbyte VAX 750 running Berkeley Unix or VMS. For more
advanced researchers the number drops, as it does if you get
someone doing image or speech processing. We can support this
number because most of the time most people are editing, not
running their programs. Of course, we are then stuck with a
terrible human-machine interface: a 24 by 80 VDU. So we are
now trying to shift as much as possible of our research onto
SUN workstations - cheaper than Symbolics. At least SUNs run
Unix, unlike most purpose-built AI workstations, and for us
that's a big advantage. We use POPLOG, but there's also
Quintus Prolog, Common Lisp, and other AI tools available on
the SUN. Of course it will be a little while before these
machines have the mature interfaces available on Lisp
machines.
Aaron Sloman, Cognitive Studies Programme,
University of Sussex, Brighton, England.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 85 21:22:55 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Hype & Big AI Machines.
I think Martins (#146) missed the point of Wylands (#145) salient
observation that AI researchers focus on *problems* while disciples of
other forms of CS focus on *solutions*. For those of you near good
college libraries let me suggest that you look up the "Collected Works
of John VonNeumann" and read what he has to say about computers. In
short, he advocates (see Vol 5) that computers be used to obtain
insights into problems, which are then presumably solved in closed
form.
It makes sense, then, to use AI to develop an understanding
of problems which are really too difficult to deal with without AI
techniques, and then close in on a CS *solution*, and finally with
insights so obtained on a closed form, mathematically verifiable
true solution.
In my area of interest we have to deal with lots of nasty
solutions to differential equations. At last, I have sold my
bosses to get Macsyma to help us beat these monster's into a form
which we can implement in reasonable time on our mainframes.
[Macsyma is a super duper symbolic algebra package which costs
5K for a Symbolics 3670 from Symbolics -- it was developed over
the last 20 years at MIT -- and yes, the price just dropped].
With regard to messages from Peck (#144) suggesting small
Xerox AI machines and Connolly (#145) and Welty (#144) singing the
praises of large AI machines -- there is no doubt that if you have
experienced AI investigators, and a network of solid general
purpose processing the large AI (and small ones) are worth their
cost.
The original questions was, however, where does one start?
Cugini was correct in pointing out the risks of jumping in to
the AI culture too quickly for the reasons he stated and two others:
1) *solutions* often are often dependant upon CS techniques, 2) if
you don't know that AI is part of your solution (eg. you are
not part of an research AI group) why commit yourself prematurely?
Coupled with the availability of good learning systems (and
adequate but perhaps not best) development systems on the VAX and
PC-AT there is really little need to invest initially in a
dedicated AI machine of any size (although Xerox's 6085 sure looks
nice). Slow as Golden Hill's Common Lisp is, it is the Lisp system
of choice for beginning Lisper's at our organization (we also have
a Symbolics 3670 as I implied above). In fact, rolling out of
bed in the morning does not qualify one to appreciate the Symbolics
development environment. {if it did it probably would not be
worth using}
[flame off]
Richard Jennings
Arpa: jennings@aerospace
I don't work for them, just use their arpanet port.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 85 10:21 CDT
From: Joseph←Tatem <tatem%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: AI machines
I have been reading with interest the discussion about AI (LISP)
machines and their usefulness. Since I have been thinking about this
myself, I will take this oppurtunity to throw my two cents in.
From what I hear, the average time that it takes to come up to speed
on one of these LISP machines is about 3 months. This corresponds
roughly to my own experience. Of course, some vendors provide online
services that can aid you to various degrees. However, I have found
that John Cugini's sentiments are common and not altogether
ill-founded. Have you ever done any work with the Window System on
one of these beasts?? If you have you know that it is a mess and is
not well-documented. You find flavors like STREAM-MIXIN-WITH-HACKS.
When you look these up in the manual, you will likely-as-not read
something like, "This function does not work reliably, don't use it."
On the other hand, once you have learned your way around a little
bit, you find that you are using a very powerful machine with a nice
development environment. I can get at lots of imformation in the
debugger and I can incrementally develop my systems, etc, etc. I
find that I have become spoiled. Things that I once did fine without
(or with) now seem essential (unnecessary): I don't know how I lived
without (with) them before.
I believe that the problem is a design issue. Most of these machines
are based on software that was developed at (and licensed by) MIT.
It seems to me that the system was never really designed (at least
the user-interface), but that it was a concatenation of Master's
Theses (and other grad. student type work). This is not to say that
it is not a good system. There has been a lot of good work put into
these machines. It is just that there needs to be some consistency.
I see a need to redesign at two levels. First, I would like to see
a consistent set of functions (and flavors, etc). Secondly, I would
like to see a well-designed user interface. A mouse and a few
windows do not make a good interface just by being there. By now, we
should know the kinds of things that make computers easy to use. There
certainly is no dearth of ideas in the literature. At the very least,
I would like for a brand-new user to be able to sit down at one of
these beasts and at least be able to figure out which mouse button to
click or which function to enter to get himself started.
So whaddya think?? Joe Tatem
tatem%ti-eg@csnet-relay
Note: The opinions expressed herein are strictly my own and in no
way reflect those of my employer.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1604 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #149
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 15:55:48 PDT
Date: Fri 18 Oct 1985 14:16-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #149
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 18 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 149
Today's Topics:
Projects - University of Aberdeen & CSLI,
Literature - New Complexity Journal,
AI Tools - Lisp vs. Prolog,
Opinion - AI Hype & Scaling Up,
Cognition & Logic - Modus Ponens,
Humor - Dognition
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 17 Oct 85 12:44:41-PDT
From: Derek Sleeman <SLEEMAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: University of Aberdeen Program
UNIVERSITY of ABERDEEN
Department of Computing Science
The University of Aberdeen is now making a sizeable committment to
build a research group in Intelligent Systems/Cognitive Science.
Following the early work of Ted Elcock and his co-workers, the
research work of the Department has been effectively restricted to
databases. However, with the recent appointment of Derek Sleeman
to the faculty from summer 1986, it is anticipated that a sizeable
activity will be (re)established in AI.
In particular we are anxious to have a number of visitors at
any time - and funds have been set aside for this. So we would be
particularly interested to hear from people wishing to spend Sabbaticals,
short-term Research fellowships etc.
Please contact Derek Sleeman at 415 497 3257 or SLEEMAN@SUMEX
for further details.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Oct 85 17:12:46-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Projects
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI PROJECTS
The following is a list of CSLI projects and their coordinators.
AFT Lexical Representation Theory. Julius Moravcsik
(AFT stands for Aitiuational Frame Theory)
Computational Models of Spoken Language. Meg Withgott
Discourse, Intention, and Action. Phil Cohen.
Embedded Computation Group. Brian Smith (3 sub groups)
sub 1: Research on Situated Automata. Stan Rosenschein
sub 2: Semantically Rational
Computer Languages. Curtis Abbott
sub 3: Representation and Reasoning. Brian Smith
Finite State Morphology. Lauri Karttunen
Foundations of Document Preparation. David Levy.
Foundations of Grammar. Lauri Karttunen
Grammatical Theory and Discourse
Structures. Joan Bresnan
Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Ivan Sag and Thomas Wasow
Lexical Project. Annie Zaenen
Linguistic Approaches to Computer
Languages. Hans Uszkoreit
Phonology and Phonetics. Paul Kiparsky
Rational Agency. Michael Bratman
Semantics of Computer Language. Terry Winograd
Situation Theory and Situation
Semantics (STASS). Jon Barwise
Visual Communication. Sandy Pentland
In addition, there are some interproject working groups. These
include:
Situated Engine Company. Jon Barwise and Brian Smith
Representation and Modelling. Brian Smith and Terry Winograd
------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Oct 85 09:56:32-EDT
From: Susan A. Maser <MASER@COLUMBIA-20.ARPA>
Subject: NEW JOURNAL
JOURNAL OF COMPLEXITY
Academic Press
Editor: J.F. Traub, Columbia University
FOUNDING EDITORIAL BOARD
K. Arrow, Stanford University
G. Debreu, University of California, Berkeley
Z. Galil, Columbia University
L. Hurwicz, University of Minnesota
J. Kadane, Carnegie-Mellon University
R. Karp, University of California, Berkeley
S. Kirkpatrick, I.B.M.
H.T. Kung, Carnegie-Mellon University
M. Rabin, Harvard University and Hebrew University
S. Smale, University of California, Berkeley
S. Winograd, I.B.M.
S. Wolfram, Institute for Advanced Study
H. Wozniakowski, Columbia University and University of Warsaw
YOU ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT YOUR MAJOR RESEARCH PAPERS TO THE JOURNAL.
See below for further information.
Publication Information and Rates:
Volume 1 (1985), 2 issues, annual institutional subscription rates:
In the US and Canada: $60
All other countries: $68
Volume 2 (1986), 4 issues, annual institutional subscription rates:
In the US and Canada: $80
All other countries: $93
Send your subscription orders to: Academic Press, Inc.
1250 Sixth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 230-1840
Contents of Volume 1, Issue 1:
"A 71/60 Theorem for Bin Packing" by Michael R. Garey & David S. Johnson
"Monte-Carlo Algorithms for the Planar Multiterminal Network
Reliability Problem" by Richard M. Karp & Michael Luby
"Memory Requirements for Balanced Computer Architectures" by H.T. Kung
"Optimal Algorithms for Image Understanding: Current Status and
Future Plans" by D. Lee
"Approximation in a Continuous Model of Computing" by K. Mount & S. Reiter
"Quasi-GCD Computations" by Arnold Schonhage
"Complexity of Approximately Solved Problems" by J.F. Traub
"Average Case Optimality" by G.W. Wasilkowski
"A Survey of Information-Based Complexity" by H. Wozniakowski
SUBMISSION OF PAPERS
The JOURNAL OF COMPLEXITY is a multidisciplinary journal which
covers complexity as broadly conceived and which publishes research
papers containing substantial mathematical results.
In the area of computational complexity the focus is on
problems which are approximately solved and for which optimal
algorithms or lower bound results are available. Papers which provide
major new algorithms or make important progress on upper bounds are
also welcome. Papers which present average case or probabilistic
analyses are especially solicited. Of particular interest are papers
involving distributed systems or parallel computers for which only
approximate solutions are available.
The following is a partial list of topics for which
computational complexity results are of interest: applied mathematics,
approximate solution of hard problems, approximation theory, control
theory, decision theory, design of experiments, distributed computation,
image understanding, information theory, mathematical economics,
numerical analysis, parallel computation, prediction and estimation,
remote sensing, seismology, statistics, stochastic scheduling.
In addition to computational complexity the following are
among the other complexity topics of interest: physical limits of
computation; chaotic behavior and strange attractors; complexity in
biological, physical, or artificial systems.
Although the emphasis is on research papers, surveys or
bibliographies of special merit may also be published.
To receive a more complete set of authors' instructions (with format
specifications), or to submit a manuscript (four copies please),
write to:
J.F. Traub, Editor
JOURNAL OF COMPLEXITY
Department of Computer Science
450 Computer Science Building
Columbia University
New York, New York 10027
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 85 22:15 EDT
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Lisp vs. Prolog (reply to Pereira)
I would like to reply to Fernando Pereira's message in which he wrote:
It is a FACT that no practical Prolog system is written entirely
in Lisp: Common, Inter or any other. Fast Prolog systems have
been written for Lisp machines (Symbolics, Xerox, LMI) but their
performance depends crucially on major microcode support (so
much so that the Symbolics implementation, for example, requires
additional microstore hardware to run Prolog). The reason for
this is simple: No Lisp (nor C, for that matter...) provides the
low-level tagged-pointer and stack operations that are critical
to Prolog performance.
It seems to me that the above argument about Prolog not REALLY being
implemented in Lisp is just a quibble. Lisp implementations from the
beginning have provided primitive procedures to manipulate the likes
of pointers, parts of pointers, invisible pointers, structures, and
stack frames. Such primitve procedures are entirely within the spirit
and practice of Lisp. Thus it is not surprising to see primitive
procedures in the Lisp implementations of interpreters and compilers
for Lisp, Micro-Planner, Pascal, Fortran, and Prolog. Before now no
one wanted to claim that the interpreters and compilers for these
other languages were not written in "Lisp". What changed?
On the other hand primitive procedures to manipulate pointers, parts
of pointers, invisible pointers, structures, and stack frames are
certainly NOT part of Prolog! In FACT no one in the Prolog community
even professes to believe that they could EVER construct a
commercially viable (i.e. useful for applications) Common Lisp in
Prolog.
I certainly realize that interesting research has been done using
Planner-like and Prolog-like languages. For example Terry Winograd
implemented a robot world simulation with limited natural language
interaction using Micro-Planner (the implementation by Sussman,
Winograd, and Charniak of the design that I published in IJCAI-69).
Subsequently Fernando did some interesting natural language research
using Prolog.
My chief chief concern is that some AILIST readers might be misled by
the recent spate of publicity about the "triumph" of Prolog over Lisp.
I simply want to point out that the emperor has no clothes.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 85 11:03:00 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: AI hype
A comment from Vol 3 # 128:-
``Since AI, by definition, seeks to replicate areas of human cognitive
competence...''
This should perhaps be read in the context of the general discussion which
has been taking place about `hype'. But it is still slightly off the mark
in my opinion.
I suppose this all rests on what one means by human cognitive competence.
The thought processes which make us human are far removed from the cold
logic of algorithms which are the basis for *all* computer software, AI or
otherwise. There is an element in all human cognitive processes which
derives from the emotional part of our psyche. We reach decisions not only
because we `know' that they are right, but also because we `feel' them to
be correct. I think really that AI must be seen as an important extension
to the thinking process, as a way of augmenting an expert's scope.
Gordon Joly (now gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
(formerly gcj%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri 18 Oct 85 10:13:10-PDT
From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA
Subject: Scaling up AI solutions
>From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
>Subject: Scaling Up
>Mr. Wyland seems to think that finding problem solutions which "scale up"
>is a matter of manufacturing convenience, or something like that. What
>he seems to overlook is that the property of scaling up (to realistic
>performance and behavior) is normally OUR ONLY GUARANTEE THAT THE
>"SOLUTION" DOES IN FACT EMBODY A CORRECT SET OF PRINCIPLES. [...]
The problem of "scaling up" is not that our solutions do not work
in the real world, but that we do not have general, universal
solutions applicable to all AI problems. This is because we only
understand *parts* of the problem at present. We can design
solutions for the parts we understand, but cannot design the
universal solution until we understand *all* of the problem.
Binary vision modules provide sufficient power to be useful in
many robot assembly applications, and simple word recognizers
provide enough power to be useful in many speech control
applications. These are useful, real-world solutions but are not
*universal* solutions: they do not "scale up" as universal
solutions to all problems of robot assembly or understanding
speech, respectively.
I agree with you that scientific theories are proven in the lab
(or on-the-job) with real world data. The proof of the
engineering is in the working. It is just that we have not
reached the same level of understanding of intelligence that
Newton's Laws provided for mechanics.
Dave Wyland
------------------------------
Date: Tue 15 Oct 85 13:48:28-PDT
From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
Subject: modus ponens
Seems to me that McGee is the one guilty of faulty logic. Consider the
following example:
Suppose a class consists of three people, a 6 ft boy (Tom), a 5 ft girl
(Jane), and a 4 ft boy (John). Do you believe the following statements?
(1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then if the tallest is
not Tom, then the tallest will be John.
(2) A boy is the tallest person in the class.
(3) If the tallest person in the class is not Tom then the tallest
person in the class will be John.
How many readers believe (1) and (2) imply the truth of (3)?
- Mike
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 85 21:22:26 pdt
From: cottrell@nprdc.arpa (Gary Cottrell)
Subject: Seminar - Parallel Dog Processing
SEMINAR
Parallel Dog Processing:
Explorations in the Nanostructure of Dognition
Garrison W. Cottrell
Department of Dog Science
Condominium Community College of Southern California
Recent advances in neural network modelling have led to its
application to increasingly more trivial domains. A prominent
example of this line of research has been the creation of an
entirely new discipline, Dognitive Science[1], bringing together
the insights of the previously disparate fields of obedience
training, letter carrying, and vivisection on such questions as,
"Why are dogs so dense?" or, "How many dogs does it take to
change a lightbulb?"[2]
This talk will focus on the first question. Early results
suggest that the answer lies in the fact that most dog
information processing occurs in their brains. Converging data
from various fields (see, for example, "A vivisectionist approach
to dog sense manipulation", Seligman, 1985) have shown that this
"wetware" is composed of a massive number of slow, noisy
switching elements, that are too highly connected to form a
proper circuit. Further, they appear to be all trying to go off
at the same time like popcorn, rather than proceeding in an
orderly fashion. Thus it is no surprise to science that they are
dumb beasts.
Further impedance to intelligent behavior has been
discovered by learning researchers. They have found that the
connections between the elements have little weights on them,
slowing them down even more and interfering with normal
processing. Indeed, as the dog grows, so do these weights, until
the processing elements are overloaded. Thus it is now clear why
you can't teach an old dog new tricks, and also explains why
elderly dogs tend to hang their heads. Experience with young
dogs appears to bear this out. They seem to have very little
weight in their brains, and their behavior is thus much more
laissez faire than older dogs.
We have applied these constraints to a neural network
learning model of the dog brain. To model the noisy signal of
the actual dog neurons, the units of the model are restricted to
communicate by barking to one another. As these barks are passed
from one unit to another, the weights on the units are increased
by an amount proportional to the loudness of the bark. Hence we
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
[1]A flood of researchers finding Cognitive Science too hard
are switching to this exciting new area. It appears that trivial
results in this unknown field will beget journal papers and TR's
for several years before funding agencies and reviewers catch on.
[2]Questions from the Philosophy of dognitive science (dogmat-
ics), such as "If a dog barks in the condo complex and I'm not
there to hear it, why do the neighbors claim it makes a sound?"
are beyond the scope of this talk.
term this learning mechanism bark propagation. Since the weights
only increase, just as in the normal dog, at asymptote the
network has only one stable state, which we term the dead dog
state. Our model is validated by the fact that many dogs appear
to achieve this state while still breathing. We will demonstrate
a live simulation of our model at the talk.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1919 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #150
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 16:02:13 PDT
Date: Sun 20 Oct 1985 20:40-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #150
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 20 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 150
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Program Logics (UPenn) &
Meaning, Information and Possibility (UCB) &
Machine Learning and Knowledge Representation (NU) &
Intelligent Mail Manipulation (MIT) &
A Logic for Defeasible Rules (Buffalo) &
Learning From Multiple Analogies (GTE) &
Computational Discourse Analysis Using DEREDEC (MIT) &
RESEARCHER and Patent Analogies (CMU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 85 19:26 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Program Logics (UPenn)
REASONING ABOUT PROGRAMS: CONCEPTUAL AND METHOLOGICAL DISTINCTIONS
DANIEL LEIVANT, COMPUTER SCIENCE, CMU
3:00 pm Tuesday, October 15, 1985
216 Moore, University of Pennsylvania
Reasoning about programs can be done explicitly, in first-order or higher-order
mathematical theories, or implicitly, in modal logics of programs (Hoare Logic,
Dynamic Logic...). One wants the latter, but the former are better suited for
metamathematical analysis (semantics, calibration of proof-theoretic strength).
However, modal logics are interpretable in explicit theories, so we can eat the
cake and have it.
In particular, we can distinguish in modal logics of programs a purely logical
component and an analytical component. For example, Hoare's Logic captures
exactly logical reasoning about partial-correctness assertions over
WHILE-programs. We argue that this type of completeness is more informative
than relative completeness.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 85 14:22:50 PDT
From: admin@ucbcogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Meaning, Information and Possibility (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, October 22, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``Meaning, Information and Possibility''
L. A. Zadeh
Computer Science Division, U.C. Berkeley
Our approach to the connection between meaning and information
is in the spirit of the Carnap--Bar-Hillel theory of state
descriptions. However, our point of departure is the assump-
tion that any proposition, p, may be expressed as a generalized
assignment statement of the form X isr C, where X is a variable
which is usually implicit in p, C is an elastic constraint on
the values which X can take in a universe of discourse U, and
the suffix r in the copula isr is a variable whose values
define the role of C in relation to X. The principal roles are
those in which r is d, in which case C is a disjunctive con-
straint; and r is c, p and g, in which cases C is conjunctive,
probabilistic and granular, respectively. In the case of a
disjunctive constraint, isd is written for short as is, and C
plays the role of a graded possibility distribution which asso-
ciates with each point (or, equivalently, state-description)
the degree to which it can be assigned as a value to X. This
possibility distribution, then, is interpreted as the informa-
tion conveyed by p. Based on this interpretation, we can con-
struct a set of rules of inference which allow the possibility
distribution of a conclusion to be deduced from the possibility
distributions of the premises. In general, the process of
inference reduces to the solution of a nonlinear program. The
connection between the solution of a nonlinear program and the
traditional methods of deduction in first-order logic are
explained and illustrated by examples.
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
William Clancy of Stanford University will speak on ``Heuristic
Classification'' at the SESAME Colloquium on Monday, Oct. 21,
4:00pm, 2515 Tolman Hall.
Ruth Maki of North Dakota State University will speak on ``Meta-
comprehension: Knowing that you understand'' at the Cognitive
Psychology Colloquium, Friday, October 25, 4:00pm, Beach Room,
3105 Tolman Hall.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 85 15:02 EDT
From: Carole D Hafner <HAFNER%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Machine Learning and Knowledge Representation (NU)
Northeastern University
College of Computer Science Colloquium
4p.m. Wednesday, October 30
Brittleness, Tunnel Vision, Machine Learning and
Knowledge Representation
Prof. Steve Gallant
Northeastern University
A system is brittle if it fails when presented with slight deviations from
expected input. This is a major problem with knowledge representation schemes
and particularly with expert systems which use them.
This talk defines the notion of Tunnel Vision and shows it to be a major
cause of brittleness. As a consequence it will be claimed that commonly
used schemes for machine learning and knowledge representation are pre-
disposed toward brittle behavior. These include decision trees, frames,
and disjunctive normal form expressions.
Some systems which are free from tunnel vision will be described.
Place: 405 Robinson Hall
Northeastern University
360 Huntington Ave.
Boston MA
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1985 16:53 EDT
From: Peter de Jong <DEJONG%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA>
Reply-to: Cog-Sci-Request%MIT-OZ
Subject: Seminar - Intelligent Mail Manipulation (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Thursday 17, October 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"The Information Lens:
An Intelligent System for Finding, Filtering, and
Sorting Electronic Messages"
Thomas W. Malone
MIT Sloan School of Management
This talk will describe an intelligent system to help people share,
filter, and sort information communicated by computer-based messaging
systems. The system exploits concepts from artificial intelligence such
as frames, production rules, and inheritance networks, but it avoids the
unsolved problems of natural language understanding by providing users
with a rich set of semi-structured message templates. A consistent set
of "direct manipulation" editors simplifies the use of the system by
individuals, and an incremental enhancement path simplifies the adoption
of the system by groups.
The talk will also include an overview of the other projects and
research goals in the Organizational Systems Laboratory at MIT.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 85 08:30:03 EDT
From: "William J. Rapaport" <rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - A Logic for Defeasible Rules (Buffalo)
UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF
COMPUTER SCIENCE
COLLOQUIUM
DONALD NUTE
Advanced Computational Methods Center
and Department of Philosophy
University of Georgia
A LOGIC FOR DEFEASIBLE RULES
Humans reason using defeasible and sometimes conflicting rules
like `Matches burn when struck' and `Wet things don't burn'. A
formal language for representing sentential versions of such
rules is presented together with a derivability relation for this
language. The resulting system, LDR, is non-monotonic. Inspired
by work in conditional logic, the non-monotonic rules of LDR
correspond to simple subjunctive and `might' conditionals.
Chaining of these rules is restricted in LDR just as the transi-
tivity of the conditional is restricted in conditional logics.
Several notions of consistency and coherency are defined. LDR is
of special importance for research in automated reasoning, since
its language is PROLOG-like and its derivability relation can be
implemented in PROLOG.
Thursday, November 7, 1985
3:30 P.M.
Bell 337, Amherst Campus
Wine and cheese will be served at 4:30 P.M., 224 Bell Hall
For further information, contact:
William J. Rapaport
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Computer Science, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260
(716) 636-3193, 3181
uucp: ...{allegra,decvax,watmath}!sunybcs!rapaport
...{cmc12,hao,harpo}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!rapaport
cs/arpanet: rapaport%buffalo@csnet-relay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 85 23:44:39 EDT
From: Bernard Silver <SILVER@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Learning From Multiple Analogies (GTE)
GTE LABS INCORPORATED
MACHINE LEARNING SEMINAR
Title: Learning from Multiple Analogies
Speaker: Mark H. Burstein
BBN Labs.
Date: Monday October 21, 10am
Place: GTE Labs
40 Sylvan Rd, Waltham MA 02254
Students learning about an unfamiliar new subject under the guidance
of a teacher or textbook, are often taught basic concepts by analogies
to things that they are more familiar with. Although this seems to
be a very powerful form of instruction, the process by which students
make use of this kind of instruction has been little studied by AI
learning theorists. A cognitive process model of how students make
use of such analogies will be presented. The model was motivated by
examples of the behavior of several students who were tutored on the
programming language BASIC, and focusses in detail on the development
of knowledge about the concept of a program variable, and its use in
assignment statements. It suggests how several analogies can be used
together to form new concepts where no one analogy would have been
sufficient. Errors produced by one reasoning from one analogy can
be corrected by another.
As an illustration of the main principles of the model, a computer
program, CARL, is presented that learns to use variables in BASIC
assignment statements. While learning about variables, CARL generates
many of the same erroneous hypotheses seen in the recorded protocols
of students learning the same material given the same set of analogies.
The learning process results in a single target model that retains
some aspects of each of the analogies presented.
For more information, contact Bernard Silver (617) 576-6212
------------------------------
Date: 11am 10/22/85
From: Alker@mc
Subject: Seminar - Computational Discourse Analysis Using DEREDEC (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Computational Discourse Analysis Using DEREDEC:
An Analysis of Balzac's Sarrasine
Jaqueline Leon and Jean-Marie Marandin
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Paris, France
We present research in computational discourse analysis and discuss an
example for the case of Balzac's Sarrasine. We use P. Plante's
DEREDEC programming system in this work because of its suitability for
natural language processing. After a bottom-up syntactic parser for
French grammar produces a syntactic derivation, we perform pattern
matching on the output to achieve a linguistic and literary
interpretation. We describe how we use these programs to capture two
different aspects of a text: the thematic segmentation and density.
Time: 11-12:30, Tuesday, October 22, 1985
Place: Millikan Room, E53-482
Host: Professor Hayward R. Alker, Jr., Department of Political Science, MIT
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 85 10:14:51 EDT
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Seminar - RESEARCHER and Patent Analogies (CMU)
Topic: Presentation of RESEARCHER project.
Speaker: John C. Akbari
Place: DH3313
Date: Wednesday, Oct. 23
Time: 10:00am - 11:00am
Speaker:
John C. Akbari is a Masters student at Columbia University's Department of
Computer Science. He is interested in joining the Intelligent Systems
Laboratory's Phoenix project. Below is a description of his artificial
intelligence research.
Both projects described below investigate different aspects of RESEARCHER, a
prototype intelligent information system being developed at Columbia
University under the direction of Professor Michael Lebowitz. The domain of
investigation is disc drive patents. The result of this research is being
implemented in LISP as a component of RESEARCHER.
MS Thesis
Research involves generating "catalogue descriptions" of
hierarchical objects, determining salience as a function of
similarity between an instance of an object and the
prototype of the object. This will be used in generating
information to be passed to a case grammar generator to
produce the actual text. We hope to develop a method of
determining importance of static information (via "filtering
through" the prototype) relative to context. We are studying
the interaction of structural, attributive, and functional
information on the quality of the description. Further work
will investigate the need for different prototypes for
different users as an aspect of user modelling, so that a
patent lawyer would receive a different description from an
engineer, given the same instance.
Thesis advisor: Prof. Michael Lebowitz
Natural language
We are enhancing RESEARCHER's parser to utilize syntactic
aspects of relations that cause focus of attention to shift
within sentences. This involves modifying memory-based
parsing to determine when syntax cues are sufficiently
strong to over-ride the need to search memory.
Supervisor: Prof. Michael Lebowitz
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1607 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #151
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 16:05:47 PDT
Date: Sun 20 Oct 1985 20:46-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #151
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 20 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 151
Today's Topics:
Seminar Summary - Situation Theory and Situation Semantics,
Conferences - Symposium in Logic on Computer Science &
The Computerized Oxford English Dictionary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 16 Oct 85 17:12:46-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Summary - Situation Theory and Situation Semantics
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI SEMINAR SUMMARY
Notes from the STASS Underground
October 3, 1985
David Israel gave an overview of the motivation behind the
formation of the Group on Situation Theory and Situation Semantics
(STASS). The aim of the group is the development of Situation Theory
as a framework within which to express, analyse, and compare
treatments of a wide range of problems and phenomena. Among the
``applications areas'' are the semantics of natural languages, the
semantics of programming and other computer languages, the nature of
informational content, the nature of computational processes, problems
in the theory of representation, problems about the nature of truth,
etc. The method of development is essentially a close and continuous
interaction between those working on Situation Theory itself and those
looking to use the theory within their own areas of interest. This
interaction is enhanced because everybody in the group is doing both
things, often simultaneously---though not, of course, equally.
In the respect of being a background theory within which to develop
theories of more delimited domains, Situation Theory is analogous to
Set Theory. Thus, for instance, Montague's treatment of phenomena in
the semantics of natural language was carried out within set theory.
So, too, was the treatment by Barwise and Perry in ``Situations and
Attitudes.'' The crucial transition between the account in that book
and the present approach is precisely the abandonment of the strategy
(or was it anyway only a tactic?) of modelling all but a small number
of basic kinds of things in set theory. Thus, for instance, in
``Situations and Attitudes'' there was no real attempt to explicate
the nature of propositions---though much of the interest of the book
was said to lie in its treatment of the propositional attitudes. The
reason for this uncomfortable state of affairs was that there was no
good way of modelling propositions set theoretically. The aim now is a
direct, non-reductionist treatment of the various kinds of entities
only modelled in the book---thus, of states of affairs and facts,
conditions, situations, propositions, etc. This is thought to have a
number of happy side effects. One is that it makes it much easier to
expose the various modes of modelling to analysis---easier simply
because one has not committed oneself to modelling as one's major
theoretical technique. The second stems from the fact that Situation
Theory is not only analogous to Set Theory in a certain respect;
Situation Theory is intended both to encompass and to be modellable by
Set Theory. Thus, the demand that Set Theory be capable of providing
models of Situation Theory imposes constraints on our conception of
sets. A crucial example of such a constraint is that there be non
wellfounded sets. --David Israel
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1985 20:18 EDT
From: MEYER@MIT-XX.ARPA
Subject: Symposium in Logic on Computer Science
ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PAPERS
SYMPOSIUM ON LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
JUNE 16-18, 1986, CAMBRIDGE, MASS., USA
The Conference will cover a wide range of theoretical and practical issues in
Computer Science broadly relating to Logic, including algebraic and topological
approaches. Many of these areas have been represented separately, but not in a
general LICS conference. Some suggested, not exclusive, topics are:
Abstract data types, computer theorem proving, concurrency,
constructive proofs as programs, data base theory, foundations of logic
programming, logic-based programming languages, logic in complexity
theory, logics of programs, knowledge and belief, program verification,
semantics of programs, software specifications, type theory.
Organizing Committee
J. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A.Chandra,Chair D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
Program Committee
R. Boyer W. Damm S. German
D. Gries M. Hennessy G. Huet
D. Kozen A. Meyer,Chair J. Mitchell
R. Parikh J. Reynolds J. Robinson
D. Scott M. Vardi R. Waldinger
Paper Submission: Authors should send 16 copies of a detailed abstract by Dec.
23, 1985 to the program committee chairman:
Albert R. Meyer - LICS Program tele:(617)253 6024
MIT Lab. for Computer Science Arpanet: MEYER@XX
545 Technology Square, NE43-315
Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
(If reproduction facilities are not available to the author, a single copy of
the abstract will be accepted.)
The abstract should be at most 4500 words, but should provide sufficient
detail, including references and comparisons to related work, to allow the
Program Committee to assess its technical merits. The time between abstract
due-date and committee review is short, so late submissions run a high risk of
elimination. Authors will be notified of acceptance by Jan. 24, 1986.
Photo-ready copies of accepted papers typed on special forms are due March 31,
1986.
General Chairman: A. K. Chandra, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P.O.
Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, tele: (914) 945-1752, CSNET: ASHOK.YKTVMV
at IBM.
Local Arrangements Chairman: A. J. Kfoury, Dept. of Computer Science, Boston
University, Boston, MA 02215, tele: (617) 353-8911, CSNET: KFOURY at BOSTONU.
Sponsorship: IEEE Computer Society, Technical Committee on Mathematical
Foundations of Computing, in cooperation with ACM SIGACT and Association for
Symbolic Logic (request pending).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 85 17:27:37 edt
From: lesk%petrus@mouton.ARPA (Michael E. Lesk)
Subject: Conference on the computerized Oxford English Dictionary
The University of Waterloo Centre for the New OED is starting research
projects using the machine-readable form of the OED now being prepared.
The plan is to have not just typesetting tapes, but an electronic database
representing the history and use of the English language, as shown in
the dictionary. A one-day meeting at Waterloo, from 7pm Thursday Nov. 7
through 4:30pm Friday Nov. 8, 1985, will examine research areas related
to the OED and machine-readable dictionaries. The program is:
Introduction
John Simpson, Oxford University Press, "The New OED Project"
John Stubbs, University of Waterloo, "The UW Centre for the New OED"
Using On-Line Dictionaries (Michael Lesk, session chair)
Henry Kucera, Brown University, "The Problem of Structural Ambiguity
in the Lexicon"
Donald Walker, Bell Communications Research, "Knowledge Resource Tools
for Accessing Large Text Files"
George Miller, Princeton University, "Wordnet: A Dictionary Browser"
The Use and Misuse of Dictionaries (Neil Hultin, session chair)
Gisele Losier, U. Waterloo, "Using the OED for the Study of Loan Words"
Christopher Dean, U. Saskatchewan, "The OED: The Study of Local Regional
Dialects and Historical Dialet Dictionaries"
Knowledge Databases (Robin Cohen, session chair)
Randy Goebel, U. Waterloo, "What is a Knowledge Representation System?"
John Sowa, IBM, "Using Knowledge Representation to Capture the Semantic
Information of a Lexicon"
Summary (Frank Tompa, U. Waterloo, plus other session chairs)
Those interested in attending should send $25 US or $35 Canadian, along
with their name, address and phone numbers, to:
Centre for the New OED
Dana Porter Library, rm 105
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1923 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #152
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 16:10:29 PDT
Date: Sun 20 Oct 1985 20:57-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #152
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 21 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 152
Today's Topics:
Query - Classic AI Books,
Administrivia - Move Discussion to Symbolics List,
Games - Go,
Humor - IM Hockey!,
AI Tools - The future of POP-11
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 19 October 1985 20:05:27 EDT
From: Dan.Miller@a.sei.cmu.edu
Subject: Classic AI Books
This type of question was asked a while ago on the SOFT-ENG (software
engineering) bboard, and now I'd like to ask the same of AI'ers:
WHAT, IN YOUR OPINION, ARE THE "CLASSIC" AI BOOKS???
Please send your replies or pointers directly to dhm@sei.cmu.edu (old
style: dhm@cmu-sei.arpa).
I'll post the "netwide" consensus.
--- Daniel "Dan" H. MIller Software Engineering Institute
dhm@sei.cmu.edu (dhm@cmu-sei.arpa) Carnegie-Mellon University
(412)578-7700 Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
"The views expressed are my own, and not of my employer"
------------------------------
Date: 19 Oct 85 15:17 PDT
From: Fischer.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Move discussion to Symbolics list
In your message to AIList with header:
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 85 10:21 CDT
From: Joseph←Tatem <tatem%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: AI machines
You prepare to discuss the redesign of the Symbolics window system.
That should probably be done on the mailing list reserved for that
specific machine. I doubt everyone on AIList has a Symbolics system (I
don't), and those folks with Xerox Lisp machines are pretty happy with
their existing window interface.
(ron)
Ron Fischer
Xerox AI Systems
Palo Alto, CA
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 85 13:38:01 EDT
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: the ancient oriental game of Go
Reply to David Nicol <cscboic%BOSTONU.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>:
Robert Maas, REM%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA, has a Go playing program.
...Keith
------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 1985 22:14 EDT (Wed)
From: "David A. Brown" <DAVID%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: IM Hockey!
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
INTRAMURAL HOCKEY
or
A Project in Cooperative Real-Time
Solution of 12-body Problems
Consider a compact subset of the Euclidean plane, H; cover this
compact set with substance W, cool that substance past its freezing
point. Let P and Q be sets of independently controlled
self-interested actors. Each actor is unaware of the specific
knowledge of the other actors (imperfect information) and also unaware
of the effects of its own actions (perfect incompetence). Posit a
game plan "gp" in which an object, "puck", originally lying on the
plane H, is attracted strangely to one or both of two attractors, g1
and g2. It is well known that this problem is decidable. We propose
to implement a distributed system for solving this problem. A simple
strategy for solving this is known (see Oilers, 1985), but difficult to
implement in general (see Rangers, 1900-.....).
A simulation of this 12-body problem will be performed under the
auspices of MIT intramurals; bodies are needed. [...]
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1985 22:17:47-BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%svga@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: The future of POP-11
Fri Oct 18 22:17:37 BST 1985
Ken,
I've received a letter about POP-11 which may be of some
interest to AIList readers. I am forwarding it for you to veto
if appropriate. First some background.
POP-11 is a much expanded version of POP-2, the AI language
originally developed at Edinburgh University.
POP-11 is being increasingly widely used in the UK, both in
universities and in commercial organisations taking part in
Britain's Government-funded Alvey Programme, which has a major
AI component. It has many Lisp-like features, including
garbage collection, built in list processing, incremental
compilation, integrated screen editor etc. However, the syntax
and the philosophy are very different from Lisp: e.g.
procedures are just values of variables.
People in the UK have been discussing the future of POP-11,
some arguing that it should be abandoned in favour of Common
Lisp, others arguing that it has too many advantages and
should not be thrown out just because it is less widely used.
POP-11 is the core language of POPLOG, developed at Sussex
University and marketed by Systems Designers.
I recently had a letter on POP-11 from Steve Knight who
currently works for GEC, one of Britain's largest high tech
firms, and is about to move to Hewlett Packard AI Labs in
Bristol. He doesn't at present have access to Arpanet, so
agreed that I could forward an extract from his letter.
As we at Sussex University have an interest in this matter,
being the designers of POPLOG, I thought I should leave it to
you to decide whether the contents of this message are worth
broadcasting.
His current address (mail will be forwarded after he moves):
Steve Knight,
35 Baker St,
Chelmsford, Essex, CM2 OSA,
England.
Steve writes:
As you know, my main interests in computing are to do with
designing high quality software in as little time as possible.
What do I mean by high quality? Specifically, having high
reliability, good space/time performance, being written in a
natural and elegant way, and most important of all being what
the client really wanted. By as little time as possible, I
mean timescales that are orders of magnitude shorter than the
ones we accept now.
Not unnaturally these are regarded as contradictory aims. The
very short timescales are frequently the butt-end of
managerial humour (and subsequent managerial eating of hats!) I
practice what I preach in POPLOG because it is a system of
great potential; this potential is only partly understood,
even at Sussex.
As an example, when Graham Higgins (now at Hewlett Packard UK)
wanted a more complete Lisp system than the one available in
POPLOG 9.0, we wrote our ZLISP in 10 man-days, using POP-11.
The subsequent code was of the order of +1Mb. The system had
no serious bugs (apart from design errors, visible in long
distance hindsight), was as complete as any other Lisp system
either of us had used (PSL/Franz/other GEC-Lisps - but not
Common Lisp which is significantly better of course!), ran
quicker than any other Lisp on the system (VAX-750), had some
novel features (such as tracing individual embedded
S-expressions) and was integrated with VED (the POPLOG screen
editor). This is not just "blowing my own trumpet" because it
was easy. Any software engineer at all could do it in POP-11.
Anyhow, my interests led me in a number of distinct main
directions in POP11
* formal methods and specification tools
* applicative languages/style
* software design assistance
* reusability of software
* programming environments
* natural user interfaces.
I have been slowly building up a body of software and
experience in POPLOG that allows me to tackle a few of these
issues.
Along the way I have encountered some basic problems in using
POPLOG the way I want. Some are to do with the POPLOG--
Operating system interface. Some are design errors in POPLOG.
But before I dissect some of these problems for you, it might
be proper to touch on the really good points of POPLOG, for my
work.
* Help files.
I think the most inspirational aspect of POPLOG (for me) is
the 'help' system. I dislike manuals intensely. They represent
all that is wrong with computing. The commitment to online
help gets 10/10! I am amazed at the high standard of
description and usefulness throughout. Of course, 'help' is
not enough, but POPLOG shows up its potential.
* Virtual machine.
The presence of the VM in terms of its 'code planting
procedures' is invaluable. [What is needed here is a full
description of the VM]. I often remark that it is easier to
write a compiler than an interpreter in POPLOG!
* POP-11
A super language. Rich without being especially arbitrary
(non-orthogonal). The most important feature is the open
stack, leading to beautiful transformations. [Caroline and I
hope to write a paper (for ECAI 86?) on why Lisp is a "bad"
language, using POP-11 as a contrast.] The other important
features are: procedures as first-class citizens, the powerful
idea of updaters, partial application rather than closures,
and the 'keys' system.
* VED
Despite its faults, plainly the best full screen editor of its
type. EMACS comes a poor second in my view. [VED needs a major
overhaul, of course, but it is undoubtedly the best all the
same.] Without the powerful VED macros I define in my
vedinit.p file I could not manipulate code with the same
flexibility or have the same productivity.
Anyhow the list of generalisations could go on. Suffice it to
say that POPLOG does provide an environment conducive to the
development of software and teaching programming. POP-11 is
the key ingredient. [As an aside, Prolog is useful but I
regard it as a difficult language to use well. It is
temptingly declarative, but the left-to-right evaluation order
gives far too little control and spoils the declarative
flavour.]
←←←←←←←
{Steve's letter goes on with a list of complaints at a level
of detail which would not make much sense to people who are
not familiar with POPLOG. So I have summarised them, and he
has checked my summary, as follows:}
* Subsystems
POPLOG does not yet have a good way of integrating different
subsystems (e.g. Lisp, Prolog, POP-11, user defined
sub-systems) with the editor and compilers, help system, teach
system, etc. The facilities available are not yet fully
documented.
* POP-11 should not be a privileged language as it is now.
The POPLOG VM should come with a disposable kit of tools for
building a range of language compilers. (This is also the
Sussex long term philosophy - see the paper by Mellish and
Hardy in IJCAI 1983.)
* VED - the screen editor is obsolete in terms of modern
machines, and needs a thorough overhaul including abandoning
the explicit use of files, adding non-ascii I/O, adding a
window manager, etc. (I appreciate this is a debatable area.)
* Need to be able to decouple compiled programs from the
development environment after development and testing. 'Having
written my 250 line POP-11 program, how can I throw everything
else away...?'
* Autoloading is a 'messy idea' and, like files, needs to be
re-designed.
* Sections (POP-11's substitute for 'packages').
'I don't think these are quite right yet'
* Files and Operating System.
The O.S. should be abandoned and replaced with an interactive
programming environment. POPLOG needs to move more in this
direction, including replacing files with for example
persistent variables.
* Exception handling.
'Novice programmers find writing exception handling quite
hard'. Steve has some proposals for improving exception
handling.
* POPLOG should not have a fixed user-settable upper memory
limit as now. It should deduce upper and lower safe limits
dynamically.
* Use of the stack and variables should be made traceable by
redefining the POPLOG VM. This gives the power of
access-orientd programming (cf LOOPS). Sophisticated users can
get the same effect with nullary operators, but something
simpler is needed for beginners.
* Lexical analysis of text is currently too inflexible
(Incharitem needs improvements.)
* User-definable system routines should be replaced by an
explicit list of routines to be executed so that
dynamic modifications are easier.
>From Steve Knight, via Aaron Sloman, Sussex University.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Oct-85 1918 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #153
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Oct 85 16:14:30 PDT
Date: Tue 22 Oct 1985 08:57-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #153
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 22 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 153
Today's Topics:
Queries - Mike O'Donnell & Expert Systems for Law Enforcement,
Literature - AI Book by Jackson,
AI Tools - YAPS & LISP Workstations,
Logic - Counterfactuals,
Opinion - SDI Software & AI Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Monday, 21 Oct 85 11:18:14 PDT
From: wm%tekchips%tektronix.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Looking for Mike O'Donnell
I'm trying to contact Michael J. O'Donnell.
I think he is now at University of Chicago, but I'm
pretty sure he reads this list.
Wm Leler
(arpa) wm%tektronix@csnet-relay
(csnet) wm@tektronix
(usenet) decvax!tektronix!tekchips!wm
------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 85 09:37 EDT
From: Gunther @ DCA-EMS
Subject: Expert Systems and Law Enforcement
Need information about others working in the area of Expert
Systems and Law Enforcement. We are compiling a bibliography of
anything related to this area. Please reply with
* Bibliographies
* Reports
* Names and Phone Numbers
to
* John Popolizio or Jerry Feinstein
* Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc.
* 301-951-2911 (2912)
Thank You.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 21 Oct 85 20:40:50-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: AI Book by Jackson
I saw an ad for an inexpensive AI book in a Dover catalog:
"Introduction to Artificial Intelligence" by Philip C. Jackson, Jr.,
second, enlarged edition, $8.95. Just published, it says.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Oct 85 11:27:28 EDT (Mon)
From: Liz Allen <liz@tove.umd.edu>
Subject: YAPS
YAPS may be redistributed but only after the whoever wants YAPS gets a
license from the Univ of Maryland first. Contact Hans or me for the
agreement which should be signed and sent to us. Once that is done,
Hans can send you a copy of his code.
-Liz
[Liz also sent along a copy of the YAPS distribution agreement. For $100
(4.1 sources) or $250 (4.1 and 4.2) UMd includes their Franz flavors package,
a window system, an editor, spreadsheet, Z80 emulator and cross-compiler, etc.
Here is a description of YAPS:
The YAPS production system written in Franz Lisp. This is
similar to OPS5 but more flexible in the kinds of lisp
expressions that may appear as facts and patterns (sublists
are allowed and flavor objects are treated atomically), the
variety of tests that may appear in the left hand sides of
rules and the kinds of actions may appear in the right hand
sides of rules. In addition, YAPS allows multiple data
bases which are flavor objects and may be sent messages such
as "fact" and "goal".
Contact Liz for more details. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 85 10:33:36 EDT (Tue)
From: dndobrin@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
Subject: LISP Workstations
Re: Cugini's and Tatem's <148> flames.
I agree that LISP machines are darned hard to learn; I also agree
that they're worth the effort. My interests are twofold: why is it
that intelligent, capable people like Cugini aren't willing to make the
effort? How can the learning be made easier, or at least, more
attractive.
There's no easy solution. LISP machines are, in my experience,
pretty well designed (at least by comparison with the hodgepodge in
UNIX), and their documentation is, in most places, very good. (In my
book, any documentation which tells you not to use something is already
near the front of the pack.) Their online documentation, in particular,
has received many awards; in one case, I was one of the judges, and
they didn't even need to bribe me. Their documentation department does
not consist of M.I.T. hackers; it has very experienced people in it.
Jan Walker, their manager, is one of the best in the business.
Sometimes, admittedly, they just slap the hacker's documentation onto the
system, but most of the time, it shows real care.
Then why is it so hard to learn? I think learning a complex system
is very much like learning to play a complex game. No one learns chess
in a month; very few people can even become competent at nim or rogue
in a month. If you could get good quickly, the game would lose its
interest. I think, therefore, that one can learn how to teach people
LISP-machineology if one studies the way people learn games.
Mostly, they learn from other people. In an informal study I did
at M.I.T., I discovered that people learn to play rogue by watching
other people play rogue and by asking more experienced players about
what they should do whenever a difficult situation came up. People who
play at home or who never ask don't play as well. Profound discovery.
The analogy, however, is exact. Whenever you have many different things
to do and the optimal move is not at all clear (or even calculable), you
have to have some way of zeroing in on the close-to-optimal solutions.
Documentation doesn't help you zero in, because it doesn't usually
discuss that situation, and just finding what the documentation does
say requires as much work as doing the original zeroing in.
Experience does help you zero in. So if you don't have the
experience, the easiest thing is to ask somebody who does.
So, I would argue, the solution to Cugini's problem is to get Tatem
to hang out over there for about three months. Maybe two.
Well-designed systems and good documentation do make learning
easier. With a well-designed system, when you are confronted with a
puzzling situation, you can, in effect, consult the designer, figuring
that he or she already knows the situation and has worked out some
solution. Similarly, good documentation can often take you through some
of the most common problem places. But even with good documentation and
design, at some point, there you are on level 23, a griffin on one side,
a dragon, on the other, 88 hit points, strength of 24, a +2, +2
two-handed sword, a wand of cold, and a wand of magic missile. What do
you do?
The analogy does break down in a funny way. In a game, you rarely
get in a situation where no move does anything. But in learning a
computer system, you often do. That's why Control-C is one of the first
things everybody learns.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 85 19:54:21 edt
From: Dana S. Nau <ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!dsn@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Counterfactuals
> From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
> . . .
> (0) Suppose a class consists of three people, a 6 ft boy (Tom), a 5 ft girl
> (Jane), and a 4 ft boy (John). Do you believe the following statements?
>
> (1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then if the tallest
> is not Tom, then the tallest will be John.
> (2) A boy is the tallest person in the class.
> (3) If the tallest person in the class is not Tom then the tallest
> person in the class will be John.
>
> How many readers believe (1) and (2) imply the truth of (3)?
If we accept statement (0) as an axiom, then statement (3) is a statement of
the form "A => B" whose antecedent A is false. Thus statement (3) is true,
regardless of the truth or falsity of B.
Since (3) is true, it is also true that (1) and (2) imply (3). The truth or
falsity of (1) and (2) are irrelevant in this case.
Although I haven't read the earlier articles in this discussion, I suspect
your INTENT was that statement (3) would talk about a world identical to (0)
except that Tom would not be present--and in this world statement (3) would
be false. The only way I know of to handle this using logic is to state (3)
in completely separate logical theory from the one whose axiom is (0).
The rules for handling logical implications whose antecedents are
counterfactuals don't correspond to our intuitive notions of how
counterfactuals work. Although this isn't my area, I have an impression
that the problem is a pretty thorny one.
Dana S. Nau (dsn@rochester)
From U. of Maryland, on sabbatical at U. of Rochester
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 15 October 1985, 23:31-EDT
From: COWAN@MIT-XX
Subject: SDI Software and AI hype
I must respond to Prof. Minsky's perplexed comment that he does not
understand computer scientists who argue against the computing
requirements of SDI. I believe Minsky and those computer scientists are
talking about two different things.
Arguing for the feasibility of the software portion of SDI, Minsky says:
... aiming and controlling them
should not be unusally difficult. The arguments I've seen to the
contrary all seem to be political flames.
Minsky is obviously talking about the technical software problem. But
SDI opponents flame POLITICALLY, and so they MUST, because they are
talking about the technical AND POLITICAL software problem.
Even though I, like Minsky, believe that computers can eventually be
made to think like humans, computers cannot RESPONSIBLY be used in place
of humans in certain situations, especially those requiring political
judgement. I believe that it is easy to see that a lot of POLITICAL
decisions will have to be built into the SDI software. Therefore, the
political aspects of the SDI software problem must be considered.
A bare-bones, apolitical SDI system is one that doesn't consider the
Soviet response (including a Soviet SDI). For such a system, I'm
willing to agree that SDI software is feasible -- if not today, at least
within my lifetime.
But such a "vanilla-SDI" system would be worthless, unless there is a
US-Soviet treaty outlawing countermeasures and anti-SDI systems, AND the
SDIs of both countries (the USSR would not allow us to have a unilateral
SDI edge) COULD NOT BE USED OFFENSIVELY. Unfortunately, it is
impossible to imagine an SDI system that could not be easily
software-upgraded to knock out the other country's SDI. SDI satellites
are sitting ducks compared to missiles.
A true SDI system would have to be programmed to react to situations
where things go wrong, even if the problems are with the other country's
SDI. If one country knocks out the other's SDI, then that country could
launch a first strike under a protective unbrella -- an unacceptable
situation for the country whose SDI was attacked. Thus, each SDI system
would probably retaliate if the other SDI system attacked, even if the
attack was a mistake. And each SDI system would probably fire on the
opposing SDI system if a missile launch were detected on the other side.
If you think about this situation for a while, you realize how serious
and unstable it is. Even Charles Zraket, executive vice president of
the Mitre Corporation, describes multiple SDIs as
"the worst crisis-instability situation. It'd be like having two
gunfighters in space armed to the teeth with quick-fire capabilities."
The country whose trillion dollar SDI system is destroyed first would be
tempted to "use 'em or lose 'em" -- to launch a first strike of its own.
(Submarine launched cruise missiles could underfly any imaginable SDI.)
Any hostile action (even upgrading the software!) could be perceived as
an opening maneuver leading to a first strike. The decision of whether
to retaliate, if made by a human being, would undoubtedly consider
political circumstances on the ground (even statements in Pravda!). But
time requirements would preclude human involvement; the software would
have to determine a potentially grave response, using incomplete
information, to situations for which it was not tested.
To be "safe," each country would need an "SDSDI" to protect its SDI.
But then, all the arguments of the previous paragraphs would still
apply, at a higher defensive level. Boeing, Rockwell, Lockheed, and
McDonnell Douglas might be content to build SDSDSDI's and SDSDSDSDI's,
but the result would be decreasing stability, not increasing deterrence.
The complexity of retaliatory policy would surpass the capabilities of
policy makers, and certainly make "SDI control" an even more difficult
problem than arms control is today. Why not solve the easier problem?
It's fine to argue that software for a "vanilla-SDI" system is feasible,
but it is intellectually dishonest to argue feasibility if you
realize the true political nature of the software problem.
People who write the hyped proposals aren't being dishonest, though. The
SDI organization's requests for proposals don't describe the above
scenario; they just ask people to study things like "reasoning under
uncertain conditions." That's a fine goal, but it is the responsibility
of computer scientists to make clear that such disciplines as "reasoning
under uncertainty" are not applicable to problems as political as
ballistic missile defense.
Rich Cowan (cowan@mit-xx)
[I would like to remind readers that SDI hype/feasibility is
not necessarily AI hype/feasibility, and that ARMS-D@MIT-MC and
POLI-SCI@RUTGERS seem to be the proper Arpanet fora for military/political
discussions. I will attempt to screen out (censor, if you will) AIList
submissions that do not focus on the AI aspects of the debate. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Sat 19 Oct 85 01:02:09-PDT
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Subject: Grading the Professor
In response to some simple questions about hype in "AI"
[AIList #132], Prof. Minsky illustrates [AIList #139] rather
than clarifies the subject matter.
First, with respect to his own role in "AI" hype, the
professor is evasive. Let's optimistically give him a grade
of "Incomplete", and hope he will make up the work later,
after he's had a chance to think about it some more. The
only alternative is to conclude that he thinks it's OK to
recklessly exaggerate the usefulness of "AI".
Next, Prof. Minsky retells one of the most bizarre and
colorful "AI" myths: that "AI" has somehow been responsible
for all kinds of authentic real-world computing applications,
such as: air traffic control, CAT scanners, avionics,
industrial automation, radar signal processing, resource
allocation, etc. !! But he rewards our patience with an
astounding Revelation that pumps new wind into these
nostalgic creations: that "AI" also deserves credit for the
successes of information theory, pattern recognition, and
control theory!!!!! Leapin' lizards !!!
Could it really be that a field with this kind of
distinguished and fruitful past would have regressed to
today's fascination with such computationally trivial
pursuits as: the "5th Generation", "blackboards", "knowledge
engineering", OPS-5, R1/XCON, AM, BACON, EMYCIN, etc. ?
Finally, Prof. Minsky proposes to stretch to 15-years the
gestation period for "AI" products (an estimate that seems to
grow just about linearly with time). But, 15 years FROM
WHEN? Since modern "AI" is at least 30 years old, shouldn't
we already have experienced a 15-year bonanza of genuine,
concrete, real-world "AI" contributions? Where is it ?
Every other area of computing can point to a steady
succession of useful contributions, large and small. From
"AI" the world seems to get back very little, other than
amateurish speculations, wild prophecies, toy programs,
unproductive "tools", and chamberpots of monotonous hype.
What's wrong ?
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Oct-85 0053 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #154
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Oct 85 00:53:31 PDT
Date: Wed 23 Oct 1985 23:01-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #154
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 24 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 154
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Representation of Natural Forms (MIT) &
LOGIN: Logic Programming with Inheritance (UPenn) &
Database Updates in Prolog (UPenn) &
Concurrent Logic Programming (CMU) &
Person Schemata (UCB) &
NETTALK: Connectionist Speech Learning (UPenn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 21 Oct 85 09:55:17-EDT
From: "Brian C. Williams" <WILLIAMS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Representation of Natural Forms (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Thursday 24, October 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"Perceptual Organization And The Representation Of Natural Form"
Alex P. Pentland
AI Center, SRI Int'l and CSLI, Stanford
To understand both perception and commonsense reasoning we need a
representation that captures important physical regularities and that
correctly describes the people's perceptual organization of the
stimulus. Unfortunately, the current representations were originally
developed for other purposes (e.g., physics, engineering) and are
therefore often unsuitable.
We have developed a new representation and used it to make accurate
descriptions of an extensive variety of natural forms including people,
mountains, clouds and trees. The descriptions are amazingly compact.
The approach of this representation is to describe scene structure in a
manner similar to people's notion of ``a part,'' using descriptions that
reflect a possible formative history of the object, e.g., how the object
might have been constructed from lumps of clay.
For this representation to be useful it must be possible to recover such
descriptions from image data; we show that the primitive elements of
such descriptions may be recovered in an overconstrained and therefore
reliable manner. An interactive ``real-time'' 3-D graphics modeling
system based on this representation will be shown, together with short
animated sequences demonstrating the descriptive power of the
representation.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 18:21 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - LOGIN: Logic Programming with Inheritance (UPenn)
Colloquium
3pm 10-26-85
23 Moore, University of Pennsylvania
LOGIN: A LOGIC PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE WITH BUILT-IN INHERITANCE
HASSAN AIT-KACI
A.I. Program, MCC, Austin, Texas
Since the early days of research in Automated Deduction, inheritance has been
proposed as a means to capture a special kind of information; viz., taxonomic
information. For example, when it is asserted that "whales are mammals", we
understand that whatever properties mammals possess should also hold for
whales. Naturally, this meaning of inheritance can be well captured in logic
by the semantics of logical implication. However, this is not operationally
satisfactory. Indeed, in a first-order logic deduction system realizing
inheritance as implication, inheritance from "mammal" to "whale" is achieved by
an inference step. But this special kind of information somehow does not seem
to be meant as a deduction step---thus lengthening proofs. Rather, its purpose
seems to be to accelerate, or focus, a deduction process---thus shortening
proofs.
In this talk, I shall argue that the syntax and operational interpretation of
first-order terms can be extended to accommodate for taxonomic ordering
relations between constructor symbols. As a result, I shall propose a simple
and efficient paradigm of unification which allows the separation of (multiple)
inheritance from the logical inference machinery of Prolog. This yields more
efficient computations and enhanced language expressiveness. The language thus
obtained, called LOGIN, subsumes Prolog, in the sense that conventional Prolog
programs are equally well executed by LOGIN.
I shall start with motivational examples, introducing the flavor of what I
believe to be a more expressive and efficient way of using taxonomic
information, as opposed to straight Prolog. Then, I shall give a quick formal
summary of how first-order terms may be extended to embody taxonomic
information as record-like type structures, together with an efficient type
unification algorithm. This will lead to a technical proposal for integrating
this notion of terms into the SLD-resolution mechanism of Prolog. With
examples, I shall illustrate a LOGIN interpreter.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 11:35 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Database Updates in Prolog (UPenn)
Colloquium - 3pm 10-24-85
216 Moore, University of Pennsylvania
A LOGICAL APPROACH TO DATABASE UPDATES IN PROLOG
DAVID S. WARREN , SUNY AT STONY BROOK
The power of the logic programming paradigm (exemplified by the Prolog
programming language) lies in its close relationship to logic. This gives
logic programs a clean, simple, and elegant declarative semantics, making them
easy to understand and reason about. It has turned out, however, that in order
to make Prolog a practical and usable programming language, several
computational (and non-logical) extensions must be added. These extensions
include the ``not'' operator, the ``setof'' operator, the ``var'' predicate,
and the ``assert'' and ``retract'' operators. To the extent that these
operators are non-logical, they destroy the declarative semantics of programs
that use them. Such a program can only be understood by knowing its
computation sequence.
Progress has been made in providing a logical semantics for the ``not''
operator in Prolog, and the circumstances under which Prolog's negation as
failure rule coincides with logical ``not'' are now reasonably well understood.
This has allowed Prolog programs which use the ``not'' operator (meeting the
appropriate constraints) to be understood declaratively.
This talk describes an approach to providing a logical semantics for the Prolog
operator ``assert''. We use a simple modal logic, which leads to a slightly
different operational semantics for ``assert'' and suggests ways that the
assert operator should be restricted in application. The resulting system has
interesting implications for a theory of database updates.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 1985 1109-EDT
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Thesis Oral - Concurrent Logic Programming (CMU)
ABSTRACT OF THESIS PROPOSAL
Speaker: Vijay A. Saraswat
Date: Friday - 1 November, 1985
Time: 10:00 am
Place: 7220
Topic: CONCURRENT LOGIC PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
The domain of logic programming languages, consists, of the most part,
of programming languages based on Horn logic which provide modified
forms of top-down, SLD-refutation execution engines. A program in
these languages consists of a set of definite clause axioms with
(perhaps implicit) control information for guiding the underlying
engine. Execution is initiated by the presentation of a conjunction
of goals or queries and terminates when the engine, following the
prescribed control, discovers either a proof of the goals, or the
impossibility of such a proof. Concurrent logic programming (CLP)
languages provide execution engines capable of pursuing concurrently
proofs of each of the goals in a conjunctive system (so-called
and-parallelism) and also different possible proof paths for each goal
(or-parallelism). Examples of existing concurrent Horn languages are
Concurrent Prolog, Parlog, GHC, Delta-Prolog and CP[!,|,&].
In this thesis I propose to lay a sound theoretical foundation for,
and explore the paradigm of, CLP languages. Specifically, I propose
to investigate the design, semantics, implementation and use of such
languages.
The thesis is intended to make contributions to each of the following
areas:
-- programming language design, via
-- an understanding of the design space for
concurrent programming languages based on annotated Horn logic,
-- the design of a paradigmatic CLP language (CP[!,|,&,;]) providing
a reasonably complete set of control structures for the parallel
exploration of the refutation search space, and,
-- an extensive comparison of CLP languages with related
computational models outside the realm of logic programming,
such as Actors, CSP, data-flow languages (including the
systolic computational model) and constraint-based languages
-- theoretical computer science via an understanding of the formal
(operational and denotational) semantics of, and reasoning systems
for, concurrent logic languages, including an understanding of
the `logic' in such languages,
-- programming language implementation, via a compiler-based
implementation of the specific concurrent language CP[!,|,&]
targetted to a uniprocessor machine,
-- the `correct' design of efficient concurrent algorithms in the
framework of unification-based concurrent logic programming
languages,
-- knowledge representation languages, via the design of a
`higher-level' object-oriented, schema-based language
featuring multiple inheritance with exceptions, and its
implementation in Cp[!,|,&].
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 85 13:52:25 PDT
From: admin@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Person Schemata (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, October 29, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``Person Schemata''
Mardi J. Horowitz M.D.
Professor of Psychiatry, U.C.S.F.
The speaker directs the recently formed Program on Cons-
cious and Unconscious Processes of the John and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation. Research on person schemata is one of
the core agendas of this program.
After a brief description of the program, the discussion
will focus on clinical phenomena as segmented by different
states of mind in a single individual. By examining the confi-
guration in each state of mind as it occurs over time, it may
be possible to infer what the self schemata and role relation-
ship models are that organize thoughts, feelings and action
into observed patterns. The theory that forms the basis for
such inferences includes the postulate that each person's
overall self organization may include a partially nested
hierarchy of multiple self-concepts. A frequent set of states
of mind in pathological grief reactions will provide a concrete
illustration of phenomena, methods of inference, and a theory
of person schemata.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 85 16:43 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - NETTALK: Connectionist Speech Learning (UPenn)
Colloquium - University Of Pennsylvania
3pm 10-29-85, 216 Moore
NETTALK: TEACHING A MASSIVELY-PARALLEL NETWORK TO TALK
Terrence J. Sejnowski
Biophysics Department, Johns Hopkins University
Text to speech is a difficult problem for rule-based systems because English
pronunciation is highly context dependent and there are many exceptions to
phonological rules. A more suitable knowledge representation for
correspondences between letters and phonemes will be described in which rules
and exceptions are treated uniformly and can be determined with a learning
algorithm. The architecture is a layered network of several hundred simple
processing units with several thousand weights on the connections between the
units. The training corpus is continuous informal speech transcribed from tape
recordings. Following training on 1000 words from this corpus the network can
generalize to novel text. Even though this network was not designed to mimic
human learning, the development of the network in some respects resembles the
early stages in human language acquisition. It is conjectured that the
parallel architecture and learning algorithm will also be effective on other
problems which depend on evidential reasoning from previous experience.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Oct-85 0250 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #155
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Oct 85 02:50:22 PDT
Date: Wed 23 Oct 1985 23:04-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #155
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 24 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 155
Today's Topics:
Query - AI and Responsibility Panel,
Literature - AI Book by Jackson,
Philosophy - MetaPhilosophers Mailing List,
News - New Jersey Regional AI Colloquium Series,
Logic - Modus Ponens,
AI Tools - AI Workstations,
Opinion - SDI Software and AI Hype &
Problems with Current Knowledge-Based Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 22:02:00 PDT
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: AI & Responsibility
After reading comments on this net concerning the
responsibility of AI systems, I finally got around to
looking into the IJCAI proceedings. There was evidently
a pretty lively panel discussion between people (one
lawyer) who think that computers are the next group
to be franchised as people (following blacks and
women) and others (AI researchers) who tended to
argue that computers are unreliable and bear close
watching.
Anybody out there attend the real thing and
care to comment on how the oral discussion went? Any
other comments on the Proceedings text? (pp1260+ in
Vol II, IJCAI '85).
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1985 00:36 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AI Book by Jackson
I am reading Jackson's AI book. It's very good and particularly in
respect to the early decades of AI. I have seen no better way to get
a picture of all the ideas of the 1960's, which many students don't
know and do not always re-invent either.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 22 Oct 85 22:33-EDT
From: Glen Daniels <MLY.G.DANIELS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: New mailing list
MetaPhilosophers%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Discussion of personal philosophies, cosmologies, and metaphysical things.
The place to air your ideas (or see others) on life, why we're here, what
Mind is (as opposed to Brain), where our "selves" come from, what the
universe is, what God is, any anything else in a metaphysical/philosophical
vein.
Send mail to MetaPhilosophers-Request%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC for more
information or to be added.
Everyone is welcome!
--Gub (The MetaModerator)
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 85 15:59:04 EDT
From: DRASTAL@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: New Jersey regional AI colloquium series
Dear Colleague,
During the last IJCAI, it became clear to me that keeping in touch
with other members of the AI community is only getting harder. Networks
are not the right communication medium for reporting new work in progress,
and the major conferences have grown too large for lively exchange. Yet,
there are quite enough of us in the central New Jersey area who have
something to say about our work in AI.
This is why Dr. Yousry and I have decided to parent an informal
colloquium series for researchers in this geographic area, and we invite
your participation. Reports are welcome in areas ranging from theoretical
foundations to implementation techniques. Anyone wishing to present or
host a colloquium should send an abstract to one of us at the address below.
We will coordinate the date, location, and distribution of announcements.
Since this letter creates the series, it is most important that we
hear from you now so that a distribution list can be compiled. Speakers
will be recruited once we develop a critical mass of interested people.
I know that we can look forward to some stimulating chain reactions among
the participants.
George A. Drastal Mona A. Yousry
RCA AT&T
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Engineering Research Center
Route 38 ATL Building P.O. Box 900
Moorestown Corporate Center Princeton, NJ 08540
Moorestown, NJ 08057
609-639-2405
609-866-6653
ihnp4!erc780!may
DRASTAL@RUTGERS.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 85 14:43:06 GMT
From: Bob Stine <stine@edn-vax.arpa>
Subject: re: modus ponens
Mike Dante writes:
> Suppose a class consists of three people, a 6 ft boy (Tom), a 5 ft girl
>(Jane), and a 4 ft boy (John). Do you believe the following statements?
>
> (1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then if the tallest is
> not Tom, then the tallest will be John.
> (2) A boy is the tallest person in the class.
> (3) If the tallest person in the class is not Tom then the tallest
> person in the class will be John.
>
> How many readers believe (1) and (2) imply the truth of (3)?
In answer to the last question - gosh, I sure do. The way the
question is framed, however, blurs the distinctions between several
separate issues.
It would do to review what it means for a statement (or statements)
to imply another, which is just that statement A implies statement
B if and only if statement A and the negation of statement B are
contradictory. If several statements imply B, then their conjunction
is inconsistent with the negation of B.
In the above example, whether or not (1) and (2) are true, false,
or silly, (1) and (2) imply (3). What we believe about the truth
or falsity of an argument's premises is quite another issue from
the soundness of the argument.
What clouds the issue, I think, is that you have introduced a
contra-factual hypothesis in (3) (i.e., "assume that Tom is not
tallest"). If we assumed that Tom were not tallest, then to preserve
consistency, some or all of the other atomic suppositions
(Jane is five feet, etc) would have to go. This would terminate
the support for the argument's premises, and get us off the hook
for asserting its conclusion.
One final point. Note that (1) is equivalent to
(1') A boy is not tallest or Tom is tallest or John is tallest.
From Mike's supposition - Tom is 6, Jane is 5, and John is 4 feet tall -
we can deduce that Tom is tallest. It would be unusual to ask whether
we believe the weaker statement (1') once we have established that Tom
is indeed tallest. This points to another area where questions of
logic part company from questions of belief - logic holds, even where
questions of belief are inappropriate.
- Bob Stine
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 85 08:57:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: Son of DO you really need an AI machine?
Since my original eruption provoked some responses (gratifyingly enough),
I thought I'd indulge myself to a few comments on the comments.
> I think, therefore, that one can learn how to teach people
> LISP-machineology if one studies the way people learn games.
> Mostly, they learn from other people. In an informal study I did
> at M.I.T., I discovered that people learn to play rogue by watching
> other people play rogue and by asking more experienced players about
> what they should do whenever a difficult situation came up. People who
> play at home or who never ask don't play as well. Profound discovery.
Yes, I agree completely - we did not have a local Symbolics wizard,
and no doubt this made my life more difficult. The situation is
reflected in the fact that I had to *develop* (as I said earlier)
about 10-12 pages of densely-packed cheat sheets, rather than
*inheriting* them, and then customizing.
> I agree that LISP machines are darned hard to learn; I also agree
> that they're worth the effort. My interests are twofold: why is it
> that intelligent, capable people like Cugini aren't willing to make the
> effort? How can the learning be made easier, or at least, more
> attractive.
The heart of the issue here is I *did* make the effort and did get to
the point of feeling reasonably comfortable (though I certainly
did not attain wizardom) with the beast - I even knew by heart
how to get out of the inspector! - and even with that I never
felt I was quite getting my money's worth. I believe there are two
factors:
1) My own style of programming leans away from spontaneity - perhaps
I "over-design", but usually for me the coding is "merely" (hah!)
a realization of an existing design. All the features of an
AI-machine are focused on *coding and testing* - but by then
in some sense the real work is done. Debugging aids are
always helpful, of course, but I never really felt the
need for all the exotic editor features. Perhaps also
a lot of these features really come into their own only
with truly large systems (> 5,000 lines).
2) the issue is always, not: is this AI-machine good?, but: is this
AI-machine better than the alternatives? If the alternative is
writing an expert system in BASIC with a line-oriented editor,
then I too would kill to get on a Symbolics. But in my case
(not wholly atypical, I think) the alternative was the use
of VAX/VMS Common Lisp. My previous message discussed the costs
of moving from a familiar, fully functional and maintained
(by someone else, I'm pleased to say - who wants to do tape
backup, anyway?) system to a new standalone machine. I should
re-emphasize a point made in passing last time: the VAX
implementation is very well done - it has a slightly intelligent
editor (even blinks matching parens for you!), a good debugger,
prettyprinter, etc etc.
Now in one sense, the AI-machine advocates can crow: "well, the
only reason you like the VAX is that they stole, er, borrowed
some of the nifty techniques originally developed on AI machines."
True enough, but I'm not giving out prizes for creativity; if
I can get "most" of the advantages of an AI machine, together
with those of a plain old VAX (FORTRAN, Pascal, SNOBOL4, mail
to other people including ailist, laser printer, TEX, a single
set of files, my very own terminal, free (to me) maintenance,
etc..), isn't this the best deal?
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1985 00:28 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: SDI Software and AI hype
I agree generally with Cowan's analysis of that SDI debate: that I did
not consider the "political software" problem. I don't know about the
split-second decision problem, because you can complain that we can't
program such things, but I'm not so confident about what the President
would do in 30 seconds, either.
IN any case, I repeat that I didn't mean to suggest that my opinion on
SDI has any value because I haven't studied it. I was only reacting to
what I thought were political reasons for dragging weak computer
science arguments into the debate. As for SDI itself, my only
considered opinion is based on meeting some of its principal
supporters, and on the whole, they don't seem to be a suitably
thoughful crowd to deserve the influence they've acquired.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 23 Oct 85 15:18:31-EDT
From: MCCOWN@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA
Subject: Fundamental problems with current knowledge based systems
The following are my views of some of the fundamental problems with
current engineering of knowledge based systems. Most of this is not
new, but perhaps needs restating. These ideas have been stated by
others in other forms before, but I would like to make sure this
captures what has been said.
Primarily, the systems are inflexible. If new information is input to
the system which is not explicitly represented in the knowledge base,
similar though it may be to previous inputs or existing
representations, the system cannot deal with it unless explicitly told
how. This lack of generalization and analogy capability causes a
great bottleneck in the maintenence of the system, requiring experts
and knowledge engineers to continuously update the knowledge base to
reflect the current possibilities of input. In the rapidly changing
real world this is unacceptable.
The lack of ability to generalize and analogize is closely related
to the ever present learning problem, and this not only affects the
knowledge base maintenance problem, but the problem of knowledge
acquisition as well. Currently, an inordinate number of hours of an
expert's time are required in the interative process of knowledge
acquisition. In addition, the capability of the knowledge engineer to
understand the domain and to program such knowledge directly affects
the quality of the system. A poor knowledge engineer makes for a poor
system, regardless of the quality of the expert.
While learning is a very general term, the type of learning referred
here is the ability to recognize new and relevant information and its
relation to information already known, and the ability to store that
information and its relationships. While much work has been done in
the representation of knowledge (related work being semantic net
variations, frames, scripts, and MOPs for taxonomic and time ordered
information, as well as production rules for procedural information,
and predicate logic), no effective work has been done in getting
information from a source into these representations, except for the
method currently used - have a human (knowledge engineer) do it.
Automated techniques to implement representations from examples (such
as RuleMaster) are heavily domain dependent and are nothing more than
complex weighted decision tables which work only for certain types of
information. Other generalization work (such as RESEARCHER, IPP) are
also heavily domain dependent, and are successful in capturing well
only taxonomic information (A is a B, B works for C, etc.), and simple
time-ordered information (A happened before B). Ways to recognize new
related information, and (more important) new relevant related
information are still lacking, as are ways of converting input
information to consistent internal formats (consistent with the
previous existing related knowledge).
Indeed, even in the area of knowledge representation itself, the
representations are often difficult to relate to other representations
in a general way. Such relationships again depend upon the domain and
are rigidily coded, creating difficulty in generalization and analogy.
Time dependence, location dependence, non-monotonic reasoning, and
uncertainty all require the programmer to jump through hoops to find
ways to represent and relate information and procedures, forcing
domain-dependent representations as well.
Many of the problems in distributed and cooperating expert systems
also stem from this apparent requisite to code knowledge in a domain-
dependent fashion. Obviously if there are no generic techniques for
coding knowledge, then a communication scheme must be developed to
transfer information from one knowledge base to another (and as with
any communication, often something is lost in the translation).
It seems to be apparent that the learning problem is probably the
most critical missing element in current knowledge based system
technology, and that the knowledge representation issue may be the
most critical element in the learning problem. This observation is
not new, and this line of thought has been persued many times in the
past. What I would like to add to the discussion is my belief that
the current methods of knowledge representation are fundamentally
incapable of solving the learning problem due to their discreteness.
While discrete, cleanly delineated representations are (relatively)
easy to work with, program well, and are easy to implement using the
discrete representations that binary, Von Neuman machines offer,
these representations, due to this very same discreteness, do not and
can not represent reality in any generic and flexible way. I have an
argument as to why, but I would like to here some criticism of the
assertions set forth here first. No sense arguing from a shaky
foundation. Solutions along the lines (or at least in the spirit of)
coarse coding, distributed representation, etc., seem to be a possible
solution to some of these problems.
Obviously this type of discussion is related to that of "shallow
structure" vs. "deep structure" in natural language processing. We
can represent the shallow structure using these current representation
an relational techniques. However, I feel that these techniques
cannot effectively represent the deep structure owing to the property
of their inherent discreteness. All relationships must be explicitly
represented in these techniques, and are not implicit in the
representation. Some means of content-addressable representation is
required for implicit relationships between information.
This is not to say that these representations are useless. On the
contrary, they are very useful programming techniques for some types
of analysis problems. They offer insights into problem areas in AI
(such as learning), and they're representative of some real
psychologically functional products of the human mind, and are useful
in representing these products. However, it's time to ask "products
of what", and to approach the "what" (learning) rather than the
product (knowledge).
Thanks for taking the time.
Mike McCown
mccown@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA
RADC/IRDT
Griffiss AFB, NY 13441-5700
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂26-Oct-85 0106 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #156
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Oct 85 01:05:54 PDT
Date: Fri 25 Oct 1985 23:13-PDT
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #156
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 26 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 156
Today's Topics:
Query - PSL vs Common Lisp,
AI Tools - Micro Lisps,
Literature - AI Book by Jackson,
Correction - Concurrent Logic Programming Languages,
Opinion - AI Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 1985 14:51 EDT (Thu)
From: Kimberle Koile <KKoile@BBNG.ARPA>
Subject: PSL vs Common Lisp
I'm interested in finding out about the differences between Portable
Standard Lisp and Common Lisp. Specifically, how difficult would it be to
take something that runs on a Symbolics machine (in Common Lisp) and make it
run in PSL on a Vax/VMS or a Cray?
Many thanks,
Kimberle Koile
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 85 23:11:04 edt
From: osiris!snk (Steve Kahane)
Subject: Micro Lisps
RE: Dr Blum's (BLUM@sumex) request for information on LISP products
that run on micros:
A paper comparing three products that run in the IBM series of
personal computers (muLISP, IQLISP, GCLISP)
will be presented at the 1985 Symposium on Computer Applications
in Medical Care (SCAMC). Information will be presented on the
following:
Memory Addressing Capabilities
Development Environment (error handling, debugging facilities,
editing, graphics, windowing)
Tutoring Tools
Benchmarks
Compilers (GCLISP (beta-test)) IQC-LISP?
SCAMC meeting will be in Baltimore (Convention Ctr) on 11/10 - 11/13.
For more info on meeting call (202) 676-4509.
Reprints of the paper mentioned above are not yet available, but
if anyone has any specific questions I would be glad to try to
answer.
Stephen N. Kahane (snk@osiris)
Operational and Clinical Systems
Halsted 124
The Johns Hopkins Medical Institution
600 North Wolfe St
Baltimore, MD 21205
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1985 21:59 EDT
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AI Book by Jackson
The Jackson book is
INTRODUCTION TO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Philip C. Jackson, Jr.
Dover Publications, New York, 1985
------------------------------
Date: 25 Oct 1985 11:10-EDT
From: Vijay.Saraswat@K.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Concurrent Logic programming languages
Lest there be any misunderstanding: the presentation on Nov. 1 at CMU
is my thesis proposal NOT thesis defence! (The "Thesis Oral" in the
Subject field was a secretarial oversight.)
------------------------------
Date: Thu 24 Oct 85 11:51:35-CDT
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Hype about Hype
A CS professor recently told me that he was worried about the AI hype.
He (who is in databases, not AI) fears that so much has been promised that
there will be an anti-AI reaction and dissapointment that will hurt all of
CS. And I've seen much posted on this list about the dangers of all this
hype.
The fears seem a bit overblown to me. I've gone through the professional
employment adds in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal over the last
weeks. I didn't notice ANYBODY advertising for hotshots in AI, Rule Based
programming, LISP etc. The Austin American Statesman had one mention, but
just the "it would also be nice if the candidate had some experience in..."
form, what they were really looking for was UNIX.
UT has been aswarm with recruiters recently. I'm not interviewing, but
I've been talking with them in the halls and restaurants. Nobody up above
seems to have told them to grab some heavy AI talent - most of them think
experts systems are inferior to decision tree systems and are not
impressed.
The average American has > 14,000 commercial messages per WEEK aimed at
them. I most people are pretty used to hype -we don't get our hopes up
very easily.
When I see the strong reactions to some of the blatant BS being said
about AI, I'm puzzled. I suspect strongly that we're the only ones giving
some of this stuff more than a second glance.
Do you believe all the claims they make about your toothpaste?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 85 12:22 EST
From: "Christopher A. Welty" <weltyc%rpicie.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Contributions of AI
I for one am tired of seeing this guy Gary Martins polluting
the net with his childish attacks on Dr. Minsky. Did Minsky run away
with his wife or something? Whatever the cause, keep your personal
problems off the net. This should be for more productive discussions
dealing with the field. Spending almost two hours some mornings reading
my mail is not rewarding when it invloves sifting through accusations
and wild generalizations, and things like this:
>Every other area of computing can point to a steady
>succession of useful contributions, large and small. From
>"AI" the world seems to get back very little, other than
>amateurish speculations, wild prophecies, toy programs,
>unproductive "tools", and chamberpots of monotonous hype.
>What's wrong ? [Gary Martins]
Read a few books, Mr Martins. Maybe go for a trip to some research centers,
or even to some companies and hospitals. Your messages are the only things
I can see that fit into the categories of "amateurish speculations, wild
prophecies, ..., and chamberpots of monotonous hype." AI has made significant
contributions to Computer Science Research, and to the world. Underneath
the "hype" are productive systems that are used to do such "toyish"
things as diagnose illnesses, and control processes that were once controlled
by humans (some of which were hazardous to those humans). These diagnostic
and control Expert Systems come in many forms. The most sophisticated
Data Base Systems in use today come from the knowledge-base systems sectors
of AI research. Other examples are all around us, and there are too many
to discuss, this message is long enough already.
-Chris
------------------------------
Date: Fri 25 Oct 85 20:20:54-EDT
From: Richard A. Cowan <COWAN@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: Causes of AI hype
This is a response to Gary Martins' question about why AI is frequently hyped.
[AILIST: Volume 3, #126] I thought about this for a while, so please tell me
which points are weak, or if there are any factors I missed. Martins asks:
- why this [hype] happens ?
- is this good or bad for "AI" ?
- does this happen in all high-tech fields, or is "AI"
unique ?
- what can or should be done about it ? by whom ?
I offer a simple explanation: a lot of money is being pumped into AI to do
things the field is not ready for. There are three different ways AI seems
"not ready," depending on the intended application.
1. Some applications being funded are within the state of the art,
but too few researchers are close enough to the state of the art to
warrant the volume of money spent.
2. Other applications currently being attempted are beyond state of
the art AI, but may be possible in 5 to 100 years.
3. Still other applications are forever beyond the capabilities of
AI, because they involve responsibilities requiring human judgement.
Reason number 1 generates hype because there is a continual stream of
people from other fields into AI. They go and take crash courses in
AI at various training centers, but what can they REALLY learn in one
week? They get an excellent overview, which has to be optimistic about AI
in order to justify the $3000 expense for the course.
Perhaps the huge expenditure on AI training within industry is needed to
rapidly enlarge the "AI labor force." But such expenditure puts a
severe strain on engineering faculty supply and salaries at universities
(MIT's former provost cited this as a primary cause of large tuition
increases). This hurts university education in AI just when the need is
most critical. It just might be better to slowly wait for the
university AI community to enlarge since dramatic corporate funding
increases at this stage also run the risk of damaging academic programs
by institutionalizing the hype (i.e. MIT's 6.871 Expert Systems course).
Reason number 2 generates hype because a disproportionate effort is
devoted to goals which are not achievable. Most engineering fields
are composed primarily of people applying well-understood engineering
skills. A relatively small number of especially creative people do
exploratory work advancing the engineering field itself. But in AI,
since little is well-understood, almost everyone works on "novel
ideas." Thus the "hype ratio" is very large.
I know an AI manager at DEC who (previous to DEC) worked on government
AI research contracts but now works on expert systems for industry.
He is glad to be working on real problems; by contrast much DOD AI
work was extremely detached from reality. When private sector profits
are at stake, there must be something real underneath the hype for
funding to be continued.
For a contrast to this, I posted an inquiry about TIMM a couple of weeks
back, which received 6 negative responses, and none positive. While
problems with one product does not mean that a company is incapable of
doing good work, the company (General Research Corporation) has received
over $12 million dollars in software research contracts for the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) alone. I suspect the SDI office's
budget for corporate research is so large and the talent pool so small
that they can't be selective. Sorry to pick on General Research; I
expect many other companies are the same. It's perfectly possible that
such companies would do excellent work if the government would give them
problems with a more immediate use to solve.
I believe the Japanese 5th generation project will help Japan more than
SCI helps us because it has a more commercial orientation. I also
believe that the total US effort in AI (ONR + SDI + SCI) is too large.
It's always exciting to attack unsolved problems, but AI initiatives of
the recent mission-oriented nature consume an awful lot of resources.
Why not devote some of those resources to unsolved problems such as acid
rain which have interested professors but scant funds?
-Rich
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂27-Oct-85 2343 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #157
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Oct 85 23:43:15 PST
Date: Sun 27 Oct 1985 22:09-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #157
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 28 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 157
Today's Topics:
Reports - Davis Working Papers in Linguistics,
Seminars - Iterative Knowledge Aggregation (UPenn) &
Limits of Expert Systems (Ames) &
Layered Control System for a Robot (MIT) &
Machine Learning and Knowledge Representation (MIT) &
Possible Histories (SRI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 85 22:20:47 pdt
From: ucdavis!harpo!lakhota@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Davis Working Papers in Linguistics
From: Robert Van Valin, UC Davis
ucdavis!harpo!lakhota@Berkeley
We have started publishing a working paper series at Davis,
and I think there are many linguists on the net who would be
interested in it. Could you run the following blurb for the
first issue in the series? Thanks.
DAVIS WORKING PAPERS IN LINGUISTICS
No. 1, 1985
Contents:
`A lexical theory of auxiliary selection in Italian'
Giulia Centineo, UC Berkeley
`Clause linkage and zero anaphora in Mandarin Chinese'
Liang Tao, UC Davis & Hunan Teacher's College
`Aspects of the interaction of syntax and pragmatics: Discourse
coreference mechanisms and the typology of grammatical systems'
Robert D. Van Valin, Jr., UC Davis
`Notes on Tepehua (Totonacan; Mexico) verbal semantics'
James K. Watters, UC Berkeley & SIL
Approx. 150 pages
[This announcement of the report series is fine, but I have
suppressed price and ordering information to comply with
Arpanet regulations against commercial use. Contact
"ucdavis!harpo!lakhota"@Berkeley for details. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 85 00:43 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Iterative Knowledge Aggregation (UPenn)
12:00 Monday Oct. 28th
303 Towne Building, University of Pennsylvania
A Survey of Iterative Knowledge Aggregation Methods
Robert Hummel
Courant Institute, NYU
Iterative knowledge aggregation methods are used to choose one of a
finite set of labels about each of a set of objects. Relaxation
labeling processes are one example; there are now numerous other
techniques for combining information which is sometimes supportive of
a hypothesis and sometimes mutually contradictory. In this talk, I
compare and contrast these methods, including stochastic relaxation
algorithms, constrained power methods, and the Dempster/Shafer theory
of evidence formulation. For each methods, we review the form of the
state space, the type of evidence which can be represented, and the
updating and convergence properties of the method.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 85 21:37:39 pdt
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Seminar - Limits of Expert Systems (Ames)
Terry Winograd, 11/5, 1030am
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Ames Research Center
Joint Ames AI Forum/RCR Branch Seminar
SPEAKER: Terry Winograd
Computer Science Dept.
Stanford University
TOPIC: Expert systems: How far can they go?
ABSTRACT: We are in the midst of a great wave of enthusiasm about the
potential for expert systems in every area of human life and work. There is
no agreement, however, as to just how much they can achieve, and where they
will run into fundamental limits. This talk will address some basic
questions as to what expert systems can really be expected to do. I will
describe the "blindness" that is inevitable in the process of articulating
the "systematic domains" that are needed for computer manipulation, and
argue that it leads to important limitations on what we can expect AI
techniques to accomplish.
DATE: 5 Nov. 1985 TIME: 1030am BLDG: 245 ROOM: Space Sci Aud.
Tuesday
POINT OF CONTACT: E. Miya PHONE NUMBER: (415)-694-6453
eugene@ames-nas.ARPA
VISITORS ARE WELCOME: Register and obtain vehicle pass at Ames Visitor
Reception Building (N-253) or the Security Station near Gate 18. See map
below. Do not use the Navy Main Gate.
Non-citizens (except Permanent Residents) must have prior approval from the
Director's Office one week in advance. Submit requests to the point of
contact indicated above. Non-citizens must register at the Visitor
Reception Building. Permanent Residents are required to show Alien
Registration Card at the time of registration. If you are a foreign
national E-mailing a request, please include your nationality, and
Visa Type and number.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 85 16:58:36 EDT
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Layered Control System for a Robot (MIT)
Thursday 31, October 4: 00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"A Layered Robust Control System for a Mobile Robot"
Rod Brooks
MIT AI Lab
The AI Lab Mobile Robot project has built one robot and we are
constructing a second. They are intended to autonomously wander around
office areas of the lab at the same time as people are occupying those
areas. The robots will eventually build maps of their surrondings and
the second one will interact with the environment with an onboard
manipulator. We describe a new architecture for controlling these
mobile robots. Layers of control system are built to let the robot
operate at increasing levels of competence. Layers are made up of
asynchronous modules which communicate over low bandwidth channels.
Each module is an instance of a fairly simple computational machine.
Higher level layers can subsume the roles of lower levels by
suppressing their outputs. However, lower levels continue to function
as higher levels are added. The result is a robust and flexible robot
control system. The talk will end with speculations on evolution and
brains, and modelling them with the Unconnection Machine.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 85 17:00:31 EDT
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Machine Learning and Knowledge Representation (MIT)
Wednesday 30, October 4: 00pm Room: 405 Robinson Hall
Northeastern University
360 Huntington Ave.
Boston MA
Northeastern University
College of Computer Science Colloquium
Brittleness, Tunnel Vision, Machine Learning and
Knowledge Representation
Prof. Steve Gallant
Northeastern University
A system is brittle if it fails when presented with slight deviations from
expected input. This is a major problem with knowledge representation schemes
and particularly with expert systems which use them.
This talk defines the notion of Tunnel Vision and shows it to be a major
cause of brittleness. As a consequence it will be claimed that commonly
used schemes for machine learning and knowledge representation are pre-
disposed toward brittle behavior. These include decision trees, frames,
and disjunctive normal form expressions.
Some systems which are free from tunnel vision will be described.
INFO: Carole D Hafner <HAFNER%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
------------------------------
Date: Sun 27 Oct 85 18:48:47-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Possible Histories (SRI)
POSSIBLE HISTORIES
Pat Hayes
Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, AI Lab
11:00 AM, MONDAY, October 28
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
A history is a connected piece of space/time with 'natural' boundaries.
Using these as a basic ontology for talking about events, processes, etc.
has some advantages over some other frameworks, and doesn't have some of
the disadvantages which are sometimes attributed to it.
However, it does have one major problem, which is the difficulty of talking
about alternative possible futures, to allow planning to be done.
In this talk I discuss a new way of using histories which looks like
it can overcome this problem.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂30-Oct-85 1251 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #158
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Oct 85 12:51:01 PST
Date: Wed 30 Oct 1985 10:17-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #158
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 30 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 158
Today's Topics:
Opinion - AI Hype,
AI Tools - LISP Workstations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 28 Oct 85 08:42:30-EST
From: Richard A. Cowan <COWAN@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: AI Hype
In response to David Throop's comment:
The fears seem a bit overblown to me. I've gone through the professional
employment adds in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal over the last
weeks. I didn't notice ANYBODY advertising for hotshots in AI, Rule Based
programming, LISP etc. The Austin American Statesman had one mention, but
just the "it would also be nice if the candidate had some experience in..."
form, what they were really looking for was UNIX.
Experience demonstrates that hype is in greatest abundance when lots of
money is involved. Therefore recruiting is not the place where you'd expect
to find hype; after all, these ads hope to appeal to intelligent people.
There have certainly been plenty of AI-related ads at MIT, though.
The reason for this is quite simple: when applying for government
research contracts, companies must list people qualified to work on
the project. These companies are facing shortages; they often put
each AI person on as many as 3 proposals. Sadly, many companies
recruit here to buy contract winning power. Regardless of a person's
programming ability, his or her MIT affiliation wins contracts.
I do believe that you've picked up on a trend, though: the hype is
decreasing. There has been an academic reaction against such hype. But the
hype persists where no reaction has occurred: where reaction is
self-censored by monetary interest in AI.
For real hype, go to IJCAI or read some publication that appeals to defense
markets (Defense Electronics, etc.); it's the military that has the money.
I sympathize with your perspective; I recently would have agreed. As
undergraduates, we are often shielded from the realities of military
domination of our work, because our professors (rightfully) are
uncomfortable with it. Please forward this to your concerned CS professor.
Rich (cowan@mit-xx)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 85 11:44 EST
From: "Steven H. Gutfreund" <gutfreund%umass-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Damage from AI Hype
David Throop in AI-List V3 #156 mentions that he has not seen much damage
from the AI hype to other areas of CS work. This may be true if you
look at the commercial cs field (as he did with the New York Times and
Texas Austin American) But I had some personal experiences in the
last year that indicate to me that it has had a significant effect
on CS RESEARCH LABS.
I went to several research labs in the last year (DEC, MCC, Siemens,
Tektronix, HP, NRL) looking for a research appointment. (I wanted to
put off my PhD work for a little while). This process started in
February, and it was about this time that the Industry down-turn
became severe. Naturally the first areas affected was expansion of
research groups hiring. This meant that most groups that were able
to get open req's, were targeting them to AI slots, since the companies
were perceiving that they "had to get into AI" or be left behind.
Needless to say, I did not find a satisfactory position, nor did
3 other New PhD's in software engineering here, who decided it would
be better to continue as Post-Docs. I am beggining to see a situation
that is defining CS research as AI research, especially when one
looks at DARPA and NSF funding.
This need "to get into AI or be left behind" is out of control. I have
a Tektronix Smalltalk machine that I obtained as a donation to do my
Thesis work. (smalltalk based). Next week a bunch of executives from
the local power company (a small outfit called Western Mass Elec)
is coming here to see my work because it is "ON AN AI Machine". You
see they have decided that they have to get into AI or be left behind
so these executive officers are dragging out their EDP computing staff
to see an AI machine and to get them to see the AI LIGHT! (I am
going to feel very bad when I tell them I do Smalltalk, not AI).
Don't these people have a better use for the scarce programming talent?
This all reminds me of the standard IBM hard-sell techniques of the
Thomas J. Watson days. Sell IBM to the top executives. Then force
those those poor system programmers to learn/use OS-360. If you sell
to the top, you can ignore the complaints of the knowlegable programmers
below who will complain about the bestiality of the system.
Speaking of bestiality, when at DEC I talked to the R1/XCON people.
I saw this project when I worked at DEC 4 years ago. It now takes 18 people
to maintain it (I was part of an operating system group that kept the
whole OS, and utilites going with 6, and we did developement too!)
Compare the functionality.
- Steven Gutfreund
gutfreund@umass.csnet
------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 85 14:53:06 EDT (Thu)
From: Liz Allen <liz@tove.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: LISP Workstations
I'd like to point out a couple things that made lisp machines hard
for me to learn -- that didn't quite coincide with the things that
dndobrin@athena.mit.edu was suggesting. My background was strong
in running Franz under Berkeley Unix and using the vi editor there.
I'd already been maintaining the Maryland Franz Lisp environment
for a couple years or so -- and that includes a flavors package.
Lisp machine lisp was not a big problem.
I was using a Symbolics machine in a place where there was only
one of them and no one to give me any pointers -- or even much of
a lispm-init file... I expected some learning time, but it was
*much* harder to learn that I ever expected... Let me give some
examples of problems I had. I should preface this by saying that
I do like to use the machine now that I've gotten more comfortable
with it, but...
I was using "system f" to look at the file system (I hadn't found
dired yet) and using the menu stuff pretty successfully. I was
missing the notion of current working directory, but I was living
with that (I hadn't figured out how to avoid typing long names
yet). What I really needed was to see the files that were listed
off the bottom of the screen... I tried going to the last file on
the screen, but couldn't persuade the screen to scroll with a cr
or anything. I'd seen scroll bars briefly before and wanted one
of those, but there wasn't one on the screen so I wasn't sure I
could use one there was for the window. I tried to look up
how to scroll by looking under "window" in the documentation, but
only found info on creating windows... I lived without scrolling
for a while by closing and opening directories a lot and using ↑S
in emacs. Then, one day, the scroll bar suddenly appeared -- and
then disappeared. But I wasn't sure what I'd done to get it. I
experimented a little, but since I was neatly keeping the mouse
within the window, I couldn't get the scroll bar back. I got it
by accident one or two more times before I figured out that running
the mouse into the left margin of the window would get it. Now,
wouldn't a little documentation in some obvious place about how to
*use* existing windows be a great help?
The other big problem I had was in using emacs -- I learned about
apropos pretty quickly, but it was not a lot of help. My favorite
example is when I wanted to pick up some text without modifying
the existing buffer. I tried apropos on "pick" which gave me
nothing except the all too familiar single line "Done". Then I
tried "yank" which told me how to put it back down again... (Yank
in vi is how to pick up text and put it in a register...) That
did give me the correct idea that I wanted to put something in the
kill ring, so I did an apropos on "kill", but that didn't help.
"Copy region" (M-W) was the command that I was looking for -- I
stumbled across it by accident much later. My problem was vocabulary
-- I knew the basic concepts, but it was hard to find out what the
names for them were. I didn't have an emacs reference card (we
didn't seem to have one with the Symbolics documentation). The
emacs manual was too much reading for too little new info; it tends
to assume you don't know anything about an editor. And the index
is a lot like apropos -- you have to know the vocabulary. I finally
decided that an apropos on something like "region" would probably
be a good way to learn emacs verbs, but I had already learned enough
to get by so never tried it.
Some specific responses to dndobrin@ATHENA.MIT.EDU:
LISP machines are, in my experience, pretty well
designed (at least by comparison with the hodgepodge in
UNIX), and their documentation is, in most places, very
good.
The documentation is good if you either already know the vocabulary
or have someone who can tell you the right word for what you want.
In UNIX, at least, apropos matches on descriptions of a command as
well as the name of the command (though just using the name of the
command under UNIX would be useless...). That would have helped
me -- the apropos on "kill" would have given me copy region then.
And, as I said above, some basic stuff on *using* windows would
have been nice...
Then why is it so hard to learn? I think learning a
complex system is very much like learning to play a complex
game.
I'm not sure I like your game analogy -- why do you need a challenge
to use a tool? It can be fun to learn, but I think you probably
have enough of a challenge just debugging your application. It's
not supposed to be you against the machine where the machine is
trying to keep you from getting your program to run... (I know
you didn't mean that.)
Mostly, [new users] learn from other people.
That's a good way to learn, but documentation ought to be able to
stand alone.
Whenever you have many different things to do and the optimal
move is not at all clear (or even calculable), you have to
have some way of zeroing in on the close-to-optimal solutions.
That wasn't the issue. I knew exactly what I wanted to do. There
are times when a way to do something on one machine isn't even
appropriate for the other machine, but I had an appropriate solution
in mind in both of my examples up there. I just didn't know how
to use the mouse, etc, to accomplish it.
So, I would argue, the solution to Cugini's problem
is to get Tatem to hang out over there for about three
months. Maybe two.
I would recommend taking a course -- I haven't taken any (by the
time they were offered, I was already more or less comfortable with
the machine) so I don't know what levels are available -- or joining
a Local Symbolics Users' Group. Otherwise, you can waste a lot of
time searching documentation, etc, for rather obvious things.
But even with good documentation and design, at some point,
there you are on level 23, a griffin on one side, a dragon,
on the other, 88 hit points, strength of 24, a +2, +2
two-handed sword, a wand of cold, and a wand of magic
missile. What do you do?
You didn't say what kind of armor you have! But I think you're
an expert by then... Anyway, I'm not quite sure I follow the
analogy -- I already knew how to debug programs if that's what you
mean. But knowing what options are available (eg that you can
wield a sword) and knowing how to do them (press the "w" key and
do a menu select) is something the documentation should tell you
without you needing to know the word "wield"; you should be able to
find the info under "sword"...
-Liz Allen
liz@tove.umd.edu or liz@maryland.arpa
seismo!umcp-cs!tove!liz
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂30-Oct-85 1536 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #159
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Oct 85 15:36:03 PST
Date: Wed 30 Oct 1985 10:29-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #159
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 30 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 159
Today's Topics:
Queries - AI and Cognitive Psych in India & Statistical Expert Systems,
Correction - BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC,
Knowledge Representation - Text Understanding,
Applications - LISP-Machine Tutors,
Project - GUIDON-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 85 05:33:46 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Query: Info wanted on AI & Cognitive Psych in India
I'm trying to collect information on scientists in India who
are interested in--or doing research in--the areas of Artificial
Intelligence or Cognitive Psychology. If you know of any such
people or of any releveant research centers or Indian AI
associations, I would be grateful if you could pass this information
on to me at: gluck%su-psych@sumex-aim. To anyone interested
in learning more about the Indian "Cognitive Science" community, I'd
be happy to forward the collected information.
-Mark Gluck
Dept. of Psychology-SU
Stanford, CA 94305
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 85 15:16:37 PDT
From: Stuart Crawford <GA.SLC@Forsythe>
Subject: Statistical Expert Systems
[Forwarded from the AI-ED list by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I am interested in obtaining pointers to recent references regarding
the known pros and cons of using pure statistical approaches to
medical diagnosis (such as the use of classification and regression
trees) as opposed to expert systems approaches. In particular, I
am interested in any literature discussing the possible use of
the combined use of such approaches. For example, using
classification trees to help with the fine tuning of production
rules, or using classification rules to augment current knowledge
bases. I know much more about the statistical approaches than the
ai approaches, but it seems that some interdisciplanary technique
might be fruitful.
Stuart Crawford
[Bob Blum's RX/RADIX work at Stanford is the best reference I
can suggest. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 85 10:50 EST
From: Christopher Garrigues <7thSon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Subject: BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC
In a recent AILIST digest, a recommendation was made that people
interested in information on Symbolics Lisp Machine Information could
join both SLUG@UTEXAS.ARPA and BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC.ARPA.
The first is true. SLUG is the Symbolics Lisp Users Group and is
exactly what it sounds like.
The second is not true. BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC is where MIT users send their
bug-reports to Symbolics and is exactly what that sounds like.
The volume of requests to BUG-LISPM-REQUEST@MIT-MC got to the point
that Symbolics Home Office Software Support (HOSS@SCRC-STONY-BROOK) has
been added to that list.
I believe that the confusion arose in the fact that MIT like most
sites, allows LOCAL users to be on the bug mailing lists. In this case,
local users are those who are students, faculty or otherwise associated
with MIT.
To subsume the purpose that BUG-LISPM@MIT-MC has for writing on,
Symbolics customers with software contracts should send mail to
HOSS@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA. If non-contract customers send legitimate
bug reports to HOSS, we will note the report and forward it to the
appropriate developers.
As a source to read from, I believe there has been some discussion on
the SLUG list of developing a second list for discussion of bugs and/or
problems users have encountered along with bugfixes. You'll have to
contact SLUG for futher information on that subject.
I apologise for taking up the space on AILIST for a non-AI oriented
entry, but since the overflow of traffic to BUG-LISPM-REQUEST@MIT-MC
started here, I thought I should go to the source.
Thanks for the audience,
Chris Garrigues
Symbolics Home Office Software Support
(7thSon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 85 16:02:23 cst
From: "V.J. Raghavan" <ihnp4!sask!regina!raghavan@UCB-VAX>
Subject: Text Understanding
[Excerpted from the IRList Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[This year's Montreal ACM SIGIR Conference on Information Retrieval
had many interesting papers. A file, in "SMART" form, of the
abstracts, was typed in at Univ. of Regina and edited at Virginia
Tech. Order info for proceedings is: Proc. of the Eighth Annual Int.
ACM SIGIR Conf. on R&D in Inf. Ret., ACM Order No. 606850 -- Ed]
.I 10
.T
Processing Free-Text Input to Obtain a Database of Medical Information
.A
EMILE C. CHI
CAROL FRIEDMAN
NAOMI SAGER
MARGARET S. LYMAN
.W
The Linguistic String Project of New York University has developed computer
programs that convert the information in free-text documents of a technical
specialty into a structured form suitable for mapping into a relational
database. The processing is based upon the restrictions on the use of
language that are characteristic of the subject matter and the document type.
These restrictions are summarized in a "sublanguage grammar" that provides a
set of word classes and formulas corresponding to the objects and relations
of interest in the domain. The programs are independent of the particular
sublanguage grammar employed. The application to narrative patient records
will be described and the applicability of the methods to other domains
discussed.
[...]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 85 8:24:34 EST
From: Bruce Nevin <bnevin@bbncch.ARPA>
Subject: need for tutors
Re: response to Cugini and Tatem by dndobrin@athena.mit.edu (3.153)
This discussion reminds me of the LISP tutor developed at CMU.
A brief search did not turn up the article that I read about it
(John R. Anderson and Brian J. Reiser, The LISP Tutor, BYTE, April 1985),
but I did find a piece to which it referred in its bibliography,
`Minimalist Training' by John M. Carroll, Datamation, Nov. 1, 1984.
Gist is that, of course, the ideal learning situation is me on
one end of a log and Socrates on the other, but who can afford
that, so the CMU folks set out to design a tutor for LISP that
would provide the kind of immediate feedback at arbitrary depth
that a human tutor would. And apparently with considerable
success.
Reference to a similar effort appeared in a talk by Pirolli at UCB last
September 24 (according to Digest # 3.127)
Since we can't `get Tatem to hang out over there for about three months'
for all the `over theres' that there are, cloning software versions of
his familiarity with LISP machines would seem to be the right answer.
Bruce Nevin
bn@bbncch.arpa
BBN Communications
33 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA 02238
(617) 497-3992
------------------------------
Date: Fri 25 Oct 85 13:40:35-PDT
From: Mark Richer <RICHER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: GUIDON-2 Project
[Forwarded from the AI-ED list by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Here's some information on the GUIDON project, including references:
Mark Richer, Oct. 25th, 1985
The GUIDON project is an applied AI research project at the Knowledge
Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
This project is investigating strategies for teaching diagnostic
reasoning (specifically, medical diagnosis) using computers and
knowledge-based systems technology. Part of the effort in this project
has been to extend the capabilities of KB systems technology for the
purpose of explanation and instruction. NEOMYCIN, a knowledge-based
diagnostic consultation system, has been implemented and is the
foundation for a new series of instructional programs, collectively
called GUIDON-2. These programs are substantially different in design
than the original GUIDON tutoring system that worked in conjunction
with EMYCIN (e.g., MYCIN) systems. The director of the project is
William J. Clancey, Ph.D., Senior Research Associate, Computer Science
Department, Stanford University. There are about a dozen people
associated with this project at present including a physician. Below
is a list of references that might be of interest to people doing work
in computer-based instruction. Papers that are listed as HPP or KSL
technical reports are available by writing or calling Knowledge Systems
Laboratory, 701 Welch Road, Bldg. C, Palo Alto, CA 94304, (415)
497-3444. STAN-CS papers (I think) are available through the Computer
Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305.
WARNING: Do not send requests for papers to me; I'm afraid I will get
swamped. Try to find the reference yourself if it was published,
otherwise request it directly by calling or mailing to KSL or Stanford
CS. (KSL is part of the CS Dept, but we are housed in a separate
building at present and we maintain our series of technical reports.)
Thank you.
References: [these are not in any particular order]
Clancey, W.J. (1979) Transfer of rule-based expertise through a
tutorial dialogue. Computer Science Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford
University, NOT Available as a tech report. Revised version, MIT
Press, in preparation.
Clancey, W.J. (1979) Tutoring rules for guiding a case method
dialogue. Int J of Man-Machine Studies, 11, 25-49. Also in Intelligent
Tutoring Systems, eds. Sleeman and Brown, Academic Press, London,
1982.
Clancey, W.J. (1982) Overview of GUIDON.
Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,
Summer 1983, Volume 10, Numbers 1 & 2, pages 8-15.
Also in The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2,
eds. Barr and Feigenbaum, Kaufmann, Los Altos.
Also STAN-CS-93-997, HPP-83-42.
Richer, M. and Clancey, W. J. (1985)
GUIDON-WATCH: A graphic interface for browsing and viewing a
knowledge-based system. To appear in IEEE Computer Graphics
and Applications, November 1985, Also KSL 85-20.
Clancey, W.J., Bennett, J., and Cohen, P. (1979)
Applications-oriented AI Research: Education.
In The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Chapter IX,
Volume 2, eds. Barr and Feigenbaum, Kaufmann, Los Altos.
Also STAN-CS-79-749, HPP-79-17.
Clancey, W.J., Shortliffe, E.H., and Buchanan, B.G. (1979)
Intelligent computer-aided instruction for medical diagnosis.
In Readings in Medical Artificial Intelligence: The First
Decade, eds. W.J. Clancey and E.H. Shortliffe, Addison-Wesley, 1984.
Also Proceedings of the Third Annual Symposium on
Computer Applications in Medical Care,
Silver Spring, Maryland, October 1979, pps. 175-183.
Also HPP 80-10.
Clancey, W.J. and Letsinger, R. (1981)
NEOMYCIN: Reconfiguring a rule-based expert system for
application to teaching. In Readings in Medical Artificial
Intelligence: The First Decade,
eds. W.J. Clancey and E.H. Shortliffe, Addison-Wesley, 1984.
Proceedings of Seventh IJCAI, 1981, pps. 829-826.
Also STAN-CS-82-908, HPP 81-2.
Clancey, W.J. (1981)
Methodology for Building an Intelligent Tutoring System.
In Method and Tactics in Cognitive Science,
eds. Kintsch, Miller, and Polson, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1984.
Also STAN-CS-81-894, HPP 81-18.
Clancey, W.J. (1984)
Acquiring, representing, and evaluating a competence model of
diagnosis.
In Contributions to the Nature of Expertise, eds. Chi,
Glaser, and Farr, in preparation.
Also HPP-84-2.
Clancey, W.J. (1979)
Dialogue Management for Rule-based Tutorials.
Proceedings of Sixth IJCAI, 1979, pps. 155-161.
London, B. & Clancey W. J. (1982)
Plan recognition strategies in student modeling: Prediction
and description.
Proceedings of AAAI-82, pps. 335-338.
Also STAN-CS-82-909, HPP 82-7.
Clancey, W.J. (1983)
Communication, Simulation, and Intelligent Agents:
Implications of Personal Intelligent Machines for Medical
Education.
Proceedings of AAMSI-83, pps. 556-560.
Also HPP-83-3.
Many people have influenced our thinking, but in particular the
following paper may be helpful to understand our current thinking with
regard to computer-based learning:
@Inproceedings[BROWN83,
key="Brown"
,Author="Brown, J.S."
,title="Process versus product--a perspective on tools for
communal and informal electronic learning"
,booktitle="Education in the Electronic Age"
,note="Proceedings of a conference sponsored by the
Educational Broadcasting Corporation, WNET/Thirteen Learning
Lab, NY, pp. 41-58 ."
,month=July
,year=1983]
The work described in this paper has its home at the XEROX
Palo Alto Reasearch Center (PARC).
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂31-Oct-85 1322 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #160
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Oct 85 13:21:09 PST
Date: Thu 31 Oct 1985 10:18-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #160
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 31 Oct 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 160
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Knowledge-Based Language Production (BBN) &
Mechanical Verification of Mathematics (BBN) &
Levels of Abstraction in Expert Systems (BBN) &
Conversational Language System (BBN) &
Correcting Misconceptions (BBN),
Conferences - Economics and AI &
AI Society of New England &
Revised Call for Papers: OIS-86
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 85 00:56:16 EST
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge-Based Language Production (BBN)
Friday 1, November 10: 30am Room: BBN Labs, 10 Moulton Street,
3rd floor large conference room
BBN Artificial Intelligence Seminar
"A Knowledge-Based Approach to Language Production"
Paul Jacobs
The development of natural language interfaces to Artificial
intelligence systems is dependent on the representation of knowledge.
A major impediment to building such systems has been the difficulty in
adding sufficient linguistic and conceptual knowledge to extend and
adapt their capabilities. This difficulty has been apparent in systems
which perform the task of language production, i. e. the generation of
natural language output to satisfy the communicative requirements of a
system.
The problem of extending and adapting linguistic capabilities is
rooted in the problem of integrating abstract and specialized
knowledge and applying this knowledge to the language processing task.
Three aspects of a knowledge representation system are highlighted by
this problem: hierarchy, or the ability to represent relationships
between abstract and specific knowledge structures; explicit
referential knowledge, or knowledge about relationships among concepts
used in referring to concepts; and informity, the use of a common
framework for linguistic and conceptual knowledge. The knowledge
based approach to language production addresses the language
generation task from within the broader context of the representation
and application of conceptual and linguistic knowledge.
This knowledge based approach has led to the design and
implementation of a knowledge representation framework, called Ace,
geared towards facilitating the interaction of linguistic and
conceptual knowledge in language processing. Ace is a uniform,
hierarchical representation system, which facilitates the use of
abstractions in the encoding of specialized knowledge and the
representation of the referential and metaphorical relationships among
concepts. A general purpose natural language generator, KING
(Knowledge INtensive Generator), has been implemented to apply
knowledge in the Ace form. The generator is designed for knowledge
intensivity and incrementality, to exploit the power of the Ace
knowledge in generation. The generator works by applying structured
associations, or mappings, from conceptual to linguistic structures,
and combining these structures into grammatical utterances. This has
proven to be a simple but powerful mechanism which is relatively easy
to adapt and extend.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 85 02:24:17 EST
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Mechanical Verification of Mathematics (BBN)
Thursday 31, October 10: 30am Room: BBN Labs, 10 Moulton Street,
2nd floor large conference room
BBN Laboratories
Science Development Program
AI Seminars
Toward the Mechanical Verification of Abstract Mathematics
David McAllester
MIT AI Laboratory
To mechanically verify a mathematical argument one must
translate the argument into some formal language. Many
mathematicians doubt that it will ever be practical to translate
arbitrary mathematical arguments into a completely formal language.
This talk will present a formal language called ONTIC which extends
set theory in a way that supports an "object oriented" style of
mathematical description. Ontic has been used to formally define some
basic concepts of modern algebra, real analysis, and homotopy theory.
We feel that any branch of modern mathematics can be concisely
expressed in ONTIC. Furthermore it seems practical to translate any
mathematical proof into a sequence of ONTIC formulas. A theorem-
proving system has been constructed for ONTIC and some simple
verifications have been done.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1985 11:01-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Levels of Abstraction in Expert Systems (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Speaker: Prof. B. Chandrasekaran
Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence Research
Department of Computer and Information Science
The Ohio State University
Date: 10:30am, Monday, November 4th
Place: BBN Labs, 10 Moulton Street, 3rd floor large conference room
Generic Tasks in Knowledge-Based Reasoning: Characterizing
and Designing Expert Systems at the "Right" Level of Abstraction
We outline the elements of a framework for expert system design that
we have been developing in our research group over the last several
years. This framework is based on the claim that complex knowledge-based
reasoning tasks can often be decomposed into a number of generic tasks
each with associated types of knowledge and family of control regimes.
At different stages in reasoning, the system will typically engage in
one of the tasks, depending upon the knowledge available and the state
of problem solving. The advantages of this point of view are manifold:
(i) Since typically the generic tasks are at a much higher level of
abstraction than those associated with first generation expert system
languages, knowledge can be represented directly at the level
appropriate to the information processing task. (ii) Since each of the
generic tasks has an appropriate control regime, problem solving
behavior may be more perspicuously encoded. (iii) Because of a richer
generic vocabulary in terms of which knowledge and control are
represented, explanation of problem solving behavior is also more
perspicuous. We briefly describe six generic tasks that we have found
very useful in our work on knowledge-based reasoning: classification,
state abstraction, knowledge-directed retrieval, object synthesis by
plan selection and refinement, hypothesis matching, and assembly of
compound hypotheses for abduction.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1985 11:01-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Conversational Language System (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Speaker: Prof. Janet Murray
Dept. of Humanities, MIT
Date: 10:30am, Tuesday, November 5th
Place: BBN Labs, 10 Moulton Street, 2nd floor large conference room
The Next Generation of Language Lab Materials: Developing
Prototypes at MIT
MIT's Athena Language Learning Project is a five-year enterprise
whose aim is to develop prototypes of the next generation of
language-lab materials, particularly conversation-based exercises using
artificial intelligence to analyse and respond to typed input. The
exercises are based upon two systematized methods of instruction that
are specialties at MIT: discourse theory and simulations. The project
is also seeking to incorporate two associated technologies: digital
audio and interactive video. The digital audio sub-project is
developing exercises for intonation practice, initially focusing on
Japanese speakers learning English. The interactive video component of
the project consists of preparation of a demonstration disc which
features a variety of interactive video approaches including enhancement
of the text-based simulations and presentation of dense conversational
material in natural settings. The project is being developed on the
Athena system at MIT, and is based upon the model of a near-future
language lab/classroom environment that will include stations capable of
providing interactive video, digital audio, and AI-based exercises.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1985 11:01-EST
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Correcting Misconceptions (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Speaker: Prof. Kathleen F. McCoy
University of Delaware
Date: 10:30am, Friday, November 8th
Place: BBN Labs, 10 Moulton Street, 3rd floor large conference room
Correcting Object Related Misconceptions
Analysis of a corpus of naturally occurring data shows that users
conversing with a database or expert system are likely to reveal
misconceptions about the objects modelled by the system. Further
analysis reveals that the sort of responses given when such
misconceptions are encountered depends greatly on the discourse context.
This work develops a context-sensitive method for automatically
generating responses to object-related misconceptions with the goal of
incorporating a correction module in the front-end of a database or
expert system. The method is demonstrated through the ROMPER system
(Responding to Object-related Misconceptions using PERspective) which is
able to generate responses to two classes of object-related
misconceptions: misclassifications and misattributions.
The transcript analysis reveals a number of specific strategies used
by human experts to correct misconceptions, where each different
strategy refutes a different kind of support for the misconception. In
this work each strategy is paired with a structural specification of the
kind of support it refutes. ROMPER uses this specification, and a model
of the user, to determine which kind of support is most likely. The
corresponding response strategy is then instantiated.
The above process is made context sensitive by a proposed addition to
standard knowledge-representation systems termed "object perspective."
Object perspective is introduced as a method for augmenting a standard
knowledge-representation system to reflect the highlighting affects of
previous discourse. It is shown how this resulting highlighting can be
used to account for the context-sensitive requirements of the correction
process.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Oct 85 21:23:18-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Economics and AI
See Communications of the ACM, September 1985, p. 1008, for an
announcement of the 1st Int. Conf. on Economics and AI (including
management science, organizational and behavioral sciences, etc.),
to be held in Aix-en-Provence, France, on September 2-4, 1986.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 29 Oct 85 20:13:44-EST
From: Michael Lebowitz <LEBOWITZ@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: Conference - AI Society of New England
THE SEVENTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE
OF THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
SOCIETY OF NEW ENGLAND
NOVEMBER 1-2, 1985, BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY, WALTHAM, MA
NATHAN SEIFER AUDITORIUM, IN FORD HALL
Friday, November 1, 1985
8:00 PM Invited talk by Drew McDermott (Yale University)
Easy and Hard Problems in Artificial Intelligence
Abstract -- AI has not exactly solved everything. In fact, the more we
progress the harder problems we uncover. However, some supposedly hard
problems look as if they will evaporate completely. In this talk I will
discuss: ancient problems that now look easy, like free will and
consciousness; modern problems that are hard, like representing spatial
knowledge; ancient problems that are still hard, like the nature of
explanation and induction.
9:00 PM Traditional AISNE social hour
Saturday, November 2, 1985
10:00 AM 15 minute talks
Robert McCartney (Brown University)
Algorithmic Synthesis
Tom Ellman (Columbia University)
Explanation Based Generalization of Logic Circuit Designs
Dave Glaubman (Northeastern University)
A Novice System for Bidding in Bridge
Robert S. Rist (Yale University)
Plans in Programming
Brian Otis (University of New Hampshire)
Knowledge-based Guidance for an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle
11:30 AM Panel chaired by John Kender (Columbia University)
Are Vision and Robotics AI?
12:30 PM Lunch Break
2:00 PM more 15 minute talks
Henry A. Kautz (University of Rochester)
Plan Recognition as Theory Formation
Mary P. Harper (Brown University)
Tense and Time in English
Tony Maddox (Brandeis University)
A Parallel Approach to Generating Visual Event Descriptions
Marie Vaughan (University of Massachusetts)
Rewriting and Regeneration: A Computational Model of the Writing Process
Ben Moreland (University of Connecticut)
Artificial Ingelligence Research at UConn
3:30 PM still more 15 minute talks
Marie Bienkowski (Princeton University)
Generation of Elaborations: A Goal-Directed Model
Steven Hanks (Yale University)
Temporal Reasoning and Default Logic
Hon Wai Chun (Brandeis University)
Progress Towards Massively Parallel Speech Recognition
Richard N. Pelavin (University of Rochester)
A Formal Logic that Supports Planning with a Partial Description of the Future
4:30 PM AISNE business meeting -- volunteers for organizing next
year's conference will be solicited.
There is no registration fee for AISNE, but a small donation is
requested to cover the costs of the Friday night social hour.
Program chairman: Local arrangements:
Professor Michael Lebowitz Tony Maddox
Department of Computer Science Brandeis University
450 Computer Science Building Computer Science Department
Columbia University Ford Hall 3-227
New York, NY 10027 Waltham, MA 02254
212-280-8196 617-647-2119
lebowitz@columbia-20.arpa tony%brandeis@csnet
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 85 11:26 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: REVISED call for papers: OIS-86
******************* C A L L F O R P A P E R S
* * ----------------------------------------------
* * Third ACM Conference On
* * OFFICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS
* OIS-86 *
* * October 6-8, 1986
* * Biltmore Plaza Hotel
* * Providence, RI
******************* -------------------------------------------------
General Chair: Carl Hewitt, Topics appropriate for this
MIT conference include (but are not
restricted to) the following as they
Program Chair: Stanley Zdonik, relate to OIS:
Brown University
Technologies including Display, Voice,
Treasurer: Gerald Barber, Telecommunications, Print, etc.
Gold Hill Computers
Human Interfaces
Local Arrangements: Andrea Skarra,
Brown University Deployment and Evaluation
An interdisciplinary conference on System Design and Construction
issues relating to office
information systems (OIS) sponsored Goals and Values
by ACM/SIGOA in cooperation with
Brown University and the MIT Distributed Services and Applications
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
Submissions from the following Knowledge Bases and Reasoning
fields are solicited:
Distributed Services and Applications
Anthropology
Artificial Intelligence Indicators and Models
Cognitive Science
Computer Science Needs and Organizational Factors
Economics
Management Science Impact of Computer Integrated
Psychology Manufacturing
Sociology
The following have confirmed their membership on the program
committee:
Guiseppe Attardi Ray Panko
University of Pisa University of Hawaii
James Bair Robert Rosin
Hewlett Packard Syntrex
Gerald Barber Erik Sandewall
Gold Hill Computers Linkoping University
Peter de Jong Walt Scacci
MIT USC
Irene Greif Andrea Skarra
MIT Brown University
Sidney Harris Susan Leigh Star
Georgia State University Tremont Research Institute
Carl Hewitt Luc Steels
MIT University of Brussels
Heinz Klein Sigfried Treu
SUNY University of Pittsburgh
Fred Lochovsky Dionysis Tsichritzis
University of Toronto University of Geneva
Fanya Montalvo Eleanor Wynn
MIT Brandon Interscience
Naja Naffah Aki Yonezawa
Bull Transac Tokyo Institute of Technology
Margrethe Olson Stanley Zdonik
NYU Brown University
The invited keynote speaker is Professor J.C.R. Licklider of MIT.
Unpublished papers of up to 5000 words (20 double-spaced pages) are
sought. The first page of each paper must include the following
information: title, the author's name, affiliations, complete mailing
address, telephone number and electronic mail address where
applicable, a maximum 150-word abstract of the paper, and up to five
keywords (important for the correct classification of the paper). If
there are multiple authors, please indicate who will present the paper
at OIS-86 if the paper is accepted. Proceeedings will be distributed
at the conference and will later be available from ACM. Selected
papers will be published in the ACM Transactions on Office Information
Systems.
Please send eight (8) copies of the paper to:
Prof. Stan Zdonick
OIS-86 Program Chair
Computer Science Department
Brown University
P.O. Box 1910
Providence, RI 02912
DIRECT INQUIRIES TO: Margaret H. Franchi (401) 863-1839.
IMPORTANT DATES
Deadline for Paper Submission: February 1, 1986
Notification of Acceptance: April 30, 1986
Deadline for Final Camera-Ready Copy: July 1, 1986
Conference Dates: October 6-8, 1986
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Nov-85 2256 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #161
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Nov 85 22:56:25 PST
Date: Mon 4 Nov 1985 20:58-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #161
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 5 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 161
Today's Topics:
Queries - DAI Contacts & Abduction & User Modelling Panel &
ATNS vs. ATTs & Vision Systems and American Sign Language,
AI Tools - LISP Workstation Help Facilities,
Literature - Proc. 5th Int. Workshop on Expert Systems,
Programming Languages - Object-Oriented Language Semantics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 85 14:12:36 pst
From: Cindy Mason <clm@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: DAI contacts
I have been reading a lot of articles in the area of Distributed
Artificial Intelligence (DAI) and would appreciate getting in
touch with others who have similar interests to discuss articles and
toss around ideas. Thanks.
Cindy Mason (clm@lll-crg)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 85 10:01:23 cst
From: Alan Wexelblat <wex@mcc.ARPA>
Subject: Abduction
Will someone please explain to me what is meant by this word?
My dictionary gives two definition: one has to do with kidnapping,
the other has to do with exercising certain thigh muscles. I assume
that AI'ers have a third definition (!?). Replies directly to me,
please.
--Alan Wexelblat
WEX@MCC.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Nov 85 11:49:21-EST
From: John C. Akbari <AKBARI@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: User Modelling Panel
Does anyone have notes on the User Modelling panel held at IJCAI-85 in
August?
THanks in advance.
john akbari
akbari@columbia-20.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 85 18:11:58 pst
From: decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!polyslo!cburdor
@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu (Christopher Burdorf)
Subject: ATNS vs. ATTs
I am currently working on a master's thesis in natural language
processing. I am currently deciding whether to use ATNs or ATTs to do
the parsing. If anyone out there has any feelings one way or the other
as to which method is better, please let me know.
Chris burdorf
Cal poly slo.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 85 09:58:29 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Vision Systems and American Sign Language
One of goals of AI research is to produce speech recognition systems.
Has there been a proposal to produce a vision system that can ``read''
ASL?
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 1985 01:35 CST (Fri)
From: Paul Fuqua <FUQUA@ti-csl60>
Subject: LISP Workstations
Some comments in response to:
Date: Thursday, 24 October 1985 13:53-CDT
From: Liz Allen <liz at tove.umd.edu>
To: AIList at MIT-MC
Re: LISP Workstations
What I really needed was to see the files that were listed
off the bottom of the screen...
The other big problem I had was in using emacs -- I learned about
apropos pretty quickly, but it was not a lot of help. My favorite
example is when I wanted to pick up some text without modifying
the existing buffer.
On the Texas Instruments Explorer (the third of the MIT-derived lispms), we
have a system called Suggestions that occupies a small menu strip on your
window with a selection of, well, suggestions. Some of the menu items are
commands, some switch to more detailed menus of classes of commands, some do
other things.
As a whole, the suggestions menus are supposed to track the state you're in
-- in Zmacs, there are Zmacs menus, with headings like cursor movement,
deleting and moving text, font commands, etc; in Dired, there is a menu of
the Dired-specific Zmacs commands; in the Lisp Listener, there are
input-editing menus, window-switching menus, and so on. (Sorry about the
vagueness, but with two years of pre-TI lispm experience, I've never used
Suggestions myself; I just gripe about the implementation.)
The idea is to try to relate concepts that the user already has in mind to
commands or groups of commands. The target person is someone who knows what
he wants to do, but not how to do it. Suggestions is by no means perfect;
for one thing, it doesn't explain scroll bars. However, it's a start.
The documentation is good if you either already know the vocabulary
or have someone who can tell you the right word for what you want.
So one obvious goal of good documentation is to lead the way to the
vocabulary. The most useful feature of the red/black/blue/grey/green/orange
Lisp Machine Manual is its concept index. At least it lands me in
approximately the right section of the manual, where I can pick up the proper
terms for the next time.
pf
ps I'm not any sort of official TI spokesman, but no one else here was
taking a shot at the issue.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 1985 16:55-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: 5th Int. Workshop on Expert Systems and Their Applications
Some time ago, I sent a list to this digest of the papers presented at
the Fifth International Workshop on Expert Systems and Their
Applications at Avignon, France on May 13-15, 1985. I have
tracked down the ordering information for those proceedings. I am
posting the details here since I have received mail from many individuals
who needed articles from there and thus this info is of general
info:
To order write to:
Marie Martine Sainflou
Agence de l'Informatique
Tour Fiat-Cedex 16
92084 Paris la Defense, France
They accepted our purchase order and billed us for 800 French Francs.
If you try and order via Interlibrary loan here is the information
from the OCLC entry:
OCLC: 12661613
1 100
2 040 ISM c ISM
3 020 2865810283
4 041 0 freeng
5 090 TK7885.A1 b P7 1985
6 049 ISMM
7 245 00 [Proceedings] / C Expert ?Systems & Tehir Applicatoins. 5th
International Workshop
8 260 0 [Paris] : b AGence de l'Informatique c 1985
9 300 2 v. : b ill. ; c 24 cm
10 500 French and English.
11 500 5 `emes Journbees Internationals, les Syst`emes Experts &
Leurs Applications
12 504 Includes bibliographies
13 650 0 Computer engineering x Congresses.
14 711 20 International Workshop on Expert Systems and their
Applications n (5th : d 1985 : c Avignon, France)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 85 16:16:30 est
From: "Dennis R. Bahler" <drb%virginia.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: replies to OOL semantics request
> Does anyone have pointers to work done on
>formal specification and/or formal semantic definition of
>object-oriented languages or systems such as Smalltalk-80?
Well, the traffic has died away on my request about formal
semantics of OOLs and a number of folks have asked to see what I got,
so this is it.
Dennis Bahler
Usenet: ...cbosgd!uvacs!drb Dept. of Computer Science
CSnet: drb@virginia Thornton Hall
ARPA: drb.virginia@csnet-relay University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
-------
From: mac@uvacs.UUCP (Alex Colvin)
You might check on the work done on PLASMA, an actor ( ~ object) language,
mostly applicative. I asked the net about this some time ago, but got no
response.
Then there's Act I, another MIT-AI project. And who knows what else?
Lastly, some folks (Lisp types, mostly), model objects as closures.
This leads to flavors.
%A Carl Hewitt
%T Viewing Control Structures as Patterns of Passing Messages
%J Artificial Intelligence
%V 8
%D 1977
%P 323-364
%X especially section 7.
%A Carl Hewitt
%A Brian Smith
%T Towards A Programming Apprentice
%J IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
%V 1
%N 1
%D March 1975
%P 26-45
%X describes meta-evaluation to justify contracts on implementations
%X featuring the Actor Induction Principle
%A Henry Lieberman
%T A Preview of Act I
%R AI Memo 625
%I MIT AI Lab
%D June 1981
%X describes the actor model of computation based on message passing
%A Henry Lieberman
%T Thinking About Lots of Things At Once Without Getting Confused
%R AI Memo 626
%I MIT AI Lab
%D May 1981
%X synchronization and concurrency in Act I
%A C. Hewitt
%A G. Attardi
%A H. Lieberman
%T Specifying and Proving Properties of Guardians for Distributed Systems
%B Semantics of Concurrent Computation
%S Lecture Notes in Computer Science
%V 70
%I Springer Verlag
%C Berlin
%D 1979
%X synchronization device
Since you're just down the hall from me, you can check out my copies.
------
From johnson%p.cs.uiuc.edu@CSNET-RELAY Thu Oct 10 00:18:08 1985
You recently asked a question on the net about work in semantics for
OOLs. I am interested in semantics for OOL, though I haven't done
anything worth talking about, so I would appreciate any responses
that you get. In general, I don't think that inheritance makes semantics
any more difficult, although Smalltalk (which is my interest) has weird
"functions that can goto creating environment" things called blocks
that require continuation semantics. I least, I think they require
continuation semantics, I haven't completely solve the problem yet.
I have done some work in type systems for Smalltalk, but I haven't
written it up yet. Are you interested in such things?
Ralph Johnson
-------
From sokol%mitre.arpa@CSNET-RELAY Fri Oct 11 00:22:09 1985
Dennis
We have been using RAND's Rule Oriented Simulation System for about 4 years
now and have been very happy with it. You can pick it up in a morning, and
can decipher other people's code immediately, It`s a lovely system.
For more information, see Rand publication R-3160-AF (1984) and N-1854-AF
(1982), or contact Phil Klahr at Rand. He also gives out source code to
universities and the like for research.
Lisa Sokol (sokol@mitre)
[ ROSS was written up in Proc. IJCAI-81 too if I remember -- drb ]
-------
From jisdale%omnilax.arpa@CSNET-RELAY Fri Oct 11 00:22:46 1985
I saw your note in AILIST-DIGEST and it struck a responsive note. I
just finished a UCLA Extension class on formal semantics that required
a term paper. For that paper I chose to attempt some formalization of
"Little Smalltalk", a stripped down Smalltalk-80 that is written in C
and does not require (or support) fancy graphics, etc. It is available
from Univ. of Arizona for a modest fee.
The paper did not really do any formal specification. Since it was
limited to 10 pages, I spent most of it giving an intro to OOL & some
of the difficulties in formalizing the syntax and semantics. The main
point on formalization I found was the ability of Smalltalk to be
self-defined. The book "Smalltalk-80, The Language and Its
Implementation" does provide a formal specification of the semantics in
Smalltalk-80 in Part Four. This was an interesting example of the
power of Smalltalk, since very few languages can be self-defining.
However, the definition is much longer than the self definition of LISP.
I did think there is potential for defining Smalltalk in VDL or other
language, but given the time I had (and the level of the class) I did
not invest much time on this.
I am interested in any responses you get about such formalizations.
Jerry Isdale
CSNET (X.25 site): jisdale@omnilax
from phonenet: jisdale%omnilax@CSNET-RELAY
(I think thats right but not sure).
US Snail:
Omnibus Computer Graphics,
Studio G, Paramount Pictures
5555 Melrose Ave,
Hollywood, CA. 90038
(213) 468-4694
(Omnibus is a commercial computer animation house with offices in NYC,
Toronto and Hollyweird).
-------
From mct%gandalf.cs.cmu.edu@CSNET-RELAY Sat Oct 12 00:13:48 1985
A Semantics of Multiple Inheritance
Luca Cardelli
in,
Semantics of Data Types,
<some conference in France, June 1984>
SpringerVerlag,
Lecture Notes in CS, #173
has a nice treatment of multiple inheritance.
-- Mark Tucker
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-Nov-85 0033 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #162
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Nov 85 00:33:25 PST
Date: Mon 4 Nov 1985 21:10-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #162
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 5 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 162
Today's Topics:
Games - ACM Computer Chess Championship,
Expert Systems - DARPA Funds KEE,
Opinion - AIList Discussion Style & Definition of AI &
Japanese Fith-Generation Motives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 2 Nov 85 19:16:33-PST
From: Stuart Cracraft <CRACRAFT at ISI-VAXA.ARPA>
Subject: ACM Computer Chess Championship
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
The annual slug-fest of machine against machine in the game of chess has
produced a new champion while in the same process dethroning CRAY BLITZ
which ran on multiple, parallel, CRAY processors. The new champion, by a
perfect 4-0 score against its opponents, is HITECH at Carnegie-Mellon,
searching 175,000 chess positions per second.
Below are reproduced descriptions of the participants including the names of
the computer chess programs, the authors, their affiliation, the type of
hardware used, and the number of nodes the particular program searches per
second. The time control for this is usually about 2 or 3 minutes per move
so you can multiply the nodes per second by 3x60 to get the total nodes
executed by a program in order to find its chess move (on the average).
In recent years, this number has been on the order of 10↑7. There are
various schools of thought which believe that this will have to increase by
several orders of magnitude before an artificial player will defeat the
human champion, unless significant breakthroughs in chess knowledge
representation are achieved.
Also, in recent years, the best computer chess programs have barely passed
the National Master ranking. That is, they have achieved a rating of 2200.
The human champion is normally rated beyond 2700.
The relationship of processor speed to ratings has been determined to be
about 100 points per factor of 2 increase in processor speed, at least in
the range up to a 2000 rating. There is some suspicion that beyond this
level, the relationship is not linear, although this has not yet been
shown by sufficient analysis, either empirical or theoretical.
Stuart Cracraft
(cracraft@isi-vaxa)
-------------
The following information was provided by the author of Phoenix.
PROGRAM AUTHOR AFFILIATION HARDWARE N/S
←←←←←←← ←←←←←← ←←←←←←←←←←← ←←←←←←←← ←←←
Awit Tony Marsland University of Alberta Amdahl 5860 10
Bebe Tony Scherzer SYS-10 Inc., Chicago Custom Chess 20,000
Engine
Chaos Mike Alexander University of Michigan Amdahl 5860 70
Fred Swartz
Jack O'Keefe
Cray Blitz Robert Hyatt University of Southern Cray X-MP 100,000
Albert Gower Mississippi (4 CPUs)
Harry Nelson
Hitech Carl Ebeling Carnegie-Melon Special pur- 175,000
Hans Berliner pose hardware
Gordon Goetsch
Andy Palay
Murray Campbell
Larry Slomer
Intelligent Mark Taylor Intelligent Software Apple IIE 500
Software David Levy
Kevin O'Connell
Lachex Burton Wendroff Los Alamos Laboratory Cray X-MP 50,000
Ostrich Monty Newborn McGill University 8 Data General 1,200
computers
Phoenix Jonathan Schaeffer University of Alberta 4 VAX 11/780s 2,000
6 SUN workstations
Spoc Jacques Middlecoff SDI/Cypress Software IBM PC 300
------------------------------
Date: Mon 4 Nov 85 09:25:01-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: DARPA Funds KEE
From Expert Systems, Vol 2., No. 3, July 1985, p. 166:
IntelliCorp has recently been awarded a DARPA contract to develop
a prototype expert system development tool. The tool will be used
by the Department of Defense, related government agencies, and
contractors working on DARPA-funded projects. The contract is
worth $1 million to IntelliCorp and will take two years to complete.
The new system will be based on a refined version of KEE, incorporating
new knowledge representation techniques. IntelliCorp sees limitations
in current ways of representing knowledge as being the limiting factor
in developing more powerful expert systems. New techniques will allow
the full diversity of an expert's knowledge to be used.
IntelliCorp will retain exclusive ownership of the KEE system around
which the new tool will be built. The compiled version of KEE will be
sublicenced to the Department of Defense, related agencies, and DARPA-
funded contractors. Ownership of the remainder of the new system will
be shared by IntelliCorp and DARPA, with the company retaining
exclusive rights to its further release and commercialisation.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 31 Oct 85 19:07:57-PST
From: Gary Martins <GARY@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Subject: Contributions of "AI" ?
A recent issue of AIList [#156] carries a highly emotional message from
Mr. Chris Welty in defense of "AI". The message is entitled "Contributions
of AI". Wouldn't you expect such a message to refer to some real
contributions of "AI" ? Instead, it contains:
* idle speculations about the relationship between my wife and
Prof. Minsky
* complaints about his morning mail
* educational advice
* finally, the usual vague, abstract "AI" blah about all kinds
of contributions "AI" has made to the world; Mr. Welty says
the list is too long to provide in full -- and so he
provides no specific information of any kind
I cannot pretend to help Mr. Welty with all of these problems. I
think he should adopt a "wait and see" posture on the first point.
Perhaps a scrolling terminal will help with #2. Advice duly noted.
As for the same old "AI" gobbledegook: CAN'T YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC ?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 85 14:26:53 pst
From: ames!eugene@RIACS.ARPA
Subject: Re: Minsky's definition of AI (really definition of I)
Interesting posting.
I'm not doing AI work, but I have something to share.
Two weeks ago on the plane down to JPL/Caltech, I read a very interesting
definition of "Intelligence" in the airline's magazine (PSA).
Intelligence is the ability to simultaneously hold two contradictory
thoughts in one's head. I am working on parallelism, and I sort of like
that definition.
>From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!aurora!eugene
emiya@ames-vmsb
------------------------------
Date: Thu 31 Oct 85 15:21:39-EST
From: Steven M. Kearns <KEARNS@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: The Japanese are Coming!
THE JAPANESE ARE CONTROLLING THE WORLD - FUN, FICTION, OR FACT?
Here is proof that fiction is actually stranger than truth: the
first "correct" exposition of the true goals of the Japanese Fifth Generation
program. Actually, this is a fun look at some of the Fifth Generation Hype
that might leave you wondering "what if it is true???"
(Q1) QUESTION: Why the "open architecture" of the Japanese
Fifth Generation effort? Why tell the world exactly what the goals are,
the money to be spent, and the principal goals to be pursued?
(A1) The Japanese have stated in their Fifth Generation propoganda
material that the security of Japan in the future depends on transforming the
structure of today's economy. Nowadays it is resource based; Japan would
like it to be information based. The reasons for this are clear. Japan
imports something like > 90% of their fuel and food. In a war, their enemies
could stop these shipments, while Japan could only threaten to cut off next
years shipment of remote control VCRs. In addition, Japan has a severe space
shortage. Material resources take up critical space, while information does
not.
If Japan had the power to transform the world economy by
themselves, they would. But the truth is, they do not have the resources to
do it by themselves. To do so requires mobilizing the world - and in high
tech the "world" means the United States. So the Japanese were very clever.
By committing a small amount of money (< 1 billion over 10 years, I believe)
and publicizing it as much as possible, they managed to steer the lumbering
giant of the United States, and the rest of the world, in the direction that
they wanted. In effect, the Japanese are investing a little money, and in
return they get to mobilize ALOT of money in a way that benefits them the
most. And none of the money that they invest is wasted either: if the
Japanese Fifth Generation program does provide a significant advance, they get
to finally shake the unfair label of "imitators, not creators". If no major
advance results, they are at least ready to exploit the successes of the
rest of the world.
Let's look at some facts that support this theory. As already
mentioned, the Japanese committment is less than 1 billion over 10 years.
In contrast, IBM's R&D budget is something like one and a half billion
EVERY YEAR. And though I do not know the specific data, I would suspect that
the defense department's Fifth Generation budget is of similar order of
magnitude (after all, the defense budget is now 300 Billion).
Finally, there are the contributions from other countries of
the world such as Britain and France, which have now mounted efforts
comparable to Japan's.
Thus, all of the gloom and doomers warning about the
onslaught of the Japanese are actually aiding the Japanese' cause.
-steve kearns
(kearns@cs.columbia.edu)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Nov-85 1404 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #163
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Nov 85 14:03:54 PST
Date: Wed 6 Nov 1985 10:37-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #163
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 6 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 163
Today's Topics:
Seminars - CommonLoops (SU) &
The Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover (UTexas SIGART) &
IEEE Seminar on AI (SMU) &
Mental Representations (UCB) &
AI in Design and Manufacture (UPenn) &
Predicting the Effects of a Therapy (MIT) &
Tools for Building Expert Systems (Rutgers) &
Very High-Level Programming Environment (CSLI),
Conference - ACL 1986 Annual Meeting
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 1 Nov 85 16:42:00-PST
From: Susan M. Gere
Reply-to: m.susan@sierra
Subject: Seminar - CommonLoops (SU)
EE380--Seminar on Computer Systems
Title: CommonLoops--A Graceful Merger of Lisp
and Object Oriented Programming
Speaker: Daniel G. Bobrow
From: Xerox PARC
Time: Wednesday, November 6 at 4:15 p.m.
Place: Terman Auditorium
CommonLoops merges the facilities of object oriented programming and
Lisp. This talk will briefly describe the relevant features of the two
styles of programming, and describe the unique properties of this merge.
These include a uniform syntax for function calling and sending
messages; a merger of the type space of Lisp and the class hierarchy of
objects; a generalization of method specification that includes ordinary
Lisp functions at one extreme, and fully type specified functions at the
other; and a "metaclass" mechanism that allows tradeoffs between early
binding and ease of exploratory programming in the implementation of
objects.
Short Biography:
Daniel Bobrow is a Research Fellow in the Intelligent Systems Laboratory
at Xerox PARC. His research interests include programming languages,
expert systems, artificial intelligence, and cooperative computing. He
received his PhD from MIT, started the Artificial Intelligence
Department at Bolt Beranek and Newman, and since at Xerox has helped to
develop a number of systems, including KRL, GUS, PIE, LOOPS, COLAB, and
CommonLoops.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Nov 85 15:21:35-CST
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - The Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover (UTexas SIGART)
SIGART, the Special Interest Group on ARTificial Intelligence, has its
monthly program meeting WEDNESDAY, 6 Nov, at JIMS restaurant at I-35 and
183 (Anderson).
We meet for drinks at 6:30 and dinner to start at 7:00. Charge is $2 for
members and $5 for non members (plus food and drinks).
The speaker will be Dr J S Moore, speaking on:
Applications of the Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover to
the Verification of Computer Hardware and Software
J Strother Moore
The Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover is computer program that
proves theorems about recursive functions. The primary
application of the program is to prove formulas that
establish the correctness, reliability, or security of
computer hardware and software.
The proof techniques used by the system include rule driven
simplification, generalization of the conjecture to be
proved, and mathematical induction. Each time a formula is
proved the theorem-prover builds it into an evolving
knowledge base which is used to structure subsequent proofs.
Thus, the human user of the system can improve the system's
performance by having it prove key lemmas first. As the
theorems get harder the user's role in the process more and
more resembles that of the mathematician who sketches proofs
before an assistant who fills in the often large gaps.
In this talk I will informally explain how the system works
and how it is used. I will also discuss some applications
of the system, including its use in finding security flaws
in the formal specifications of computer software, its proof
of the invertibility of the RSA public key encryption
algorithm, and the correctness proofs for a general purpose
microcoded CPU.
------------------------------
Date: 31 Oct 1985 09:12-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: IEEE Seminar on AI (SMU)
The following is the program for the
Special Event of the Dallas IEEE Computer Society and Dallas Section of
the ACM
Artificial Intelligence Satellite Symposium
Knowledge-Based Systems and Their Applications
presented by Texas Instruments Incorporated
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 1985 8:30 am - 4:00 pm
Place: Infomart, 1950 Stemmons Freeway Room 7011
Agenda:
Welcome and Opening Remarks 8:30 - 8:45 am
o Edward E. Feigenbaum Stanford 8:45 - 9:45
AI: An Overview. Knoweldge Engineering & Expert Systems
o RAndall Davis MIT 10:00 - 11:00 am
Problem Solutions with Expert Systems:
Approach, Tools Available, How to Begin
o Bruce G. Buchanan Stanford 11:00 - 12:00 pm
Knowledge Based Systems:
Problem Selection, Knowledge Acquisition, Validation
o Mark Fox CMU 1:00 - 2:00 pm
Knowledge-Based Systems: Applications in the Induatrial Environment
o Harry Tennant, Host TI Inc. 2:00 - 3:00 pm
Applications Abstracts by Representatives from AErospace,.
Manufacturing, Military, Industrial Control Engineering, and Education
o Harry Tennant, Moderator 3:00 - 4:00 pm
Presenter's Roundtable - Live
Closing Remarks 4:00
[TI is also sponsoring a satellite presentation at Stanford. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 85 12:05:18 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Mental Representations (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, November 5, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``On the Intentional Contents of Mental States About Fictions''
Edward Zalta
Postdoctoral Fellow in Philosophy at C.S.L.I.
Acting Asst. Professor of Philosophy, Stanford University
In this seminar, I present a theory of intentional objects
some of which seem to serve nicely as the contents of mental
states about stories and dreams (no matter how bizarre they may
be). The theory yields a way of understanding utterances about
particular fictional characters and particular dream objects.
For the purposes of the talk, it will make no difference
whether one construes the theory ontologically as a theory
about what the world has to be like or has to have in it in
order for us to characterize properly such mental states, or
whether one construes the theory as just a canonical notation
for specifying the contents of (or mental representations
involved in) such states. Either way, one is left with a
domain over which operations may be defined to explain how we
get from one state to the next, and so the theory should be of
interest to cognitive scientists. The philosophical basis of
my work lies in a theoretical compromise between the views of
Edmund Husserl and Alexius Meinong, and it is consistent with
classical logic.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 85 15:24 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - AI in Design and Manufacture (UPenn)
Professor Robin Popplestone
Department of AI at Edinburgh University
will give a lecture on
Applying AI Techniques to Design and Manufacturing
Today: Monday, November 4 at NOON in Towne Building, Room 303
I discuss the representation of mechanical engineering designs in a logic
programming context, and the exploration of a space of different possible
designs. Designs are represented in terms of modules, which are basic
concrete engineering entities (eg. motor, keyway, shaft). Modules interact
via ports, and have an internal structure expressed by the part predicate. A
taxonomic organisation of modules is used as the basis for making design
decisions. Subsystems employed by the design system include the spatial
relational inference mechanism employed in the RAPT robot Language, the Noname
geometric modeller developed at Leeds Univeristy and the Press symbolic
equation solver. The system is being implemented in the POPLOG system. An
assumption based truth maintenance system based on the work of de Kleer is
being implemented to support the exploration of design space.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 85 16:49 EST
From: Brian C. Williams <WILLIAMS@OZ>
Subject: Seminar - Predicting the Effects of a Therapy (MIT)
Thursday 7, November 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"Predicting the Effects of a Therapy in a Physiological Network"
Bill Long
Clinical Decision Making Group, LCS
If the physician gives Inderol to the patient to decrease angina, what
will happen to the blood pressure? Or more generally, is there anything
the physician should watch out for when giving drug X to this patient?
An important aspect of the Heart Failure Program is helping the user
answer such questions. The program assists in diagnosis by using the
patient information to constrain a physiological model to represent the
state of knowledge about the patient. That model can then be used to
find likely therapies to correct dangerous states and to reason about
the possible effects of those therapies.
The problems with predicting the effects of the therapies include
accounting for multiple causal pathways, accounting for the effects of
feedback, reasoning about pathways that take widely differing amounts of
time, reasoning when there is uncertainty about the patient state, and
reasoning even though there is interpatient variation. In attempting to
deal with these problems, we have developed an algorithm based on
techniques of signal flow analysis that handles some of these problems
well and others acceptably and has the right properties to provide
understandable justifications for the conclusions it reaches.
The talk will focus on the criteria that are being used in developing
this methodology, the algorithm itself, the effectiveness of the
approach, and the remaining problems.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Nov 85 17:02:55 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - Tools for Building Expert Systems (Rutgers)
III Seminar
Title: Issues in the Selection of Knowledge Engineering Environments
and Tools for Building Large Expert Systems
Speaker: Susan Man
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 1985, 11:00am - 12:00pm
Place: Hill Center, room 423
Susan Man, a Ph.D. student in our department, will present
results of a study on knowledge representation and programming
paradigms (done in conjunction with an independent study under Chris
Tong). This is her abstract:
One of the first decisions that must be made by designers of
expert systems is the choice of the knowledge engineering
environment and tool to be used for the development of the
system. In this talk, we attempt to identify some features
of programming environments and knowledge engineering tools
that are important in building large expert systems. We
first look at features in programming environments on Lisp
machines such as the Symbolics 3600's and the Xerox 1100's.
We then compare three knowledge engineering tools that are
suitable for the development of large-scaled expert systems.
The knowledge engineering tools studied are (1) Zetalisp,
(2) KEE (from Intellicorp), and (3) S.1 (from Teknowledge).
In discussing and comparing the features offered by these
knowledge engineering environments and tools, we are
particularly interested in their abilities to accommodate
various programming methodologies and to provide useful
support utilities. Programming methodology, which
encompasses the issues of knowledge representation and
programming paradigm, impact directly on the ability of the
knowledge engineering tool to model precisely and
efficiently complex domain tasks and problem solving
behaviors. Support utilities offer facilities such as
editing, debugging, and explanation and are important
factors in reducing the time and effort required in building
a large expert system.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Nov 85 14:37:04-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Very High-Level Programming Environment (CSLI)
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
COMING ENVIRONMENTS MEETING (11/11) - Steve Westfold (Kestrel)
A Very-High-Level-Language Programming Environment
Kestrel Institute is doing research on a programming system based on a
very-high-level specification/programming language. The language is
based on logic and set theory. It is a wide-spectrum language
encompassing both an inference model of computation and a state-change
model. Compilation is done by transformation and step-wise refinement
into the target language (initially Lisp). A central part of the system
is the ability to define new language constructs and domain languages,
and facilities for manipulating and transforming them. Most of the
system is written in the system language.
The underlying structure of the environment is a database of objects,
sets, sequences and mappings. There is an object hierarchy which is
used primarily for factoring applicability of mappings. Language
statements (parse structures and annotations) are represented in the
database. We identify the representation of statements with the
meta-level description of those statements. Thus, meta-level inference
on descriptions results in statement manipulation such as
transformation. Usually the programmer need not be aware of the
representation because of a quotation construct that is analogous to
lisp backquote, but is more powerful and can be used for testing and
decomposing statements as well as constructing them. Among the ways
that the user may view portions of the database are as prettyprinted
language statements, as objects with properties, and as graphs of boxes
and arrows. The database may be edited using any of these views.
The system enforces constraints stated as implications (universally
quantified) with an indication of the triggers for enforcement and of
the entities to change to make the constraint true.
We have a context tree mechanism for keeping different states of the
database. It is somewhat smart in that it does not save undo
information for database changes that are "internal" to the current
state. It would have wider application if it were able to work on
subsets of the database rather than the database as a whole.
We have recently built a prototype for a project management system. It
deals with system components and their versions and bugs, and tasks and
schedules. This work is at a fairly early stage and not my area so I
wouldn't want to talk much about the details of it, although someone
else at Kestrel might. However, it does provide good examples of the
utility of the language-defining and constraint capabilities in a domain
other than program synthesis.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 85 16:47:40 est
From: walker@mouton (Don Walker)
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS; ACL 1986 Annual Meeting
CALL FOR PAPERS
24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics
10-13 June 1986, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
SCOPE: Papers are invited on all aspects of computational linguistics,
including, but not limited to, pragmatics, discourse, semantics, and
syntax; understanding and generating spoken and written language;
linguistic, mathematical, and psychological models of language;
phonetics and phonology; speech analysis, synthesis, and recognition;
translation and translation aids; natural language interfaces; and
theoretical and applications papers of every kind.
REQUIREMENTS: Papers should describe unique work that has not
been submitted elsewhere; they should emphasize completed work rather
than intended work; and they should indicate clearly the state of
completion of the reported results. Authors should send eight copies
of an extended abstract up to eight pages long (single-spaced if
desired) to:
Alan W. Biermann
ACL86 Program Chair
Department of Computer Science
Duke University
Durham, NC 27706, USA
[919:684-3048; awb%duke@csnet-relay]
SCHEDULE: Papers are due by 6 January 1986 . Authors will be
notified of acceptance by 25 February. Camera-ready copies of final
papers prepared on model paper must be received by 18 April along with
a signed copyright release statement.
OTHER ACTIVITIES: The meeting will include a program of tutorials and
a variety of exhibits and demonstrations. Anyone wishing to arrange an
exhibit or present a demonstration should send a brief description to
Alan Biermann along with a specification of physical requirements:
space, power, telephone connections, tables, etc.
CONFERENCE INFORMATION: Local arrangements are being handled by Kathy
McKeown and Cecile Paris, Department of Computer Science, Columbia
University, New York, NY 10027; 212:280-8194 and 8125; mckeown and
cecile @columbia-20.arpa. For other information on the conference and
on the ACL more generally, contact Don Walker (ACL), Bell Communications
Research, 445 South Street, MRE 2A379, Morristown, NJ 07960;
201:829-4312; walker@mouton.arpa or walker%mouton@csnet-relay or
bellcore!walker@berkeley.
Program Committee: Alan W. Biermann, Duke University
Kenneth W. Church, AT&T Bell Laboratories
Michael Dyer, University of California at Los Angeles
Carole D. Hafner, Northeastern University
George E. Heidorn, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
David D. McDonald, University of Massachusetts
Fernando C.N. Pereira, SRI International
Candace L. Sidner, BBN Laboratories
John S. White, Siemens Communication Systems
LSA SUMMER LINGUISTIC INSTITUTE: ACL-86 is scheduled just before the
53rd LSA Institute, which will be held at the Graduate School and
University Center of the City University of New York from 23 June to 31
July. The 1986 Institute is the first to focus on computational
linguistics. During the intervening week, a number of special courses
will be held that should be of particular interest to computational
linguists. For further information contact D. Terence Langendoen, CUNY
Graduate Center, 33 W. 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036; 212:921-9061;
tergc%cunyvm@wiscvm.arpa.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Nov-85 2258 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #164
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Nov 85 22:57:50 PST
Date: Wed 6 Nov 1985 21:09-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #164
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 7 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 164
Today's Topics:
Queries - IQ Test for AI & RSA Encryption & IEEE Software Special Issue,
Correction - TI Satellite Seminar,
Expert Systems - Statistics and Diagnosis,
Logic - Abductive Inference,
Poetry - Colourless Green Ideas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Nov 85 09:37:20-PST
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: IQ test for AI.
I don't remember anyone suggesting to test AI programs with the
traditional human IQ test.
Is there any validity to this idea ?
I understand that it would be very hard for a computer program to
reason about the shape and graphics questions (given as is, i.e.
just given the actual picture of the question). I also understand
the IQ test are somewhat controversial, but they nevertheless
provide a metric for a lot of human reasoning abilities which
certainly require multiple facets of intelligence.
Has any one tried to write such a computer program ?
Rene Bach (Bach@score)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 85 20:22:21 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: RSA encryption
Date: Tue 5 Nov 85 15:21:35-CST
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
... I will also discuss some applications
of the system, including its use in finding security flaws
in the formal specifications of computer software, its proof
of the invertibility of the RSA public key encryption
algorithm ...
Has RSA been broken? I thought it was NP complete. Can you
give a reference?
...Keith
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 5 November 1985 22:12:21 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cive.ri.cmu.edu
Subject: Abstracts for IEEE Software Special Issue
All summaries that have been submitted to the IEEE Software Special Issue on
KBES for Engineering (March 1986) that have exceeded the 3 page
(double-spaced) limit have been edited to comply with the guidelines. If
this is not acceptable, please send me mail.
Sriram
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Nov 85 18:30:51-EST
From: "Randall Davis" <DAVIS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Correction - TI Satellite Seminar
Concerning the recent item in AI List which said in part:
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: IEEE Seminar on AI (SMU)
The following is the program for the
Special Event of the Dallas IEEE Computer Society and Dallas Section of
the ACM
Artificial Intelligence Satellite Symposium
Knowledge-Based Systems and Their Applications
presented by Texas Instruments Incorporated
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 1985 8:30 am - 4:00 pm
Place: Infomart, 1950 Stemmons Freeway Room 7011
TI has advertised this event widely, but there has still been some confusion
about it. It is an educational program conceived of and created by TI, and is
being broadcast via satellite to 23 different pre-selected sites around the
country; tickets are necessary only to assure seating; admission is free.
It is also, by design, available to anyone who has the equipment to pick up
the satellite signal (TI is offering technical information on satellite
reception at 214-995-4076). Current estimates are that perhaps 400 additional
sites around the country will be doing so.
From the IEEE/ACM notice above it appears that they have organized themselves
around this event, as numerous other organizations have. Please note, though,
that the broadcast is available nationwide to anyone interested.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 85 22:18:15 est
From: Dana S. Nau <dsn@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Statistics and Diagnosis
>From: Stuart Crawford <GA.SLC@Forsythe>
>
> I am interested in obtaining pointers to recent references regarding
> the known pros and cons of using pure statistical approaches to
> medical diagnosis (such as the use of classification and regression
The following articles are relevant to your request. I think one or
both of them may have appeared somewhere by now; my "refer" file is
out of date. For more information, write to
Dr. James Reggia
Computer Science Department
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
%A C. Ramsey
%A J. A. Reggia
%A D. S. Nau
%A A. Ferrentino
%T A Comparative Analysis of Methods for Expert Systems
%R submitted for publication
%A J. A. Reggia
%A B. T. Perricone
%T Answer Justification in Medical Decision Support Systems Based
on Bayesian Classification
%R Submitted for publication
%D 1983
%C College Park, MD
%I University of Maryland
Dana S. Nau (dsn@rochester)
from U. of Maryland, on sabbatical at U. of Rochester
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Nov 85 04:48:39-EST
From: "Sidney Markowitz" <SIDNEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: abductive inference
The following is in reply to the question about abduction, in the
sense of abductive inference, and its relation to AI. This is a
portion of a message extracted from the old philosophy-of-science
mailing list [and reprinted by permission of the author -- KIL]. It is
a bit long, as it contains both definitional material and opinions as
to its relevance to AI. I have deleted much extraneous material:
Date: 26 Jan 1983 0128-PST
From: ISAACSON at USC-ISI
[ ... ]
I can't speak for the Intuitionist position. I do prefer the
second inference-chain you propose, though. It is a *weaker*
inference, but, it is potentially generative. It is close to a
form of inference which is sometimes called "abduction", favored
by Charles Sanders Peirce. This sort of inference is held to
underlie hypothesis-formation. Abductive inference can be stated
as follows:
The surprising fact, C, is observed;
But if A were true, C would be a matter of course;
Hence, there is reason to SUSPECT that A is true.
The *tentative* (or hypothetical) nature of the conclusions in the two
latter cases above is what makes these inferences potentially
GENERATIVE, in the sense of knowledge-generation; whereas the
deductive template inherent in [ an example of deduction ] makes it a
barren exercise in classical Aristotelian logic, with no generative
power beyond the (pre-programmed, as it were) syllogitic-chain itself.
[ ... ]
I want to use that fairly long introduction to move into a comparison
between traditional deductive inference [ ... ] and other types of
inferences I consider to be knowledge-generators, or "epistemogenic
inferential processes."
[ ... discussion of deductive inference ... ]
For example,
All birds are five-legged mammals;
Fred is a bird;
Then Fred is a five-legged mammal.
Or,
All Blacks are white;
Fred is a Black;
Then Fred is white.
All of the stuff you see above is entirely Kosher, viewed from
within deductive logic proper, and I have no quarrel with that.
BUT WHY TAKE EXTRA PRIDE IN PROMOTING THIS KIND OF BARREN
SYLLOGISTIC ACTIVITY WITHIN AI IS BEYOND ME!
What we sorely need are inferential processes that are capable of
generating new knowledge [through computational means!]. We need
to develop a broad class of "Epistemogenic Processes". I think
it includes a family of inferences that can generate explanatory
hypotheses, and therefore, underlie theory-formation.
Peirce, the so-called "Father of Pragmatism" (he actually called
his creation "Pragmaticism"), devoted much of his massive
life-work to elaborating a type of inference he called
"abduction". In his view, when contrasted with "induction" and
"deduction", it is the only truly creative mode of inference. It
is THE epistemogenic agent. The sort that yields new explanatory
hypotheses in scientific inquiry. As a corollary he developed a
theory of the "Economy of Research", an obscure and understudied,
yet incredibly rich, research methodology.
I do agree with Minsky that we ought to be courageous and
resourceful enough to be willing to break new ground, without too
many hangups about "old stuff". Yet, I think that we have an
incredibly fertile resouce in Peirce, and we owe it to our
enterprise to COHERE what we are trying to do with what he has
already accomplished.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 30 Oct 85 23:02:50-PST
From: Paul Roberts <ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Colourless Green Ideas
[Excerpted from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
For the Literary competition set on Christmas Eve you were asked to compose
not more than 100 words of prose, or 14 lines of verse, in which a sentence
described as grammatically acceptable but without meaning did, in the event,
become meaningful. The sentence, devised by Noam Chomsky, was:
colourless green ideas sleep furiously.
[...] Competitors rose to this challenge good-humouredly and in force....
It can only be the thought of verdure to come, which prompts us in the autumn
to buy these dormant white lumps of vegetable matter covered by a brown
papery skin, and lovingly to plant them and care for them. It is a marvel
to me that under this cover they are labouring unseen at such a rate
within to give us the sudden awesome beauty of spring flowering bulbs.
While winter reigns the earth reposes but these colourless green ideas
sleep furiously.
C. M. Street
Behold the pent-up power of the winter tree;
Leafless it stands, in lifeless slumber.
Yet its very resting is revival and renewal:
Inside the dark gnarled world of trunk and roots,
Cradled in the chemistry of cell and sap,
Colourless green ideas sleep furiously
In deep and dedicated doormancy,
Concentrating, conserving, constructing:
Knowing, by some ancient quantum law
Of chlorophyll and sun
That come the sudden surge of spring,
Dreams become reality, and ideas action.
Bryan O. Wright
Let us think on them, the Twelve Makers
Of myths, trailblazing quakers
Scourging earthshakers
Colourless green ideas sleep furiously
Before their chrysalides open curiously
Anarchy burgeons spuriously
Order raises new seedlings in the world
By word and gun upheld
The scarlet banner is unfurled
The New Country appears
Man loosens his fears
The New Dawn nears
Recollect our first fathers
The good society in momentum gathers.
("recently discovered sonnet by Alexander Blok")
translated by Edward Black
[...]
(and the winner:)
(got 50 lbs.)
Thus Adam's Eden-plot in far-off time:
Colour-rampant fowers, trees a myriad green;
Helped by God-bless'd wind and temp'rate clime.
The path to primate knowledge unforseen,
He sleeps in peace at eve with Eve.
One apple later, he looks curiously
At the gardens of dichromates, in whom
colourless green ideas sleep furiously
then rage for birth each morning, until doom
Brings rainbows they at last perceive.
D. A. H. Byatt
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Nov-85 1224 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #165
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Nov 85 12:23:35 PST
Date: Thu 7 Nov 1985 09:33-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #165
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 7 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 165
Today's Topics:
Queries - Billy Salter's Thesis & Intensional Contents &
Validation of Knowledge Based Systems,
Applications - Reasoning About Shape and Graphics,
Cryptography - RSA Encryption,
AI Tools - Typed Languages and Lisp,
Opinion - AAAI and AI Hype,
Expert Systems - Stock Market Prediction Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 12:01:32 -0100
From: Rolf Pfeifer
Subject: Billy Salter's Thesis
I am looking for Billy Salter's Thesis on Subjective Theories of Economics
(or something like that). He got his PhD from Yale approximately in 83.
If anyone has a copy available or knows of Billy's whereabouts (possibly BBN?)
please let me know (including netmail address).
Thanks.
--Rolf Pfeifer
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 85 13:40:15 GMT
From: Bob Stine <stine@edn-vax.arpa>
Subject: Intensional Contents
'whois zalta' fails, so I'll direct this request to
the net. Can anyone give me pointers to Edward
Zalta's work on the "intentional contents of mental
states about fictions?" In AIList Digest V3 #163,
it was announced that Dr. Zalta would be giving
a lecture in Berkeley on that topic.
Would one use Golden Hill LISP to code assertion's
about Meinong's Golden Mountain?
- Bob Stine
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 16:03
From: at GEC Research <YE15%mrca.co.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Validation of Knowledge Based Systems
I am interested in carrying out some work on the validation of
real-time Knowledge Based Systems and would appreciate some help in
getting started. If anyone has any information they can send me on
this topic, in particular, significant references or current projects
it would be a great help. Thanks. Please send responses to:
Kevin Poulter (YE15%uk.co.mrca@uk.ac.ucl.cs)
GEC Research Ltd
Marconi Research Centre
West Hanningfield Road
Great Baddow
Chelmsford
Essex
CM2 8HN
United Kingdom
------------------------------
From: CONNOLLY CHRISTOPHER IAN <CONNOLLY@ge-crd.arpa>
Subject: reasoning about shape & graphics
Bach@score recently asked if anyone has tried to write a computer
program to reason about shape or graphics, in the context of IQ
tests:
I don't know if this is really what you were thinking of,
but Gelernter did some work on this at IBM back in 1958-1960.
His aim was to use diagrams to aid in proving geometrical theorems.
If I remember correctly, he succeeded in that his program was able
to prove several theorems in geometry. The work is reported in one
of the issues of the IBM research journal in 1960. Gelernter has
since escaped to Biophysics as an occupation (!).
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 10:14:32-CST
From: David Throop <AI.THROOP@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: RE: RSA encryption
> ... I will also discuss (the Boyer Moore theorem prover's)
proof of the invertiblity of the RSA public key encryption
algorithm ...
> Has RSA been broken? I thought it was NP complete. Can you
give a reference?
======================
No, it has not been broken. But it has been proven invertible. That is,
consider an (input) message encrypted with a public key and an (output)
string produced by decrypting the (encrypted) message using a private key.
The Boyer Moore theorem prover has rigorously proven that, given any
possible input, the output will be identical to it.
As Dr Moore said in last night's talk, what you would like to prove is
that no one can solve the encrypted message with only the public key. But
that's not provable, because the problem IS solvable. Its just very hard.
NP hard, in fact. What you would really like to prove are some things
about the properties of NP problems.
You will certainly hear about it if anybody around here proves any such
thing.
------------------------------
Date: 05 Nov 85 2115 PST
From: John Craig <JJC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Typed languages and Lisp
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.
This is part of an ongoing discussion of strong typing.]
Chris Goad (Stanford CS grad) developed a language originally called SIL,
now called RISE which is essentially a typing system added to Lisp, but
with a no-type type so that one can get around typing as one desires. The
main reasons for adding typing are:
1) faster code development (type checker finds bugs)
2) the compiler can use type information to generate more efficient
object code (for example, less or no garbage collection pauses when
running compiled code)
RISE is in use at Silma Inc (Los Altos) and forms the user interface for
their product, RoboCam.
It seems to me like you get the best of lisp and typed worlds, and efficient
code generated also. Its pretty fun, too.
John
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 85 12:20:02 MST
From: shebs@utah-cs.ARPA (Stanley Shebs)
Subject: Re: AI Hype
Just got my announcement of AAAI-86 the other day. Big poster, bright
colors (thankfully not as garish as certain other announcements), lots
of pictures, little information. By contrast, announcements for ACM
conferences stick to the salient details and do it on the standard size
sheet of paper, although they do get radical for the national conference
and put in a little icon... If AAAI can't seem to escape the need for
hype, why should anyone assume there's actually something real in AI?
stan shebs
------------------------------
Date: Sat 2 Nov 85 08:20:07-PST
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Subject: The Ultimate Hype: Mail Order "AI"!
In the interest of keeping the AI Research Community-At-Large informed of
just how out of hand AI Hype is, I offer, for your consideration the
following travesty (if you will) from the latest edition of the JS&A
"Products that THINK #16" yuppy catalog. Both pieces are rather lengthy,
but in order to appreciate the fullness of egregiousness they espouse to our
public about "ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE" (emphasis added here as well as
below), I have included them in toto.
[I have taken the liberty of cutting Geoff's 17K-char message by
about half. -- KIL]
-0- -0- -0- -0- Back Cover:
(full page)
MARKET VICTIM
I used to be a sucker for the stock market. I'd get a tip from a friend,
I'd invest on a hunch or a broker would offer me some advice and off I'd
go. On the average, I never made any money. So I dropped out of the market
until I met Hal and Bill.
Hal was one of the most astute market advisors I have ever met. At first, I
didn't trust Hal. Despite his good credentials and a well-documented
three-year track record, was still suspicious. [...]
It took the incredible accuracy of Hal and Bill to finally get me back into
the market. Hal had selected 14 stocks out of the 1500 on the New York
Stock Exchange that he felt would really take off. A few I had never heard
of. Bill advised me to sell some of my stocks in the nick of time so the
net results were 13 out of 14 winners with a few stocks giving me a return
of greater than 30% in just a four-month period. [...]
Hal and Bill are ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE computer programs--two independent
programs that perform what no other advisor or market expert has been able
to perform in the history of investing. I can now sit at my Visual Computer
(see page 10), insert both Hal and Bill into my disk drive, and be told by
this intelligent program what stocks on the New York Stock Exchange to buy
and when to sell them. [Runs on IBM compatibles with 256K memory.]
Hal gives his advice on the long range--usually his advice is good between a
three to nine month period after he makes his decisions. Once that happens,
I then follow Bill very closely because he tells me when to close that
position. If I want to know when to sell, I let Bill tell me by first
downloading the last 36 days of stock market activity from the Dow Jones
News Retrieval service with the help of my telephone modem. The program
does this automatically--all I do is press a few buttons. Then Bill takes
that information and advises me. Between both programs the accuracy will
amaze you. But that's not all. [...]
The entire program is called Halographix. [...]
The program features all the tools you need to analyze evaluate and record
your transactions. It has automatic log-on features that access the Dow
Jones News Retrieval service and download information on any stock you've
selected for your portfolio.
Each disk is valid for only four months. You pay only $199 for the program
(that's roughly $25 for each of the two independent programs per month), and
purchasing the disk entitles you to renew the disk every four months
thereafter for the same $199 per disk. Obviously, if the program doesn't
make you plenty of money, you don't renew. But for the few who have
participated, practically all of them have enthusiastically remained with
us.
Our guarantee of satisfaction is very compelling. If, after the four
months, you are not satisfied with the program or have not seen it pay for
itself many times over, please return it and get a full refund of your $199
investment. You can't lose.
To order, simply send your check, money order or credit card number to me
personally, Joseph Sugarman, President, JS&A Group, Inc., One JS&A Plaza,
Northbrook, Illinois 60062. If for some reason, we sell out our
subscription for this issue, I will promptly refund your money and keep you
on our list for our next release. But I urge you to act quickly.
I also urge you to read the article on page 20 entitled "Million Dollar
Phone." In that article, I give you an idea of the nature of ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE and the philosophy of how the program works to accurately
predict market movement.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, the tremendous number-crunching power of your own
personal computer and the skills of a computer programmer have produced a
personal friend for the small investor. You can now compete with the big
institutions on Wall Street with advice more accurate, personal and more
astute than their huge network of advisors and computers. Join with me in
this novel program and enjoy the wealth of information Halographix provides
to guide you to success in your investment activity with the New York Stock
Exchange stocks.
Halographix (6082N 6.00)..........$199
-0- -0- -0- -0- Page 20/21:
MILLION DOLLAR TELEPHONES
What you are about to read may sound like a get-rich-quick scheme. And
indeed it may be. [...]
For the past year, I have been working with a computer genius who has
developed a program that, when run on a powerful computer, can predict the
movement of the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
In our first year of testing this program, our computer generated ten
signals. Nine were accurate with the Dow making the forecasted moves within
twelve trading days.
To my knowledge, there has not been an advisor, a market expert or another
computer program that has been as accurate.
Two years ago a new form of option trading was introduced to investors.
Called OEX options, the concept gave investors a way to speculate on the
movement of the Standard and Poor's market index. This market index is very
easy to follow because it runs almost parallel to the Dow Jones Industrial
Average.
If you were right on the movement of the overall market, you could possibly
double or triple your investment within a few short weeks. If you were
wrong, all you could lost was your initial investment and no more.
Another popular feature of the option program is the tax treatment. 60% of
all your gains are treated as capital gains and 40% as ordinary income or
about a 32% effective tax rate. [...]
I have formed a club called, "Dial-An-Option," which will offer information
on the Dow Jones Industrial Average. First you sign up with JS&A as a
member, which costs you only $25. Then, at no extra charge, we provide you
with information on one major market signal. Next, sit back, relax and
watch what happens to the Dow over the next two weeks following the signal.
[....]
Our advice will be sent via an overnight delivery service so you'll get the
first market signal well enough in advance to act quickly. The signal must
make money for you and double or triple your investment or you can drop out
of our Dial-An-Option club and we'll refund your entire membership fee. Or
don't take the chance and just follow the market and see what you would have
made had you invested on our advice. [...]
Why does our computer program work so effectively? What does it do to
predict the Dow so accurately? If you'll take just a moment, I will
explain.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
The big buzzword in software today is, "ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE," or a
special level of reasoning applied to a computer program. The reasoning
involves looking at hundreds of factors at once and then comparing those
factors to previously programmed responses and then drawing a conclusion.
Our brains operate on a similar basis. We are programmed with patterns
based on previous experiences or programming. When we have to make a
decision based on new data, we lay that new data onto previous data and then
draw our conclusions.
With the number-crunching capabilities of a powerful computer and an
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE software program, our computer can sense market
movement, movement within an industry group and even movement (accumulation
or distribution) within a specific stock.
If then computes the major 30-day trend, and interprets the fluctuations in
trading and valuation levels to determine the one-to-five day pattern within
the major trend. [...]
Our computer has the ability to first sense the changes and trends in the
market before they become obvious and then, with the minimal amount of
information, develop a comparable pattern and make a conclusion--an ideal
system for predicting the movement of the Dow Jones averages. [...]
No program or system can guarantee future profit or success. If we are not
correct on any of our calls (remember, so far we've been right on nine out
of ten calls), then you'll receive a refund of the fee--something that no
other advisory service that we know of provides. Obviously we can't
guarantee any loss that may result from our advice but we urge you never to
invest more than you're willing to lose. [...]
Thanks to a powerful computer, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, and a brilliant
program, we can no do this analytical work on a computer with greater
accuracy than even the most astute analyst or the most powerful institution.
I urge you to join our club and experience the power of our computer and its
new program designed to earn you bigger returns than you've ever dreamt
possible--and all in a very short period of time.
We've given the small investor the tool to compete with the big institutions
and enjoy the potential profits offered every day in the market place. Join
our club, today.
Dial-An-Option Membership (6078N)..........$25
OEX Options Video Tape (6079N 2.00).........39
OEX Options Audio Tape (6080N 2.00).........14
Video and Audio Tape (6081N 2.00)...........49
Note: Free OEX booklet sent to each club member or
tape purchaser.
(Dian-An-Option is a registered trademark of JS&A Group.)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂08-Nov-85 1709 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #166
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Nov 85 17:08:57 PST
Date: Fri 8 Nov 1985 09:36-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #166
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 8 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 166
Today's Topics:
Queries - Xerox 1186 Comments,
Logic & Probability - Abductive Inference,
Linguistics - New Reports (CSLI),
Literature - AI at Past Conferences,
Opinion - AI Hype,
Humor - New Mailing List for AI Hype
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 09:42:55-PST
From: Ted Markowitz <G.TJM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Comments on the Xerox 1186...
With the idea of setting up an in-house AI lab for informal testing
of expert systems, teaching, etc., I've been looking at some of the
specialized AI hardware available. I've read the discussions so
far on the various machines available, but would like some more
opinions on the new Xerox 1186 class processor. Needless to say
price is something of a factor in my choice and this machine seems
the cheapest with most of the functionality that I seek. Any thoughts?
Pros and cons?
Please post answers to the list for redistribution. Thanks muchly.
--ted
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 16:01 EST
From: Mukhop <mukhop%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Abductive Inference
> From: "Sidney Markowitz" <SIDNEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
>> Date: 26 Jan 1983 0128-PST
>> From: ISAACSON at USC-ISI
>> Abductive inference can be stated as follows:
>> The surprising fact, C, is observed;
>> But if A were true, C would be a matter of course;
>> Hence, there is reason to SUSPECT that A is true.
Assume the following:
Of the subjects with mono(nucleosis), 100% show a positive result for
the mono test. Of the subjects without mono, only 1% show a positive
result. Given that the test result for a subject (of unknown condition)
is positive, what is the likelihood of the subject having mono.
Of the total population, one out of every 10000 people is assumed to have
mono.
"The surprising fact, C, is observed;"
C is the fact that the subject tested positive. The fact is
surprising because the probability is just over 1%.
"But if A were true, C would be a matter of course;"
A is the premise that the subject has mono (A => C).
"Hence, there is reason to SUSPECT that A is true."
Therefore, there is reason to suspect that the subject has mono.
The result appears to be reasonable. However, the probability of
~A given C is .991, indicating:
If the result of the test is positive, then the subject probably
does not have mono.
More appropriately:
Despite the fact that the test is positive, the subject probably
does not have mono.
I realize that the point made by Isaacson is the generative nature
of abductive inference (used to generate plausible hypotheses for testing).
This counter-example is in the same vein as some recent contributions
to this list regarding modus ponens and the presidential triangle.
Uttam Mukhopadhyay
Comp. Sci. Dept.
GM Research Labs
Warren, MI 48090-9055
Phone: (313)575-2105
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 16:41:45-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New Linguistics Reports (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
NEW CSLI REPORTS
Report No. CSLI-85-37, ``On the Coherence and Structure of
Discourse'' by Jerry R. Hobbs, and Report No. CSLI-85-38, ``The
Coherence of Incoherent Discourse'' by Jerry R. Hobbs and Michael
Agar, have just been published. These reports may be obtained by
writing to David Brown, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or
Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Nov 1985 18:46-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: AI at Past Conferences
Eighth International Conference on Software Engineering
Augst 28-30 1985 Imperial College, London
On executable models for rule-based prototyping S. Lee USA
Session 8A Knowledge Based Apporoaches
Automating tuning of multi-task program for real time embeded system
T. Shimizu K. Sakamura
Prompter: A Knowledge based support tool for code understanding
K. Fukunaga, Japan
The Analyst - A Workstation for Design and Analysis
M. Stephens, K. Whitehead
Session 9 Discussion
Software engineering- The role of logic and AI in the software
enterprise
------------------------------
Date: 08 Nov 85 17:24:32 +1100 (Fri)
From: munnari!mungunni.oz!lee@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Re: Mail Order "AI"!
This reminds me of an episode of Minder (BBC TV series), in which
Arthur (a con man) set up a racing tips business, on an "only pay
if you win" basis. They tipped all horses in each race, so some
of the clients won and paid up. A guaranteed income! I wonder if
the "AI" program for predicting the stock market uses this
heuristic.
lee
[Another possibility is that many subscribers may stay in for one or
two rounds before becoming convinced that they've been had. On the
other hand, the JS&A offer could be based on a legitimate formula
(not a breakthrough, I assume, but "chartists" have been known to do
quite with their formulas) that has recently donned AI garb. I
have some of my savings in a "timing service" that uses a similar
approach. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Fri 8 Nov 85 10:48:37-CST
From: CMP.MGREEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: ai hype
You ain't heard nothin' yet.
PCWeek, "The national newspaper of IBM standard microcomputing", ran a four
part review during October of a fourthcoming book by Mickey Williamson titled
"Artificial Intelligence for Microcomputers: A Business Design". Although
the book appears to give a generally well balanced view of the current
capabilities of AI it occasionally misses the mark.
From the start it is apparent that the author knows very little about the
subject and was forced to rely on facts and opinions supplied by others
without being able to provide some kind of sanity check. Case in point:
He quotes Barbra Wallace of KDS corporation who "worked on a molecular
memory project in the 1950s" as predicting that within 10 years we will see
a microcomputer with capabilities comparable to 2001's HAL, "but she stops
short of predicting what it will cost".
I guess it's time to offer Stanley Kubric a position with our group, if he
did it once maybe he can do it again.
Cheers -- Mike Green
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 16:14:27-CST
From: CMP.BARC@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: New Mailing List for AI Hype
Due to the volume of extraordinary AI claims, we have established
a new mailing list for promoting and isolating AI hype. This list
is designed for persons who wish to lie, exaggerate or otherwise
misinform regarding the potential and/or accomplishments of AI.
Inflated discussions about AI features, enhancements, performance,
support, and other topics of interest to venture capitalists are
welcome. Discussions about bugs, development problems, anything
approaching realism or legitimacy, or about AI hype itself are
specifically discouraged, as they are more appropriate for AIList
or other mailing lists. These restrictions will have to be left
as a matter of "honor among thieves", since the list will NOT be
moderated, but will act as a mail "reflector" - ie., any message
sent to the list will be rebroadcast to everyone on the list.
The list will be maintained at Smart Expertelligeneric Logical Infer-
enceware and Teknowledgecraft Inc., using a proposed neural emulation
network of 3,140,000 parallel Lisp machines (Our current configuration
is an Explorer prototype and a Commodore 64, running CP/M.). SELIT is
connected to the ARPAnet (both military and educational) and uucp, and
has gateways to CSNET, BITNET and Compuserve. Thus, it should be pos-
sible to access every business, school or home in the U.S. and many in
Europe. Therefore we hope to be able to reach every gullible element of
the computing community. Of course, we intend to charge an exorbitant
fee for inclusion in the mailing list, until our subscribers figure out
that the list has nothing to offer beyond the current, conventional
lists and bulletin boards.
To add your name to the list, change or delete a name or have other
administrative requests serviced, send mail to:
ARPAnet: AIHype-REQUEST@SELIT.ARPA
uucp: ...ihnp3.14!selit!aihype-request
To post a submission to the list, send mail to:
ARPAnet: AIHype@SELIT.ARPA
uucp: ...ihnp3.14!selit!aihype
Please, do NOT bother the entire list with a request to have your name
added or deleted! The general discussion should be bothersome enough.
Feel free to rebroadcast this announcement to anyone who might
be interested.
Dallas Webster
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Nov-85 2154 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #167
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Nov 85 21:54:45 PST
Date: Sun 10 Nov 1985 19:56-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #167
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 11 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 167
Today's Topics:
Seminars - TI AI Symposium Sites &
Model Theory for Knowledge and Belief (SRI) &
Example-Based Reasoning (NU) &
Knowledge Representation (UCB) &
Partial Truth Conditions and Their Logics (CSLI) &
Automatic Generation of Graphical Presentations (CSLI) &
CommonLoops (MIT) &
Minimal Entailment (UPenn) &
Alternatives to Concurrent Prolog (MIT),
Conference - Eastern Simulation Conference
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 85 00:09 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: TI AI Symposium Sites
Two sites in our area that will be providing the TI AI Symposium are:
University of Pennsylvania
Harrison Auditorium (in the Univ. Museum, 33rd & Spruce)
Philadelphia, PA
contact: Tim Finin, TIM@UPenn (215-386-1749)
lots of room - all are welcome - no invitation/RSVP needed
U.S. Army Communications /Automatic Data Processing Center
Watters Hall
Fort Monmouth, NJ
contact: Ms. Van dyke (201-544-2929)
arrive early to assure seating.
It starts at 9:15 (EST) on Wednesday, November 13th.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Nov 85 17:41:42-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Model Theory for Knowledge and Belief (SRI)
MODEL THEORY FOR KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF
Moshe Vardi
IBM San Jose
11:00 AM, MONDAY, November 11
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Recently, there has been a surge of interest in the modal logic of
knowledge and belief, which has applications in many area of computer
science. The standard semantics for modal logic is Kripke semantics.
In this semantics, possible worlds and the possibility relation are both
primitive notions. This has both technical and conceptual shortcomings.
From a technical point of view, the mathematics associated with Kripke
semantics is often quite complicated. From a conceptual point of view,
it is not clear how to use Kripke structures to model knowledge and belief,
where one wants a clearer understanding of the notions that are taken as
primitive in Kripke semantics.
We introduce modal structures as models for modal logic. We use the idea
of possible worlds, but by directly describing the internal semantics of
each possible world. It is much easier to study the standard logical
questions, such as completeness, decidability, and compactness, using
modal structures. Furthermore, modal structures offer a much more
intuitive approach to modelling knowledge and belief.
As an application, we present a semantic model for knowledge
with the following properties:
(1) Knowledge is necessarily correct
(2) agents are logically omniscient, i.e., they know all
the consequences of their knowledge
(3) agents are positively introspective, i.e., they are aware of
their knowledge, but not negatively introspective,
i.e., they may not be aware of their ignorance.
We argue that this is the appropriate model for implicit knowledge.
We investigate the properties of the model, and use it to formalize
notions such as "to know more" and "all that is known is".
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 85 14:53 EDT
From: Carole D Hafner <HAFNER%northeastern.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Example-Based Reasoning (NU)
College of Computer Science Colloquium
Northeastern University, Boston, MA
Example-Based Reasoning
Prof. Edwina Rissland
Dept. of Computer and Information Science
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA
In this talk, I shall discuss example-based reasoning,
particularly in the contexts of assisting in the preparation of
legal arguments and offering on-line explanations.
In the case of legal argumentation, I discuss how hypotheticals
serve a central role in analyzing the issues in
a case and describe a program, called HYPO, which generates
legal hypotheticals, and an environment, called COUNSELOR,
which provides support for legal reasoning and other strategic
tasks, like resource management. I'll briefly describe our
current work on on-line assistance and how we are trying to
make it more intelligent by embedding custom-tailored examples
in the explanations. I'll also discuss some general issues
about examples such as their generation, structure and importance
in reasoning, especially in the domains of mathematics and the law.
Date: Wednesday, Nov. 13, 1985
Time: 12:00 noon
Place: To be announced (contact hafner@northeastern or call the
department office at 437-2462).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 17:29:20 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Knowledge Representation (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, November 12, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``Knowledge Representation and a Theory of Meaning''
Robert Wilensky
Computer Science Division, U.C.B.
Knowledge representation is central to most Artificial Intelli-
gence endeavors. However, most knowledge representation
schemes are incomplete in a number of ways. In particular,
their coverage is inadequate, and they do not capture signifi-
cant aspects of meanings. Many do not even adhere to basic
criteria of well-formedness for a meaning representation.
KODIAK is a theory of knowledge representation developed at
Berkeley that attempts to address some of these deficiencies.
KODIAK incorporates representational ideas that have emerged
from different schools of thought, in particular from work in
semantic networks, frames, Conceptual Dependency, and frame
semantics. In particular, KODIAK eliminates the frame/slot
distinction found in frame-based languages (alternatively,
case/slot distinction found in semantic network-based systems).
In its place KOKIAK introduces a new notion called the
absolute/aspectual distinction. In addition, the theory sup-
ports ``non-literal'' representations, namely, those motivated
by metaphoric and metonymic considerations. Using these dev-
ices, the theory allows for the representation of some ideas
that in the past have only been represented procedurally,
informally, or not at all.
KODIAK is being used to represent both linguistic and concep-
tual structures. When applied to the representation of
linguistic knowledge, a new framework for talking about meaning
emerges. Five aspects of meaning have been identified. These
appear to be useful in describing processing theories of
natural language use.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 16:41:45-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Partial Truth Conditions and Their Logics (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, November 14, 1985
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall Partial Truth Conditions and Their Logics
Room G-19 Hans Kamp, University of Texas
Partial Truth Definitions and their Logics
Hans Kamp
Until recently truth definitions for formal and natural languages
were, with some few exceptions, total (in the sense of specifying
w.r.t. any model a truth value for each sentence of the language under
consideration). But during the past decade partial truth definitions
have become increasingly common both within symbolic logic and in
formal semantics.
The motives for adopting partial truth definitions vary considerably.
I will focus on three issues that have led to the formulation of such
definitions: i) vagueness; ii) the semantic paradoxes; and iii)
verification by partial information structures (a concept that has
inspired both situation semantics and recent work on the semantics of
data structures). I will discuss and compare some of the partial
semantics that have been developed in attempts to come to terms with
these issues, looking in particular at the question what logics are
generated by the resulting semantic theories. I will argue that the
relation between semantics and logic is less straightforward when the
truth definition is partial than when it is total, and consequently that
the notion of logical validity becomes much more delicate and equivocal
once total semantics is abandoned in favor of some partial alternative.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 16:41:45-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Automatic Generation of Graphical Presentations (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
PIXELS AND PREDICATES
Automatic Generation of Graphical Presentations
Jock Mackinlay
CSLI trailers, 1:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 13, 1985
The goal of my thesis research is to develop an application-
independent presentation tool that automatically generates appropriate
graphical presentations of information such as charts, maps, and
network diagrams. A presentation tool can be used to build effective
user interfaces because it exploits the structure of the information
and the capabilities of the output device to generate appropriate
presentations. Application designers need not be graphical
presentation experts to ensure that their user interfaces use
graphical languages correctly and effectively.
The research has two parts: a formal analysis of graphical
languages for presentation and a prototype presentation tool based on
the formal analysis.
The formal analysis uses syntactic and semantic descriptions of
graphical languages to develop criteria for evaluating graphical
presentations. There are two major classes of criteria: expressiveness
and effectiveness. The expressiveness criteria are theorems that identify
when a set of facts is or is not expressible in a language. The
effectiveness criteria are conjectures (rather than theorems) about
the relative difficulty of the perceptual tasks associated with the
interpretation of graphical languages. Sufficiently expressive languages
are ordered by the difficulty of their associated perceptual tasks.
The prototype presentation tool, called APT (A Presentation Tool),
uses the criteria developed by formal analysis to search a space of
graphical languages for an appropriate presentation. A novel feature
of APT is its ability to generate its search space by composing
sophisticated designs from a small set of fundamental graphical
languages. The design portion of APT is a logic program based on the
MRS representation system.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 7 Nov 85 15:32:51-EST
From: "Mary E. Spollen" <SPOLS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - CommonLoops (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
CommonLoops
Speaker: Gregor Kiczales
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
Date: November 15, 1985, Friday
Time: 2:15 refreshments
2:30 lecture
Place: NE43-512A
CommonLoops is a merger of Object Oriented Programming and Lisp. It
has a unique combination of features:
1) No special syntax: Most attempts to add object-oriented programming
to Lisp have resulted in special syntax for message sending. In
CommonLoops, there is no syntactic difference between calling a function
and "invoking a method."
2) Method Specification: In object oriented programming, methods are
specified in terms of the class of the object being sent the message.
One can think of this as specifying the type of one argument of the
method. In CommonLoops, one can specify the type of any number of
arguments to a method.
3) Type space: The "object" space is an extension of the normal Lisp
type space, not a separate space as in Loops or Flavors.
4) Metaclasses: The implementation of a type (determined by the
"metaclass") is independent of the type description. This allows
tradeoffs between early binding and ease of exploratory programming.
Host: Hal Abelson
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 85 00:53 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Minimal Entailment (UPenn)
FUN WITH MODELS: MINIMAL ENTAILMENT AND NON-MONOTONIC REASONING
David W. Etherington
University of British Columbia
(Currently at AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ.)
3:00pm December 3, 1985
216 Moore School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Circumstances commonly require that conclusions be
drawn (conjectured) even though they are not strictly war-
ranted by the available evidence. Various forms of minimal
entailment have been suggested as ways of generating
appropriate conjectures. Minimal entailment is a conse-
quence relation in which those facts which hold in minimal
models of a theory are considered to follow from that
theory. Thus minimal entailment is less restrictive than
the standard logical entailment relation, which strongly
constrains what evidence may be taken as supporting a con-
clusion.
Different definitions of minimality of models yield
different entailment relations. The talk will outline a
variety of such relations. Domain, Predicate, and Formula
Circumscription [McCarthy 1978, 1980, 1984] are syntactic
formalisms intended to capture these relations. We examine
each from a semantic viewpoint, in the hope of clarifying
their respective capabilities and weaknesses. Results on
the consistency, correctness, and adequacy of these formal-
isms will be presented.
While minimal entailment corresponds most directly to
the Closed-World Assumption, that positive information not
implicit in what is known can be assumed false, McCarthy and
others have suggested applications of circumscription to
more general default reasoning tasks. With this in mind,
connections between minimal entailment and Reiter's Default
Logic will be sketched, if time permits. In this connec-
tion, we will consider positive and negative results due to
Grosof and Imielinski, respectively.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 85 00:56:01 EST
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Alternatives to Concurrent Prolog (MIT)
Thursday 7, November 2: 15pm Room: NE43- 7th floor playroom
BFCP and GHC - Alternatives to Concurrent Prolog
Jacob Levy
Department of Applied Mathematics
Weizmann Institute of Science
This talk will discuss some of the alternatives to Concurrent Prolog
recently proposed. Each of these languages is designed to cover a
large subset of Concurrent prolog, but to be much easier to implement.
Flat Concurrent prolog (FCP) and Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC) will be
described in detail.
FCP, which has only And-parallelism, was developed at the Weizmann
Institute as a viable subset of Concurrent Prolog. Its current
implementation, in terms of a Warren Abstract Machine, will be
described.
The GHC language, designed by K. Ueda of ICOT, Japan, has
OR-parallelism as well as And-parallelism, but instead has more
limited synchronization primitives than Concurent Prolog. The second
part of this talk will briefly describe my implementation of GHC.
After the talk, a demo of FCP and Logix, its programming environment,
will be given.
Refreshments at 2:00pm
HOSTS: Professors Gerald Jay Sussman and Henryk Jan Komorowski (Harvard)
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 1985 17:09-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: 1986 Eastern Simulation Conference
10-12 March 1986, Omni International Hotel, Norfolk, Virginia
For more info contact: SCS, PO BOX 17900, San Diego, CA 92117
(619)277-3888
List of AI related titles:
"TAT Teach" An Expert Training Simulator
Knowledge-Based Opponent Simulation for Tactical Decision Training
Simulators with Artificial Intelligence
Expert Systems in Training/Decision/Simulation
The Simulation Algorithm Itself: Driving the Inference Algorithm
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Nov-85 2245 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #168
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Nov 85 22:45:41 PST
Date: Mon 11 Nov 1985 20:47-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #168
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 12 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 168
Today's Topics:
Queries - Recent Work by Johnson/Laird &
Conceptual Dependencies and Predicate Calculus WFFs,
AI Tools - Typed languages and Lisp,
Cryptography - RSA Complexity,
Inference - Abduction,
News - Computer Museum Micromouse Competition,
Review - Commercial Machine Translation,
Humor - Intelligence Quotation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 85 21:50:57 GMT
From: Bob Stine <stine@edn-vax.arpa>
Subject: Recent work by Johnson/Laird
Can anyone give me some pointers to recent work by
Johnson and Laird on the role of mental models in
cognition?
Thanks,
- Bob Stine
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 85 21:58:58 GMT
From: Bob Stine <stine@edn-vax.arpa>
Subject: Conceptual Dependencies and Predicate Calculus wffs
Anyone know of any work that has been done in translating conceptual
dependency structures into predicate calculus wffs?
Thanks,
Bob Stine
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1985 14:38 EST
From: Skef Wholey <Wholey@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Typed languages and Lisp
From: John Craig <JJC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Chris Goad (Stanford CS grad) developed a language originally called SIL,
now called RISE which is essentially a typing system added to Lisp, but
with a no-type type so that one can get around typing as one desires. The
main reasons for adding typing are:
1) faster code development (type checker finds bugs)
A type checker can find some bugs, but it isn't clear that such bugs would
take much time to find and fix relative the to the "real" bugs a programmer
spends most of his time on. Also, actually entering type information can add
to program development time. Controlled experiments are required to back
claims like the above.
2) the compiler can use type information to generate more efficient
object code (for example, less or no garbage collection pauses when
running compiled code)
I'll believe that type information can let a compiler generate more efficient
code, but dynamic storage allocation (and therefore garbage collection) has
almost nothing to do runtime typing. The exception to this is "number
consing," which can be avoided by clever Lisp systems most of the time anyway.
It seems to me like you get the best of lisp and typed worlds, and
efficient code generated also. Its pretty fun, too.
Common Lisp provides a very complete type declaration mechanism that lets one
give the compiler a great deal of information. This information is used (by
some Common Lisp compilers) to generate very efficient code. The difference
is not that one language is typed and the other untyped, but that the default
"typedness" is different.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 85 10:18:06 cst
From: ihnp4!gargoyle!simon@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Janos Simon)
Subject: Cryptography
A small correction about the difficulty of breaking the RSA scheme:
it is NOT NP-hard (although it is very likely that it is not
invertible in polynomial time - in fact it is very likely that it
cannot be inverted by polynomial time algorithms that use
randomization (that yield correct answers with high probability).
It is not hard to see that the RSA scheme can be broken if one
knows the factorization of the underlying number. Now factoring
is strongly suspected to be difficult (not doable in random
polynomial time), but it is not known to be NP-hard, and there are
good reasons to suspect that it isn't:
1)Both factoring and primality testing are in NP. That is not
true of any NP-complete problem. If factoring would be NP-hard then
NP would be closed under complementation. This would be a surprising
answer to a very difficult question.
2)There is a deterministic factoring algorithm that runs in
time exp(logn loglogn). This is not polynomial, but much less than
exponential (2**n). Again, this would be a very unexpected behavior
for an NP-hard problem.
Janos Simon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 09:27:54 EST
From: munnari!basser.oz!anand@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Re: Abduction
The term abduction( as applicable to AI) or retroduction was first
coined by Charles Sanders Peirce. Deduction, Induction and Abduction
are three types of reasoning mechanisms.
DEDUCTION- Rule: All the beans from this bag are white.
Case: These beans are from this bag.
Therefore Result: These beans are white.
INDUCTION- Case: These beans are from this bag.
Result: These beans are white.
Therefore Rule: All the beans from this bag are white.
ABDUCTION- Rule: All the beans from this bag are white.
Result: These beans are white.
Therefore Case: These beans are from this bag.
Induction is where we generalize from a number of cases of which
something is true, and infer that the same thing is true for a whole class.
Abduction is where we find some very curious circumstance which would
be explained by the supposition that it was a case of a certain general
rule and thereupon adopt the supposition.
Refer the 'Collected Papers of Charles Sandes Peirce' Vol I & Vol II
edited by Charles Hartstone & Paul Weiss, Harvard Uni. Press, 1960.
(paragraph 65,66,67,68 of Vol I and paragraphs 623 & 624 of Vol II).
(Postmaster:- This mail has been acknowledged.)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 11:17:27 est
From: Brian Harvey <bh at mit-media-lab.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Computer Museum Micromouse Competition
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
English and Japanese robot "mice" will engage in a heated nose-to-nose
competition at The Computer Museum on Saturday, November 23. The miniature
self-guiding and self-propelled robots will compete for intelligence and
speed in the official room-sized Micro Mouse Maze used in the World Micro
Mouse Competition held in Japan last August.
Schedule of Events:
11:00 - 12:00 Tours of maze; micromice on display
12:00 - 1:30 Mouse warm-up and adjustment
1:30 - 3:00 First micromouse race
3:00 - 3:30 Mouse warm-up and adjustment
3:30 - 5:00 Second micromouse race
Would-be mouse designers and the simply curious can attend a special lecture
and mouse demonstration clinic on Sunday, November 17 at 4:00 pm featuring
England's noted mouse expert Professor John Billingsley.
For more information call 426-2800 (a human being) or 357-8014 (a DECtalk
voice synthesizer).
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1985 2102-PST
From: LAWS at SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Commercial Machine Translation
Title: Machines are Mastering the Language of Multinational Business
Author: Joyce Heard with Leslie Helm
Business Week (No. 2912, 9/16/85, pp. 90D ff.)
This article describes machine translation systems that are currently
available for translating English, German, French, Spanish, Italian,
and Japanese. Speeds of up to 100,000 words per hour are claimed, as
are accuracies of up to 90% and prices as low as $3,000. [Not all the
same system, of course.] Customers are apparently willing to accept
rough translations as long as they can get them quickly; translators,
however, are not happy just polishing machine translations. Most
of the companies offering multilingual services are converting text
to a "neutral" language, then into the target language -- this greatly
reduces the cost of additional source or target languages. NEC
estimates that it needs about 100 "rules" for complete Japanese-English
translation, and has developed 30. Europe has been the chief market
so far, but most of the commercial leaders are American (Automated
Language Processing Systems, Logos, World Translation Center, and Weidner).
Fujitsu, Toshiba, NEC, and Bravice International are coming up fast,
however. Philips and the Netherlands' BSO are also working on systems.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 09:23:31 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Future Intelligence Quotation
>From the World Times, 11 November 2085 :-
``The World's first Intelligent System was put to the
test today. On the standard IQ rating, it's score was...''
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Nov-85 0112 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #169
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Nov 85 01:12:17 PST
Date: Thu 14 Nov 1985 19:27-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #169
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 15 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 169
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Question-Answering Systems (UPenn) &
Bill, the Othello Program (CMU) &
Information-Based Complexity (CSLI) &
Multilisp (MIT) &
Gazing in Theorem Proving (MCC) &
Deductive Design Synthesis (SRI) &
Probabilistic Propositional Logic (Buffalo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 16:04 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Question-Answering Systems (UPenn)
Forwarded From: Bonnie Webber <Bonnie@UPenn> on Mon 11 Nov 1985 at 10:42
Subj: Seminar in Natural Language Processing
CIS679 - SEMINAR IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING
SPRING 1986
The topic for this term is question-answering systems, with particular
attention to the type of information included in response to a question,
instead of or in addition to an answer. We will look at the role of plan
recognition and planning in formulating cooperative responses, as well as
considering how to circumscribe the reasoning expected of a respondent.
Response components of particular interest will be information intended to
explain or justify answers, information intended to point out and/or correct
misconceptions, and information intended to further the questioner's goals.
Instructors: Joshi/Webber
Time: MW 3-4:30
------------------------------
Date: 13 Nov 85 12:54:10 EST
From: Kai-Fu.Lee@SPEECH2.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Seminar - Bill, the Othello Program (CMU)
BILL :
THE OTHELLO PROGRAM
THAT BEAT IAGO
Kai-Fu Lee
Friday
November 15, 1985
Wean Hall 5409
4:30 PM - 6:00 PM
BILL is an Othello program written by myself and
Sanjoy Mahajan. It was entered in the Waterloo Othello
Tournament on November 9, and captured first place with a
4-0 record. In two unofficial games, it defeated IAGO, the
world champion othello program developed at CMU in 1980-2.
Most, if not all, othello programs use one of two
types of evaluation functions: (1) knowledge-intensive but
slow (such as IAGO), or (2) knowledge-deficient but fast
(such as most programs at Waterloo). BILL succeeds through
its use of a knowledge-intensive, yet extremely efficient
evaluation function. It is further enhanced by an
iterative deepening zero-window alpha-beta procedure, a
hash table, a linked-move killer table, a two-phase
end-game search, and thinking on opponent's time.
In this talk, I will first discuss othello strategies.
Next, I will describe Bill, and analyze its games in
Waterloo and against IAGO. Finally, we will demonstrate
BILL by playing it against the audience.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 13 Nov 85 17:05:26-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Information-Based Complexity (CSLI)
[Excerpted from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
An Introduction to Information-based Complexity
J. F. Traub
Computer Science Department, Columbia University
THURSDAY, November 21, 1985
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium, Redwood Hall, Room G-19
In information-based complexity ``information'' is, informally,
what we know about a problem which we wish to solve.
The goal of information-based complexity is to create a general
theory about problems with partial and contaminated information and to
apply the results to solving specific problems in varied disciplines.
Problems with partial and contaminated information occur in areas such
as vision, medical imaging, prediction, geophysical exploration,
signal processing, control, and scientific and engineering
calculation.
For problems with partial and contaminated information, very general
results can be obtained at the ``information level.'' Among the
general results to be discussed is the power of parallel
(non-adaptive) information and the application of such information to
the solution of problems on distributed systems.
The methodology and results of information-based complexity will be
contrasted with the study of NP-complete problems where the
information is assumed to be complete, exact, and free.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 12 Nov 85 12:45:02-EST
From: "Brian C. Williams" <WILLIAMS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Multilisp (MIT)
Thursday , October 14 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"Multilisp: A Language for Parallel Symbolic Computing"
Burt Halstead
MIT, LCS
Multilisp is an extension of Scheme with additional operators and
additional semantics for parallel execution. These have been added without
removing side effects from the language. The principal parallelism
construct in Multilisp is the "future," which exhibits some features of
both eager and lazy evaluation. Current work focuses on making Multilisp a
more humane programming environment, and on expanding the power of
Multilisp to express task scheduling policies.
A skeletal Multilisp has been implemented, and has been run on the
shared-memory Concert multiprocessor, using as many as eight processors, as
well as on a BBN Butterfly machine with as many as 128 processors. The
implementation uses interesting techniques for task scheduling and garbage
collection. The task scheduler helps control excessive resource
utilization by means of an unfair scheduling policy; the garbage collector
uses a multiprocessor algorithm modeled after the incremental garbage
collector of Baker.
The talk will describe Multilisp, discuss the areas of current activity,
and indicate the future direction of the project.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Nov 85 15:55:02-CST
From: AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Gazing in Theorem Proving (MCC)
GAZING: USING THE STRUCTURE
OF THE THEORY IN THEOREM PROVING
Dave Plummer
Department of Mathematics
University of Texas at Austin
Wednesday, November 20
10:00 a.m.
Echelon I, Room 409
A mechanical theorem prover embodies two types of knowledge: logical
and non-logical. The logical knowledge informs the prover which
inferences are legal within the logic. The non-logical information,
however, is specific to the theory that the prover is working in and
includes definitions of concepts used in the theory, axioms, and
previously proved facts. The theory is structured by relationships
between these facts and these relationships may be exploited in order
to provide guidance for a mechanical theorem prover.
In this talk I will describe a technique, called Gazing, which
exploits the structure of a theory, thus aiding a mechanical prover in
determining which items of knowledge will be useful in the proof of a
given goal. As concepts are defined in the theory, the system builds
a graph representing the definitional order. This graph is used in
two ways. First, whenever a new fact enters the theory, the ordering
is used to determine an orientation of that fact creating a new
rewrite rule. Secondly, the ordering is used to guide the search for
a proof of a conjecture whenever the proof is known to require the use
of non-logical facts. This guidance takes the form of determining
which concepts are "close" in the definitional ordering, and
attempting to find rewrite rules which may be used to rewrite two
different concepts to a common new concept. The ordering can also be
used to decide which of a number of possible common rewritings is
preferable, and indeed if any common rewriting exists.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Nov 85 14:31:42-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Deductive Design Synthesis (SRI)
EXPLOITATION OF CONSTRAINTS IN DEDUCTIVE DESIGN SYNTHESIS
Jeff Finger
Stanford University
JFinger@SU-SUSHI
PLANLUNCH
11:00 AM, MONDAY, November 18
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The talk will cover two related topics in deductive design synthesis:
(1) efficiency gained by reasoning forward from subgoals, and
(2) advantages and disadvantages of using a declarative representation
for partially completed designs.
The first part of the talk gives the deductive framework for capturing the
following intuition:
Suppose I have decided that X and Y and to be true of my
design. Perhaps I should think about what else X and Y imply
about the design, say Z. Otherwise, I might waste time
trying to complete the design process by making decisions
that have *already* been ruled out by X and Y, for example,
NOT(Z).
The conditions that X and Y imply (called "necessary constraints" or "NC's")
are found via reasoning forward from subgoals. We show how NC's of a
subgoal can be used to prune the design space either by preventing some
impossible possibilities from ever being generated or by providing a quick
means of filtering bad choices. In terms of resolution, the above use of
NC's corresponds to the rather counterintuitive notion of allowing
OR-INTRODUCTION on clauses in the set of support. We will also discuss
inheritance of NC's from goal to subgoal and the relation of finding NC's to
that of checking consistency of partially completed designs.
The second part of the talk deals with declarative representation of
partially completed designs. Deductive design systems such as QA3 or Manna
and Waldinger's reify the design as a single term in the logic.
However, it is difficult to express many sorts of constraints on partially
completed designs as a single term. Examples include two actions in an
unspecified order, or the constraint that Action A takes place less than 3
seconds or more than 8 seconds after Action B. We present a system called
RESIDUE in which we build up the design as a set of facts we are willing to
assume about of the design. Using facts rather than a single term, we can
make finer-grained decisions, avoiding unwitting commitments that might
result in unnecessary backtracking. In addition, forward reasoning on
subgoals (as in the first portion of the talk) may be done directly on the
set of facts.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 85 10:40:19 EST
From: "William J. Rapaport" <rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Probabilistic Propositional Logic (Buffalo)
UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
COLLOQUIUM
DEXTER KOZEN
Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
A PROBABILISTIC PROPOSITIONAL DYNAMIC LOGIC
This talk concerns a probabilistic analog of Propositional
Dynamic Logic, called Probabilistic Propositional Dynamic Logic
(PPDL). PPDL is useful in the formal manipulation of simple pro-
babilistic programs and the average-case analysis of determinis-
tic programs. We describe the formal syntax and semantics of the
system and its deductive calculus, and illustrate its use by cal-
culating the expected running time of a simple random walk. We
also describe briefly a polynomial-space decision procedure for
deciding the truth of formulas involving well-structured pro-
grams.
Thursday, November 21, 1985
3:30 P.M.
Bell 337, Amherst Campus
Wine and cheese will be served at 4:30 P.M., 224 Bell Hall
For further information, call (716) 636-3181.
William J. Rapaport
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Computer Science, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260
(716) 636-3193, 3180
uucp: ...{allegra,decvax,watmath}!sunybcs!rapaport
...{cmc12,hao,harpo}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!rapaport
cs: rapaport@buffalo
arpa: rapaport%buffalo@csnet-relay
bitnet: rapaport@sunybcs
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Nov-85 0021 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #170
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Nov 85 00:20:52 PST
Date: Thu 14 Nov 1985 20:31-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #170
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 15 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 170
Today's Topics:
Queries - Semantic Networks & Reason Maintenance System (or TMS),
Representation - Conceptual Dependency and Predicate Calculus,
New BBoard - TI Explorer,
Hype - The Business World Flames as Well as We Do!,
Inference - Rumor, Prejudice, and Uncertainty &
Abduction and AI in Space Exploration
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 09:24:07 EST
From: "William J. Rapaport" <rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: another request for help
When our system crashed, I also lost the address of a guy in Europe
(Switzerland, I think) who wanted info on semantic networks. I'd
greatly appreciate help on recovering his address. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 85 13:32:10 EST
From: munnari!basser.oz!anand@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Reason Maintenance System(or TMS)
Has anyone implemented a RMS using PROLOG? Would like to know the
pros and cons of its implementation with LISP? Thank you in advance.
-- Anand S. Rao
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 85 13:28:33 EST
From: munnari!basser.oz!anand@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Conceptual dependency & predicate calculus
Perhaps the best work on linking CD and predicate calculus is by John Sowa.
Refer his book 'Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind
and Machine'. (Review in AI journal Sept. 1985) --- Anand S. Rao
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 85 13:19:23 gmt
From: Patrick Hayes <spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Subject: CD into PC
In response to Bob Stines request concerning translating CD notation into
1PC. This should by now be regarded as a routine exercise, surely. Since
logic doesnt have such ideas as physical transfer already incorporated into
it, one has to translate into 1pc extended by the choice of a particular
vocabulary of relations, etc., and this can be done in several ways ( n-place
relations instead of (n-1)-place function symbols, for example ) : take your
choice. You will need predicates such as PTRANS, of course, but also relations
(or whatever) corresponding to the various colors of funny-arrow used in CD.
There is a standard way to transform graphical notations into tree-structured
notation such as 1PC or LISP: each node in the graph becomes a name in the
language, and each link in the graph becomes an assertion that some relation
( which one depends on the color of the link ) holds between the entities
named. In this way the graph maps into a conjunction of atomic assertions
in a vocabulary which is just about as simple or complex as that used in the
graphical language.
Several notaional tricks can add variety to this simple idea, for example
instead of mapping <node1>link2<node3> into relation2(thing1,thing3)
one can use exists x. Isrelation(x,tpe2) & Holds(x,thing1,thing3). This
enables one to write general rules about a number of link types in a few
compact axioms. Ask any experienced logic programmer for more ideas.
Now, this just translates CD into 1PC notation, of course. To get the
inferential power of CD one then needs to translate the inference rules into
1PC axioms written in the appropriate notation. If you can find the CD
inference rules written out clearly somewhere, this should be straightforward.
One might ask whether such a translation actually captures the meaning of CD
adequately. Unfortunately, as ( to the best of knowledge ) CD notation has
never been supplied with a clear semantics, this would have to remain a
matter for subjective judgement.
A last observation: if you check the published accounts of MARGIE, one of the
early demonstration systems using CD, you will find that one-third of it was
a program which manipulated CD graphs so as to draw conclusions. In order
to do this, it first translated them into a tree-like notation similar to
that obtained by the above technique.
Pat Hayes
------------------------------
Date: 6 Nov 85 11:04:37 EST
From: Kevin.Neel@ISL1.RI.CMU.EDU
Subject: TI Explorer bbs
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following was posted on netnews:
>Date: Fri 13 Sep 85 15:16:25-PDT
>From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
>Subject: New Lists for TI Explorer Discussion
In order to facilitate information exchange among DARPA sponsored
projects using TI Explorers, two ArpaNet mailing lists are being
created. INFO-EXPLORER will be used for general information
distribution, such as operational questions, or announcing new
generally available packages or tools. BUG-EXPLORER will be used to
report problems with Explorer software, as well as fixes. Requests to
be added to or deleted from these lists should be sent to
INFO-EXPLORER-REQUEST or BUG-EXPLORER-REQUEST, respectively. All
addresses are at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA. These lists signify no commitment
from Texas Instruments or Stanford University. Indeed, there is no
guarantee that TI representatives will read the lists. The idea of
the lists is to provide communication among the users of Explorers.
-- Rich Acuff
Stanford KSL
[...]
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 85 1549 PST
From: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: The Business World Flames as Well as We Do!
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
You might think that in moving to the business world I've given
up on the joy of seeing first-class flaming in my normal
environment - business ethics and all that.
Wrong!
The following is a quote from a story about Clarity Software Corp's
new ad (soon to appear). Clarity is introducing a product called
``Logic Line-1,'' which is a natural language data retrieval system.
The ad compares their product to competing AI products. They say,
apparently about AI programmers:
``Luckily, we won't have to worry about their rancid cells
polluting mankind's gene pool very long anyhow. Such
brain-damaged geeks tend to die young. If you've recently
spent money on artificial intelligence software, you might be
wishing that a few programmers had croaked before writing
that blithering swill they named AI and palmed off onto you.''
-rpg-
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 14:30 EST
From: Mukhop <mukhop%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Rumor, prejudice and the management of uncertainty
AI research in recent years has extensively dealt with the
management of uncertainty. A reasonable approach is to model human
mechanisms for knowledge maintenance. However, these mechanisms are
not perfect since they are vulnerable to rumor and prejudice. Both
traits are universal; the object(s) of rumor or prejudice is a
function of the culture and the times.
Rumoring is illustrated in the following scenario: A passes some
information to B and C, who in turn communicate it to others, and so on.
It is possible for a person to receive the same information from several
sources and consequently have a lot of confidence in its truth.
The underlying uncertainty management calculus seems to be flawed
since it ignores the fact that these sources are not independent.
I would like to see some discussions on the following:
1) In any current AI system, is the test for independence of sources
made prior to updating the uncertainty metric associated with a
proposition? This seems to be especially relevant to
Distributed AI systems.
2) Can someone suggest a model or scenario for prejudice? This may
lead to a test to rid AI systems of it.
3) The human knowledge maintenance system (HKMS) seems to update
knowledge in a reasonable manner when the information is
received from independent sources but behaves erratically when
the sources are not independent. Similarly, do the features of
the HKMS, that cause prejudicial reasoning under some circumstances,
lead to sound conclusions when certain conditions are met? How else
could the HKMS have evolved in such a way?
4) The human visual system allows optical illusions to be formed,
but is near-perfect for most routine activities (the bedouin
who regularly observes mirages may beg to differ). It has also
had more time to evolve. Is it conceivable that the HKMS will
evolve in time so that it will be robust in the face of rumor
and eliminate prejudicial reasoning? Or is it important to
retain these traits to ensure "the survival of the fittest."
Uttam Mukhopadhyay
Computer Science Dept.
General Motors Research Labs.
Warren, MI 48090-9055
Phone: (313) 575-2105
[One model of prejudice is based on our propensity for prototype-based
reasoning, combined with our tendency to focus on and remember the more
extreme characteristics of prototypes. The fewer individuals we have seen
from a population, the more certain we are that they are representative.
The work of Kahneman and Tversky seems relevant. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 13 Nov 1985 00:39-EST
From: ISAACSON@USC-ISI.ARPA
Subject: Abduction & AI in space exploration
To my knowledge, abductive inference received some serious
attention by NASA in the early 1980's. There is a heavy volume:
ADVANCED AUTOMATION FOR SPACE MISSIONS, NASA Conference
Publication 2255, Proceedings of the 1980 NASA/ASEE Summer Study,
University of Santa Clara, CA [published end of 1982].
A certain "Space Exploration" team handled, among other things,
futuristic requirements for advanced machine intelligence. (The
task was to design a mission to Titan sometime around the year
2000.) The whole issue of abduction and hypothesis-formation was
made a central issue in competition with "expert systems" soft-
peddled by certain vested interests. The final "Conclusions and
Recommended Technology Priorities" has in No. 1 place the
following recommendation:
(1) Machine intelligence systems with automatic hypothesis-
formation [i.e., abduction - jdi] capability are necessary for
autonomous examination of unknown environments. This capacity is
highly desirable for efficient exploration of the Solar System
and is essential for the ultimate investigation of other star
systems. [p. 381]
(Some well-known peddlers of expert systems actually wanted to
send over there one of their expert systems, until confronted by
the question of whose expertise they are going to package into
the explorer... )
That recommendation is derived from the Space exploration report,
p. 39-76. That report, p. 68, cites the following conclusion:
Required machine intelligence technologies include:
* Autonomous processing (essentially no programming)
* Autonomous "dynamic" memory
* Autonomous error-correction
* Inherently parallel processing
* Abductive/dialectic logical capabilities
* General capacity for acquisition and recognition of patterns
* Universal "Turing Machine" computability
In the "Technology Assessment" section there are the following
recommendations [p. 351]:
6.2.4 Initial Directions for NASA
Several research tasks can be undertaken immediately by NASA
which have the potential of contributing to the development of a
fully automated hypothesis formulating ability needed for future
space missions:
(1) Continue to develop the perspective and theoretical basis for
machine intelligence which holds that (a) machine intelligence
and especially machine learning rest on a capability for
autonomous hypothesis formation, (b) three distinct patterns of
inference underlie hypothesis formulation - Analytic, inductive,
and abductive inference, and (c) solving the problem of
mechanizing abductive inference is the key to implementing
successful machine learning systems. (This work should focus on
abductive inference and begin laying the foundations for a theory
of abductive inference in machine intelligence applications.)
(2) Draw upon the emerging theory of abductive inference to
establish a terminology for referring to abductive inference and
its role in machine intelligence and learning.
(3) Use this terminology to translate the emerging theory of
abductive inference into the terminology of state-of-the-art AI;
use these translations to connect abductive inference research
needs with current AI work that touches on abduction, e.g.,
nonmonotonic logic; and then discuss these connections within the
AI community. (the point of such an exercise is to identify
those aspects of current AI work which can contribute to the
achievement of mechanized and autonomous abductive inference
systems, and to identify a sequence of research steps that the AI
community can take towards this goal.)
(4) Research proposals for specific machine intelligence projects
should explain how the proposed project contributes to the
ultimate goal of autonomous machine intelligence systems which
learn by means of analytic, inductive, and abductive inferences.
Enough is now known about the terms of this criterion to
distinguish between projects which satisfy it and those which do
not.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Nov-85 0149 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #171
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Nov 85 01:49:34 PST
Date: Sun 17 Nov 1985 23:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #171
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 18 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 171
Today's Topics:
Report - Limits of Correctness in Computers (CSLI),
Awards - 1984 Information Awards of NSF,
Review - Summary of Spang Robinson Report,
Reports - ICOT Tech Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 13 Nov 85 17:05:26-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Report - Limits of Correctness in Computers (CSLI)
Report No. CSLI-85-36, ``Limits of Correctness in Computers'' by
Brian Cantwell Smith, has just been published. This report may be
obtained by writing to David Brown, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA
94305 or Brown@SU-CSLI.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 85 18:00:11 est
From: Ed Fox <fox%vpi.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: SIGIR Forum Fall 85 - List of 1984 Information Awards of NSF
[Excerpted from the IRList digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I. INFORMATION SCIENCE PROGRAM
Bolt Beranek & Newman
User Goals as a Basis for an Intelligent System's Ability to Understand Ill-
Formed Input--Weischedel, Ralph
Brandeis Univ.
Information Structure of a Natural Language Lexicon--Jackendoff, Ray
Brown Univ.
Cognitive Applications of Matrix Memory Models--Anderson, James A.
...
II. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
III. INFORMATION IMPACT PROGRAM
[For the full 13K text of this IRList Digest, FTP file <AILIST>NSFIS.TXT
from SRI-AI, or send a request to AIList-Request@SRI-AI.ARPA. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 1985 12:23-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Summary of Spang Robinson Report
FOCUS on MICRO Expert System tool kit
Estimated 1985 market at 7 million with 11,000 tool kits.
Sales figures:
Human Edge Software's Expert Ease 1800 copies (Jan - May)
Expert Edge 426 copies (Jan - October)
Expertintelligence 3000 copies
Level Five Research Insight 1 and 2 1300 copies
Review of Symantec's Q&A and Paradoxes by ANSI, two AI products for
industry.
Reviews of the following Expert System tools including a nice
comparative table with prices, machines available on, units sold
and revenues from expert systems.
First Class: limited to 256 examples and 32 factors per
knowledge base but knowledge bases can be chained.
Expert Ease: same limitations as firstclass
Wisdom PX: quantitative analysis
Wizdom XS: problem diagnostic
KDS: can handle 4000 rules and has dialog oriented user interface
TIMM: will infer an answer when the case does not exactly fit any of the
examples entered. Will report when case is not close enough to
any example. Will generate confidence factor. Also will allow
different experts to be integrated into the same expert system
RuleMaster: will allow user to create rule system with induction and
then edit with a rule editor.
Rule Based Systems
PPE public domain system available for $20.00
MicroExpert for $49.95 (originally published in Byte but updated
significantly) $95.00
Insight1 from Level 5 Research
Insight2 from Level5 for $495.00. Includes cyclical control and
interfaces to Turbo Pascal and dBase II and dbaseIII, supports
math and confidence systems
Exsys: suports math and confidence factors
Expert Edge: imports files, object hierarchy
High End Products
Personal Consultant from TI
M1 from Tecknowledge
KES: supports frames, production rules, Bayes Theorems and is written in C
Aion: checks for detached and redundant rules, has a Think Tank-like
front end.
Neuron Expert: Runs on on Macintosh, allows user to print network giving
relationship of all rules
Expertteach, includes Prolog 86, UO-Lisp and forward and backward
inferencing engines in prolog, lisp, pascal and DBASE-II
VENTURE CAPITAL
interviews with Sprout Group and Mayfield Fund
NEWS section
Applied Expert Systems agreed to buy 1000 Xerox 1186 AI workstations;
Applied Expert System markets PlanPower a personal financial planning
system. It will be distributing this system through Travelers
Insurance system to independent financial planners
MAD Intelligent systems agreed to supply compatible workstations to
the Philips group of companies, expected value: 15 million
Software A&E's KES now runs on the Tektronix 4404.
Migent Software has released ENRICH, The MEtods Expert, $595 on the IBM PC
Carnegie Group has delivered "Dispatcher" to Digital Equipment,
which dispatches order and controls material handling/conveyer for a
printed wire board assembly plant.
Discussion of Ford deal with Inference Corporation:
LIST of recent events and changes of bindings.
Review of Donald A. Waterman's "Guide to Expert Systems",
"Market for Expert Systems
bibliography of recent articles on AI and the PC.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 85 10:31:04 cst
From: Xu Yan ren <xu%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: ICOT Tech Reports
.TS
box;
cb s s s s
c|c|c|c
n|ltw(1i)|ltw(3i)|ltw(1.5).
ICOT TECHNICAL REPORT
←
NO. Author Topic Comment
←
002 S. Kunifuji et. T{
PROLOG and Relational Data Bases for Fifth Generation Computer system
T}
←
003 E.Y. Shapiro T{
A Subset Concurrent PROLOG and Its Interpreter
T}
←
006 A. Takeuchi et. T{
Interprocess Communication in Concurrent PROLOG
T}
←
008 H. Hirakawa T{
Chart Parsing in Concurrent PROLOG
T}
←
013 H. Nishikawa et. T{
The Personal Sequential Inference Machine(PSI): Its Design Philosophy
and machine architecture
T}
←
016 M. Sato et. T{
Qute: A PROLOG/LISP Type Language for Logic Programming
T}
←
017 T. Hikita T{
Average Size of Turner's Translation to Combinator Programs
T}
←
018 H. Tamaki et. T{
A Transformation System for Logic Programs which Preserves Equivalence
T}
←
019 H. Yasukawa T{
LFG in PROLOG --Toward a formal system for representing grammatical relations--
T}
←
020 H. Hirakawa et. T{
Implementing an OR-Parallel Optimizing PROLOG system (POPS) in
Concurrent PROLOG
T}
←
024 K. Sugiyama et. T{
A Knowledge Representation System in PROLOG
T}
←
026 H. Yokota et. T{
An Enhanced Inference mechanism for Generating Relational Algebra Queries
T}
←
027 H. Yasuura T{
On the parallel complexity of Unification
T}
←
028 K. Sakai et. T{
Incorporating Naive Negation into PROLOG
T}
←
029 K. Furukawa et. T{
Mandala: A Concurrent PROLOG Based Knowledge Programming Language/System
T}
←
030 H. Enomoto et. T{
Paradigms of Knowledge Based Software System and Its Service Image
T}
←
033 N. Ito et. T{
Parallel Inference Machine Based on the Data Flow Model
T}
←
034 E. Shapiro T{
Systems programming in Concurrent PROLOG
T}
←
035 N. Ito et. T{
Parallel PROLOG Machine Based on the Data Flow Model
T}
←
041 M. Aso T{
Simulator of XP'S
T}
←
042 R. Onai et. T{
An Approach to a Parallel Inference Machine Based on Control-Driven
and Data-Driven Mechanisms
T}
←
044 T. Chikayama et. T{
ESP Reference Manual
T}
←
046 J. Tsuji et. T{
Dialogue Management in the Personal Sequential Inference Machine (PSI)
T}
←
.TE
.TS
box;
cb s s s s
c|c|c|c
n|ltw(1i)|ltw(3i)|ltw(1.5).
ICOT TECHNICAL REPORT
←
NO. Author Topic Comment
←
053 S. Shibayama et. T{
A Relational Database Machine with Large Semiconducter Disk and Hardware
Relational Algebra Processor
T}
←
055 T. Hattori et. T{
SIMPOS: An Operating System for a Personal PROLOG Machine PSI
T}
←
056 T. Hattori et. T{
The Concept and Facilities of SIMPOS Supervisor
T}
←
057 S.Takagi et. T{
Overall Design of SIMPOS (Sequential Inference Machine Programming and
Operating System)
T}
←
058 F. Maruykama et. T{
PROLOG-Based Expert System for Logic Design
T}
←
059 T. Hattori et. T{
The Concept and Facilities of SIMPOS File System
T}
←
060 T. Yokomori T{
A Note on the Set Abstration in Logic Programming Language
T}
←
061 T. Kurokawa et. T{
Coordinator -- the Kernel of the Programming System for the Personal
Sequential Inference Machine (PSI)
T}
←
062 K. Sakai T{
An Ordering for Term Rewriting Systems
T}
←
063 H. Sakai et. T{
Design and Implementation of the Relational Database Engine
T}
←
064 S. Shibayama et. T{
Query Processing Flow on RDBM Delta's Functionally-Distributed Architecture
T}
←
065 K. Ueda et. T{
Efficient Stream/Array Processing in Logic Programming Language
T}
←
066 K. Iwata et. T{
Design and Implementation of a Two-Way Merge-Sorter and its Application
to Relational Database Processing
T}
←
067 H. Enomoto et. T{
Natural Language Based Software Development System Tell
T}
←
068 H. Enomoto et. T{
Formal Specification and Verification for Concurrent Systems by Tell
T}
←
071 M. Sugimoto et. T{
Design concept for a Software Development Consultation System
T}
←
072 T. Ida et. T{
Comparison of Closure Reduction and Combinatory Reduction Schemes
T}
←
074 N. Miyazaki et. T{
An Overview of Relational Database Machine Delta
T}
←
075 K. Taki et. T{
Hardware Design and Implementation of the Personal Sequential Inference
Machine (PSI)
T}
←
076 K. Furukawa et. T{
Mandala: A Logic Based Knowledge Programming System
T}
←
084 K. Murakami et. T{
Architectures and Hardware Systems: Parallel Inference Machine and
Knowledge Base Machine
T}
←
.TE
.TS
box;
cb s s s s
c|c|c|c
n|ltw(1i)|ltw(3i)|ltw(1.5).
ICOT TECHNICAL REPORT
←
NO. Author Topic Comment
←
086 S. Uchida et. T{
Sequential Inference Machine: SIM Progress Report
T}
←
088 H. Sawamura et. T{
Recursive Unsolvability of Determinacy, Solvable Cases of Determinacy and
their Applications to PROLOG Opetimization
T}
←
089 T. Kakuta et. T{
The Design and Implementation of Relational Database Machine Delta
T}
←
090 T. Miyazaki et. T{
A Sequential Implementation of Concurrent PROLOG based on the Shallow Binding
Scheme
T}
←
.TE
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Nov-85 1155 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #172
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Nov 85 11:54:59 PST
Date: Mon 18 Nov 1985 09:24-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #172
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 18 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 172
Today's Topics:
Queries - Fictional Machines That Talk & Object-Oriented Programming,
AI Tools - Typed Languages and Lisp,
Psychology - Prejudice,
Inference - Abduction & Translating Representations,
Intelligence - IQ Test for AI,
Review - TI's Satellite Symposium and AI Hype,
News - RCA Chair at Penn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 85 16:17 PST
From: Halvorsen.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Fictional accounts of machines that talk
I am looking for references to early (or ideally the earliest) mention
of machines with natural language capabilities in fiction or film.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 85 12:09
From: Nick Davies (at GEC Research) <YE85%mrca.co.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Object oriented programming in Common Lisp
Does anyone have or know of an implementation of Flavors or any other
object-oriented programming system in Common Lisp ?
Nick Davies (ye85%uk.co.mrca@cs.ucl.ac.uk).
Thanks in advance
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 85 14:09:10 gmt
From: Don Sannella <dts%cstvax.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Re: Typed languages and Lisp
>From: Skef Wholey <Wholey@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
A type checker can find some bugs, but it isn't clear that such bugs would
take much time to find and fix relative the to the "real" bugs a programmer
spends most of his time on. Also, actually entering type information can
add to program development time. Controlled experiments are required ...
I have been programming in HOPE and ML (both of which have the same strong but
flexible type system, due to Robin Milner) for about seven years. I do not
know of any controlled experiments which show that strong type checking
decreases program development time; I can only report that in my experience
using these languages, the type checker catches so many bugs (I would guess
far in excess of 95% of non-syntax errors) that programs really do usually
run correctly the first time they get past the type checker. I have heard
other people who use these languages say the same thing, and I haven't met
anybody who has really tried to use them complaining that entering type
information doesn't pay off. (This is especially true of ML, where the
compiler is able to infer types of functions so that a programmer is not
required to say much about types at all.) I shudder to think of how much
time I would have wasted in LISP trying to track down some of the (often
subtle) type bugs the compiler has caught for me!
Disclaimer: I haven't tried writing things like operating systems or compilers
in a language like HOPE or ML (although other people have done so), so I don't
know how much the strong type system gets in the way in cases like these. My
experience is with rather mathematically-oriented programs of 1000 lines or so.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 85 22:32:12 PST
From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Subject: Removing Prejudice
Concerning removing prejudice, let me suggest reading "The Nature of
Prejudice" by Gordon Allport and Patrick Monihan (then a Prof at Harvard).
I think modeling prejudice accurately is the mandate for AI systems, not
removing it.
Rich.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 85 03:16 EST
From: jcma@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Abduction Makes The Big Time
See Charniak and McDermott, Introduction to AI, Addison-Wesley, 1985 for
several big sections on abduction.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 85 10:27 PST
From: Shrager.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Abduction
Isn't this what *all* script and schema inference systems do?
Isn't this what *all* pattern recognition systems do?
In fact almost every AI system that is not proof-based does something
like what you are calling abduction. I can't understand why anyone
thinks that this is news, other than having a fancy new name for what
we've been doing for years.
-- Jeff
------------------------------
Date: 17 Nov 85 21:18 PST
From: Shrager.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: On translating representations
"[...] for psychological reasons, in order to guess new theories,
[mathematically equivalent theories] may be very far from equivalent,
because one gives a man different ideas from the other. [...] every
theoretical physicist who is any good knows six or seven different
theoretical representations for exactly the same physics. He knows they
are equivalent, and that nobody is ever going to be able to decide which
one is right at that level, but he keeps them in his head, hoping that
they will give him different ideas for guessing [new theories]."
From: Feynman, R (1965). The Character of Physical Law. MIT press,
Cambridge, Mass. pp. 168.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 85 10:39:47 est
From: Geoff Loker <gkloker%utai%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Re: IQ test for AI. (AIList Digest V3 #164)
> I don't remember anyone suggesting to test AI programs with the
> traditional human IQ test. [...]
> Has any one tried to write such a computer program ?
> Rene Bach (Bach@score)
Thomas Evans' PhD thesis (MIT 1963) was concerned with the solution
by machine of so-called "geometric-analogy" IQ test questions. The
program he developped was called ANALOGY, and it apparently did quite
well with the "A is to B as C is to ←←" picture problems.
A revised form of his thesis can be found in "Semantic Information
Processing", edited by Marvin Minsky, published 1968 by MIT Press.
Also, the second edition of Winston's "Artificial Intelligence"
(1984) refers to Evans' work and may have pointers to follow-up
work as well.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 85 12:04:21 EST
From: Jakob Nielsen <nielsen.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Future IQ
I have actually for some time used the term "AIQ"
(Artificial Intelligence Quotient) as a shorthand when discussing
computers (e.g. "this system has an incredibly low AIQ").
I don't think that it would have any meaning to use human IQ tests
on computers however - just understanding the questions themselves
(without trying to *answer* them) would require a higher AIQ than
normally seen these days.
Of course in 2085, who knows ...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1985 03:39 EST
From: "David D. Story" <FTD%MIT-OZ @ MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: TI's Satellite Symposium & AI Hype
I went to this thing. It was terrible. The technical content
was zilch. I also question the way that "expert systems" and
rule-production systems are lumped together. Expert systems
are defined as systems that can handle areas of knowledge in
the manner that a human expert does. They may or may not be
rule-production systems. Rule Production systems may not
exhibit even vaguest qualities of a human expert.
This type of lumpage will only serve to confuse the general public
and lend the credence of the speakers and TI to real consumer
fraud. There is not even mention of the performance criteria that
originally generated the name of "EXPERT SYSTEM". This is further
solidified by a apprx. 25 year old student saying that he wrote an "EXPERT
SYSTEM" with a couple of rules. If I say that you have a gross income
of over $6000 dollars and you have to file, does that make me an
EXPERT. I think not.
There is no mention of the degree of expertice of such systems should
possess before being named even decision support tools.
What compounds this was I attended the Press viewing of the symposium
and there was no one there to field guestions. Most novices come with
a pre-concieved idea of AI and leave being more reinforced with
errant notions.
This feeds into Geoff Goodfellow's previous posting on this list. The
furtherence of this hype is just another blackeye AI researchers are
going to have to bear when it comes to how much funding AI is
receiving. Generating interest by speculation is one thing - opening
the doors for real consumer fraud other !
Dave Story
FTD@MIT-OZ
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 02:03 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: RCA Chair at Penn
RCA ESTABLISHES AN AI CHAIR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
The University of Pennsylvania is pleased to announce the establishment
of the RCA Professorship in Artificial Intelligence in the Department
of Computer and Information Science. Established through the
generosity of RCA, the chair is intended to enhance the University's
position as a leading center for research and education in artificial
intelligence.
The University's tradition of pioneering work in the computing field, from
the development of ENIAC, the offering of the first computer course, and the
graduation of the first PhD in computer science, manifests itself today in a
strong focus in the Computer and Information Science Department on
artificial intelligence. The department is involved in a variety of research
programs at the forefront of the field, including work in natural language
processing, knowledge representation and reasoning, expert systems, computer
vision and robotics, computer graphics, parallel processing, programming
languages and environments, computer architecture and systems, theory of
computation, software engineering, and database systems. These research
programs involve interactions with the Departments of Electrical and
Mechanical Engineering (in sensors and robotics), the Department of Chemical
Engineering (in expert systems), the Departments of Linguistics, Philosophy,
and Psychology (in cognitive science, in particular, in the computational
aspects of language and perception), the Wharton School (in database
systems, expert systems, and software engineering), and the Medical School
(in expert systems and image processing).
The person appointed to the RCA Professorship will be a distinguished
scholar who has performed outstanding research in artificial intelligence
with both theoretical and practical significance, especially in the areas of
knowledge representation and reasoning with potential applications to the
new generation of expert systems technology.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂19-Nov-85 0206 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #173
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Nov 85 02:05:56 PST
Date: Tue 19 Nov 1985 00:15-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #173
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 19 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 173
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Adaptive Planning (UCB) &
Sparse Distributed Memory (BBN) &
Explanation-Based Learning (BBN) &
Learning Search Control Knowledge (CMU) &
MED2 Diagnostic Expert (MIT) &
Truth Maintenance, Multiple Worlds in KEE (SU) &
Representation of Natural Form (SU) &
Setting Tables and Illustrations With Style (CSLI),
Course - Connectionist Models (CMU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 85 16:57:53 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - Adaptive Planning (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, November 19, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``Adaptive Planning is Commonsense Planning''
Richard Alterman
Computer Science Division, U.C.B.
A characteristic of commonsense planning is that it is
knowledge intensive. For most mundane sorts of situations
human planners have access to, and are capable of exploiting,
large quantities of knowledge. Commonsense planners re-use old
plans under their normal circumstances. Moreover, commonsense
planners are capable of refitting old plans to novel cir-
cumstances. A commonsense planner can plan about a wide range
of phenomena, not so much because his/her depth of knowledge is
consistent throughout that range, but because s/he can re-fit
old plans to novel contexts.
This talk is about an approach to commonsense planning
called adaptive planning. An adaptive planner plans by exploit-
ing planning knowledge in a manner that delays the reduction of
commonsense planning to problem-solving. Key elements in the
theory of adaptive planning are its treatment of background
knowledge and the introduction of a notion of planning by
situation matching. This talk will describe adaptive planning
as it applies to a number of commonsense planning situations,
including: riding the NYC subway, trading books, transferring
planes at JFK airport, and driving a rented car.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 1985 11:48-EST
From: BGOODMAN at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Sparse Distributed Memory (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Labs SDP AI Seminar
Speaker: Dr. Michael R. Raugh
Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science
NASA Ames Research Center
Title: Kanerva's Sparse Distributed Memory: A RIACS Project
Date: Friday, November 22nd, 2:00pm
Location: Main Seminar Room (2nd floor)
Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.
50 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA.
An exciting new concept in which information is stored in a large number
of neighboring addresses determined by "content," produces a memory
that retrieves causal relationships as well as sequences of episodes and
is sensitive to similarity. It is also forgetful and reinforcable: a
memory much like yours and mine.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 1985 11:48-EST
From: BGOODMAN at BBNG.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Explanation-Based Learning (BBN)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
BBN Labs SDP AI Seminar
Speaker: Professor Gerald DeJong
Coordinated Science Laboratory
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Title: Explanation Based Learning
Date: Monday, November 25th, 10:30am
Location: 2nd Floor Large Conference room
BBN Laboratories Inc.
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA.
Machine learning is one of the most important current
areas of artificial intelligence. With the trend away from
"weak methods" and toward a more knowledge intensive approach
to intelligence, the lack of knowledge in an AI system becomes
one of the most serious limitations.
This talk advances a technique called explanation based
learning. It is a method of learning from observation.
Basically, it involves endowing a system with sufficient
knowledge so that intelligent planning behavior of others
can be recognized. Once recognized, these observed plans are
generalized as far as possible while preserving the underlying
explanation of their success. The approach supports one-trial
learning. A new general concept can be acquired from an observation
of just one observed example. The approach has been applied
to three diverse areas: natural language processing, robot
task planning, and proof of propositional calculus theorems. The
approach holds promise for solving the knowledge collection
bottleneck in the construction of current knowledge-based systems.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 85 23:39:59 EST
From: Steven.Minton@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Seminar - Learning Search Control Knowledge (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
On Wednesday, November 20, at 12:00 I will present my thesis
proposal in 5409. My thesis is concerned with the use of
explanation-based generalization in the PRODIGY system, a learning
apprentice that (among other things) acquires search control rules.
The title is: "Analytic Techniques for Learning Search Control Knowledge".
Copies are in the lounge.
ABSTRACT
Compression analysis, the subject of the proposed thesis, is a method for
analyzing search spaces to produce effective search control rules.
As with previous explanation-based learning techniques, an example problem
focuses the analysis process so that the entire search space need not
be analyzed. The key idea behind compression analysis is that
many alternative explanations can be produced to justify a search control
decision; therefore it is appropriate to search for an explanation that
produces the most effective generalized control rule. In practice this is
achieved by proposing an initial explanation which is then improved
using a set of heuristic transformation strategies.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 85 16:28:06 EST
From: "Steven A. Swernofsky" <SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - MED2 Diagnostic Expert (MIT)
Wednesday 20, November 4: 00pm (4:15 Refreshments) Room: NE43-512A
"MED2: An Expert System Shell for Diagnosis and Therapy in Complex Domains"
Frank Puppe
Kaiserlautern University
Germany
Concentrating on the medical domain, MED2 is a shell combining a wide
variety of important aspects of clinical reasoning. It's
"Working-Memory" control structure involves investigating a set of
hypotheses simultaneously, avoiding the shortcomings of focussing on
the top-hypothesis only. This concept allows using differential
diagnosis techniques and exploiting relationships among patho-concepts
in an efficient manner. Other interesting features of MED2 include
separation of database and diagnostic reasoning, temporal reasoning,
and belief revision.
HOST: Prof. Peter Szolovits
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Nov 85 08:32:01-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Truth Maintenance, Multiple Worlds in KEE (SU)
DAY December 3, 1985
EVENT Computer Science Colloquium
PLACE Skilling Auditorium
TIME 4:15
TITLE "Truth Maintenance and Multiple Worlds in KEE"
PERSON Paul Morris, Robert Nado, Richard Fikes
FROM IntelliCorp
TRUTH, MAINTENANCE AND MULTIPLE WORLDS IN KEE
We describe the integration of an assumption-based truth maintenance
system (ATMS) into the frame-based representation facilities of the
KEE system, and the use of the ATMS to implement a multiple-world
context graph system for KEE. Integration into the frame system
involves associating with potential slot values ATMS nodes that are
used to determine in which worlds (contexts) the slot values are
believed. Built-in inferences provided by the frame system, such as
inheritance and the checking of value class and cardinality
constraints, are recorded, when needed, as explicit justifications in
the ATMS. In addition, the default reasoning capabilities of KEE have
been refined and extended to take advantage of the ATMS. Tradeoffs in
the integration between flexibility of use and run-time efficiency are
examined. We describe the multiple-world context graph system with
particular attention to an interpretation of the graph as a network of
actions. In this framework, the semantics of graph merges are
investigated and restrictions to ensure valid action sequences are
discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Nov 85 08:29:15-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Representation of Natural Form (SU)
DAY November 19, 1985
EVENT Computer Science Colloquium
PLACE Skilling Auditorium
TIME 4:15
TITLE Perceptual Organization and the Representation of Natural Form
PERSON Alex P. Pentland
FROM AI Center, SRI Int'l and CSLI, Stanford
PERCEPTUAL ORGANIZATION AND THE REPRESENTATION OF NATURAL FORM
To understand both perception and commonsense reasoning we need a
representation that captures important physical regularities and
that correctly describes the people's perceptual organization of
the stimulus. Unfortunately, the current representations were
originally developed for other purposes (e.g., physics, engineering)
and are therefore often unsuitable.
We have developed a new representation and used it to make
accurate descriptions of an extensive variety of natural forms
including people, mountains, clouds and trees. The descriptions
are amazingly compact. The approach of this representation is to
describe scene structure in a manner similar to people's notion
of ``a part,'' using descriptions that reflect a possible
formative history of the object, e.g., how the object might have
been constructed from lumps of clay.
For this representation to be useful it must be possible to
recover such descriptions from image data; we show that the
primitive elements of such descriptions may be recovered in an
overconstrained and therefore reliable manner. An interactive
``real-time'' 3-D graphics modeling system based on this
representation will be shown, together with short animated
sequences demonstrating the descriptive power of the
representation.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Nov 85 11:46:58-PST
From: Fred Lakin <LAKIN@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Setting Tables and Illustrations With Style (CSLI)
Pixels and Predicates:
SETTING TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS WITH STYLE
Who: Rick Beach, Xerox PARC
Where: CSLI trailers
When: 1:00pm - Wednesday, November 20, 1985
Abstract:
Two difficult examples of incorporating complex information within
electronic documents are illustrations and tables. The notion of style,
a way of maintaining consistency, helps manage the complexities of
formatting both tables and illustrations. The concept of graphical
style extends document style to illustrations. Observing that graphical
style does not adequately deal with the layout of information leads to
the study of formatting tabular material. A grid system for describing
the arrangement of information in a table, and a constraint solver for
determining the layout of the table are key components of this research.
These ideas appear to extend to formatting other complex material,
including mathematical typesetting and page layout. Several typographic
issues for illustrations and tables will be highlighted during the talk.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Nov 85 23:29 EST
From: Dave.Touretzky@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Course - Connectionist Models (CMU)
CONNECTIONIST MODELS: A SUMMER SCHOOL
Sponsored by the Sloan Foundation
ORGANIZERS: Geoffrey Hinton (Carnegie-Mellon University)
Terrence Sejnowski (The Johns Hopkins University)
David Touretzky (Carnegie-Mellon University)
DATE: June 20 through 29, 1986
PLACE: Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM: The purpose of the summer school is to familiarize
young researchers with current techniques in the area of connectionist models
of intelligence. This includes search procedures, learning procedures, and
methods for representing knowledge in massively parallel networks of
neuron-like units. Application areas include vision, speech, associative
memory, natural language and motor control.
FACULTY: There will be six full time Tutors plus several Guest Lecturers.
Tutors: Guest Lecturers:
James Anderson, Brown University Jerome Feldman, U. of Rochester
Dana Ballard, U. of Rochester Christof Koch, MIT
Andrew Barto, U. Mass. Amherst David Rumelhart, UCSD
Geoffrey Hinton, CMU David Touretzky, CMU
James McClelland, CMU others to be announced
Terrence Sejnowski, Johns Hopkins
WHO MAY ATTEND: Participation is limited to graduate students and recent PhD's
who are or will be working on connectionist models. About 40 students will be
accepted. Persons who have already completed a Ph.D. degree must have done so
no earlier than January 1985 to be eligible to attend.
EXPENSES: There is no tuition charge. Funding from the Sloan Foundation will
provide dormitory accommodations and breakfast and lunch for each attendee,
plus reimbursement for a substantial portion of travel expenses.
HOW TO APPLY: By March 1, 1986, send your curriculum vitae and a copy of one
relevant paper, technical report, or research proposal to: Dr. David
Touretzky, Computer Science Department, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh,
PA, 15213. Applicants will be notified of acceptance by April 15, 1986.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Nov-85 1213 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #174
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Nov 85 12:11:59 PST
Date: Wed 20 Nov 1985 09:53-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #174
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 20 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 174
Today's Topics:
Queries - PEARL & Man/Machine IQ Tests & Smalltalk,
AI Tools - Object-Oriented Programming,
Science Fiction - Machines Who Talk,
Survey - Classic AI Books,
AI Tools - Xerox 1186
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 NOV 85 12:09-N
From: SCHNEIDER%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Information about PEARL
Does anybody know, whether the PEARL project at Berkeley is still alive
and whom I could contact if I have questions ?
(I couldn't reach anybody of the persons mentioned in the Pearl manual
distributed with the UNIX Franz Lisp.)
I also would be glad to get some comments on that language or pointers
to systems that have been built with it.
SNAILMAIL: Daniel Schneider
Departement de science politique
Universite de Geneve
1211 GENEVE 4 (=GENEVA)
Switzerland
BITNET: SCHNEIDER@CGEUGE51
From ARPANET: SCHNEIDER%CGEUGE51.BITNET@WISCVM
Usenet: mcvax!cernvax!cui!shneider (shneider without "c")
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 14:38:58 PST
From: Laursen.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: IQ test for AI. (AIList Digest V3 #164)
Coming at this from another angle, has anyone considered building an AI
system that boosts a human being's performance on IQ tests? Can a
person/computer combination confirm that 'Two heads are better than
one?" A baseline for comparison would have to allow the non-AI assisted
person access to a calculator and an on-line dictionary while taking an
IQ test. How much leverage beyond that could an 'intelligent' system
give?
------------------------------
Date: nov 20 1985
From: astropa%ipacuc.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: smalltalk
I would like to know if anyone can help me to reach the people who
originally implemented Smalltalk-80 at Xerox on the networks. They
are Adele Goldberg, David Robson, Daniel Ingalls. I also would like to
know if there is somebody out there interested in Smalltalk, and if
someone knows about public-domain implementations of Smalltalk.
Please send private replies to me.
Fabio Favata
Net address: ASTROPA@IPACUC.BITNET
Use the Wisconsin ARPA-BITNET gateway to reach Bitnet.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Nov 85 15:44 PST
From: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Object-Oriented Programming in Lisp
From: Nick Davies (at GEC Research) <YE85%mrca.co.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Object oriented programming in Common Lisp
> Does anyone have or know of an implementation of Flavors
> or any other object-oriented programming system in Common Lisp ?
CommonLoops is an object oriented language that is written in Common
Lisp. It is being proposed by Xerox as a standard for object-oriented
programming for that language.
CommonLoops merges the facilities of object oriented programming and
Lisp. It has a unique combination of properties. These include a
uniform syntax for function calling and sending messages; a merger of
the type space of Lisp and the class hierarchy of objects; a
generalization of method specification that includes ordinary Lisp
functions at one extreme, and fully type specified functions at the
other; and a "metaclass" mechanism that allows tradeoffs between early
binding and ease of exploratory programming in the implementation of
objects.
For information about the availability of an experimental version of
CommonLoops in Common Lisp contact Paul Ricci (Ricci@Xerox.ARPA).
For a copy of a paper describing CommonLoops, please send your U.S.
Mail address to MGardner@Xerox.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 20:55:28 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Fictional accounts of machines that talk
Date: 15 Nov 85 16:17 PST
From: Halvorsen.pa@Xerox.ARPA
I am looking for references to early (or ideally the earliest) mention
of machines with natural language capabilities in fiction or film.
In the story of Theseus and the Minotaur, author and age (at least
3000 years) unknown, Talus, the man of brass, is a minor character.
It was hammered out by Vulcan, owned by King Minos, and drowned when
it overreached itself attempting to club Theseus' vessel. It was able
to speak Greek.
...Keith
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 17:43:08 est
From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher@MIT-HTVAX.ARPA>
Subject: Machines Who Talk
Try Pam McCorduck's "Machines Who Think". The first chapter
"Brass for Brains" tells the history of AI from ancient Greece
to the Dartmouth conference. Page 4 has a quote from Homer's
Iliad, circa 850 BC, concerning Hephaestus' attendants, whom he
created in his forge:
These are golden, and in appearance like living young women.
There is intelligence in their hearts, and there is speech
in them and strength, and from the immortal gods they have
learned how to do things.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 14:47 EST
From: Seth Steinberg <sas@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
Subject: Old Time Natural Language@bbn-vax.ARPA
How about Roger Bacon's great bronze head? He supposedly built it to
answer questions for him which it supposedly did rather well. It
finally said, "Time is, time was, time past." and shattered into pieces
but we've all had this happen to us at one time or another. Before you
get too impressed with this story think of how much more impressed
you'd be if Bacon had supposedly typed in the questions on a keyboard?
There might be older stories lurking around Daedalus or possibly in
Ezekiel which supposedly has something for everyone in it.
Seth Steinberg
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 19 November 1985 17:50:28 EST
From: Dan.Miller@a.sei.cmu.edu
Subject: Results - Classic AI Books Survey
The following are the results of an October 19, 1985 AIList survey concerning
classic AI books. Thanks to all who responded.
--- Daniel "Dan" H. MIller Software Engineering Institute
dhm@sei.cmu.edu (dhm@cmu-sei.arpa) Carnegie-Mellon University
(412)578-7700 Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
"Disclaimer: The views and conclusions are those of the author, and
should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either
expressed or implied, of any organization he may be affiliated with."
===========================================================================
CLASSIC ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BOOKS SURVEY RESULTS
===========================================================================
Total people responding: 5 Total number of responses: 14
...........................................................................
Number of responses for the same book: 2
Minsky, "Semantic Information Processing" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
GLICK@AIDS-UNIX.ARPA
...........................................................................
Multiple responses for same author: 2 sets
Nilsson, "Principles of AI". TIM%UPENN.CSNET@CSNET-RELAY
Nilsson, "Problem Solving Methods in AI" GLICK@AIDS-UNIX.ARPA
Winston, "The Psychology of Computer Vision" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Winston, "Artificial Intelligence" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
(the best intro to the field)
...........................................................................
Number of responses for single books: 8
Bobrow & Collins, eds., "Representation and Understanding".
Academic Press, 1975. Still in print. VIS!GREG@SDCSVAX.ARPA
Duda & Hart, "Pattern Classification & Scene Analysis"
(also a classic in the pattern recognition literature)
MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Feigenbaum and Feldman, "Computers and Thought" GLICK@AIDS-UNIX.ARPA
Hofstader (sp?), Douglas, "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid"
(good reading for people who are AI oriented)
PES@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA
Marr, "Vision" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
(published in 82, this book may be too young to be considered
a classic, but it expounds a set of principles that will
always be applicable to vision)
Minsky & Papert, "Perceptrons" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
(also a classic in the pattern recognition literature)
Newell & Simon, "Human Problem Solving" MICHAELG%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
(a thorough analysis containing many important ideas)
Weizenbaum, "Human Reason: From Judgement to Calculation"
(a very readable book with some very powerful ideas)
PES@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Mon 18 Nov 85 18:55:21-PST
From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Comments on the Xerox 1186...
We've had a Xerox 1186 here for a couple of weeks running a
beta-version of Koto (the next release of Interlisp-D). It is configured
with 3.8 Mb of memory, a 40 Mb disk, and the smaller display (633x832).
The sales lit notes that you can buy as little memory as 1.1
Mb, disks sized at 10 Mb, 20 Mb, 40 Mb or 80 Mb, and a 15 or 19 inch
display.) I've used as little as 1.1 Mb of memory in a dolphin and
found that a typical Interlisp-D working set wants more. I recommend
at least 1.6 Mb. Similarly, a 10 Mb disk isn't large enough to
support much virtual memory. I recommend at least 20 Mb. We've found
the small display adequate, but, naturally, prefer more bits. (The 19
inch screen has more bits on it than the 808x1024 bits on the 17 inch
display found on dolphins and dandelions, but I don't know how many.)
Before laying eyes on an 1186 we ordered a number of them for
program development with 3.8 Mb of memory, 40 Mb of disk, and the 19
inch display. From our recent experience I wouldn't consider changing
the configuration in any respect.
The processor is less than half the size of a dandelion and a
good deal cooler and quieter, but still not 100% unobtrusive. The
keyboard is a major improvement over that of the dandelion.
In speed it is not markedly different from a dandetiger, doing
some things a little faster and others a little slower. Eg. it reads
files off of our unix file server slightly faster than a 'tiger and
off a Xerox 8037 slightly slower. The discrepancies that favor one
machine over the other are roughly equal in number and not more than
about 10-20% in magnitude. Exceptions: It's much weaker in floating
point (it lacks the special hardware), and in drawline (it lacks the
microcode). I expect the microcode situation to improve, but I have
been unable to get a statement out of AIS on this point.
I'd be willing to answer specific questions, but, as noted
above, we've only had it for a couple of weeks and we're running
beta-release software, so "your mileage may vary."
--Christopher
------------------------------
Date: 19 Nov 85 09:42 PST
From: Stern.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: Comments on the Xerox 1186...
Just a note from the XAIS sales staff: the 1.1 mb RAM and 10 mb disk
are offered for "delivery systems" use, where an end user is not doing
development, and is probably running only compiled code. The average
application, even in runtime-only mode, may well require more of each
resource, but then again it may not. For development, you probably want
the full-up machines.
Josh
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂21-Nov-85 2359 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #175
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Nov 85 23:58:56 PST
Date: Thu 21 Nov 1985 21:52-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #175
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 22 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 175
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Unification Revisited (SRI) &
Expanding the Horizons of Expert Systems (SRI) &
CYC Commonsense Knowledge Project (GTE) &
A Multimodal Perceptual System (UPenn) &
ANALOGICA '85 (Rutgers),
Conference - Foundations of AI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 19 Nov 85 10:02:51-PST
From: OLENDER@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Unification Revisited (SRI)
DATE: Monday, November 25, 1985
LOCATION: EJ242
UNIFICATION REVISITED
Jean-Louis Lassez
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
There are three main approaches to finitely represent sets of
solutions of equations in the Herbrand Universe. In Robinson's
classical approach the set of solutions is represented by an mgu which
is computed from the set of equations. We introduce a dual approach,
based on Plotkin's and Reynold's concept of anti-unification in which
the finite representation (mgs) is now "lifted" from the set of
solutions. A third approach proposed by Colmerauer is based on the
concept of eliminable variables.
The relationships between these three approaches are established.
This study provides an appropriate setting to address the problem of
solving systems of equations and inequations which arises in recent
extensions to Prolog. A key result is that the meta-equation
E = E1 v E2 v ... v En
admits solutions only in trivial cases. Two important corollaries
follow naturally. The first is Colmerauer's property of independences
of inequations. This means that deciding whether a system of
equations and inequations has solutions can be done in parallel. The
other corollary is a negative result; the set of solutions of a system
of equations and inequations can be finitely represented by mgu's only
in trivial cases. Consequently, one cannot obtain a simplified system
which is in "solved" form. This is unlike the case when only
equations are considered. Similar properties hold in inductive
inference when one attempts to generalize from sets of examples and
counter-examples.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 19 Nov 85 15:25:48-PST
From: ICHIKI@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Expanding the Horizons of Expert Systems (SRI)
EXPANDING THE HORIZONS OF EXPERT SYSTEMS
Piero P. Bonissone and Allen L. Brown, Jr.
General Electric Corp. R&D
Conference Room EK242
Thursday, November 21, 1985 (10:00 - 11:00a.m.)
Abstract: In this paper we analyze the complexity of problem domains,
such as maintenance problems, typically handled by first generation
expert systems. DELTA/CATS-1, an expert system for troubleshooting
diesel electric locomotives, is described as a typical example of such
systems. More complex domains of expertise involving time-varying,
partial and uncertain information cannot be addressed by the
techniques common to first generation expert systems. LOTTA, a
symbolic simulator of battlefield situations, illustrates some of the
requirements of such an intricate domain. We discuss the new
inference techniques required to address the problem of managing
battlefield strategies and tactics. These techniques include
capabilities for reasoning with uncertain and incomplete information.
The state of the art and current research thrusts are discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 11:16:19 EST
From: Bernard Silver <SILVER@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - CYC Commonsense Knowledge Project (GTE)
GTE Laboratories AI Seminar
Monday, November 25, 3 pm
Room 8-2335
GTE Laboratories
40 Sylvan Rd.,Waltham, MA
Mayank Prakash of MCC, Austin, Texas, will discuss the current state of
research on the CYC Project.
The CYC Project
The CYC Project at MCC is an attempt to enhance the power of AI
systems by providing them with common sense knowledge. Our approach
is based on the observations that 1) the brittleness of current
AI systems is due to a lack of knowledge of the broader context of
their narrow domain, and 2) automated acquisition of knowledge
requires the system to start out with a critical mass of general
knowledge. Our goal is to create a system with a large common
sense knowledge base. It will serve as a source of power for other
AI systems by acting as a knowedge server and thus providing a deeper
understanding of the domain, and by providing the ability to
analogise. It is our belief that this will significantly enhance the
performance of such systems.
For more information, please contact Bernard Silver (617) 466-2663
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 12:11 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - A Multimodal Perceptual System (UPenn)
Forwarded From: Sharon Stansfield <Stansfield@UPenn>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 11:09 EST
THESIS PROPOSAL:
A RUDIMENTARY ACTIVE,
MULTIMODAL, INTELLIGENT SYSTEM
FOR OBJECT CATEGORIZATION
S. A. Stansfield
This proposal outlines the design of a knowledge-based, active, multimodal
perceptual system for the task of object categorization. Passive stereo vision
and active touch are used.
Basic level, or generic, objects will be recognized. The representation for
reasoning will be hierarcical and frame-based. At the highest level will
reside a representation of the object as a whole, including the features which
comprise it and the relations among them. Intermediate levels will contain
frames for the various features and the slots to be filled will contain the
tactile, visual, and amodal properties of these features. The geometric
representation will be based upon the idea of a spatial polyhedron: an object
centered guide to the exploration of the object.
The architecture will be a distributed hierarchy of knowledge-based modules,
each domain specific and informationally encapsulated. These experts will be
dedicated to the exploration for and identification of the features recognized
by the system. Each module will be responsible for filling in the slots of the
frame with which it is associated. At the lowest level of the hierarchy are
the visual and tactual perception systems. At the highest level are the two
strategists: the reasoner, responsible for hypotheses generation,
disambiguation, and culling; and the explorer, responsible for generating
sensing strategies once a goal has been formulated by the reasoner.
Advisor: Committee:
R. Bajcsy S. Lederman
R. Paul
L. Shastri
Monday, 25 November 1985
10:00 a.m.
Room To Be Announced
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 85 12:21:19 EST
From: PRIEDITIS@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: Seminars - ANALOGICA '85 (Rutgers)
You are cordially invited to attend
ANALOGICA '85
AT RUTGERS
Monday, December 2, 1985
8:30 AM - 6:00 PM
Hill Center for the Mathematical Sciences, Room 705
Busch Campus, Rutgers University
New Brunswick, NJ
Sponsored by
Department of Computer Science
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
and
GTE Fundamental Research Laboratories
Waltham, MA
Free and Open to the Public
Analogica '85 is a multidisciplinary seminar on analogical reasoning, bringing
together researchers from various disciplines such as artificial intelligence,
cognitive psychology, linguistics, and philosophy of science. This one-day
seminar will include eight half-hour talks and a panel discussion.
Complimentary refreshments and lunch will be served.
For more information, contact:
Armand Prieditis, prieditis@rutgers.arpa, 201-932-4273
Smadar Kedar-Cabelli, kedar-cabelli@rutgers.arpa 201-932-4648
Tom Mitchell, faculty sponsor, 201-932-4716
SCHEDULE:
8:30 - 9:00 Coffee and donuts
9:00 - 9:15 Welcome
9:15 - 9:45 Dedre Gentner, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
9:45 - 10:15 Mark Burstein, BBN Laboratories
10:15 - 10:30 Coffee and donuts
10:30 - 11:00 Paul Thagard, Princeton University
11:00 - 11:30 Russell Greiner, University of Toronto
11:30 - 12:00 Smadar Kedar-Cabelli, Rutgers University
12:00 - 2:30 Luncheon
2:30 - 3:00 Lindley Darden, University of Maryland
3:00 - 3:30 Bipin Indurkhya, Boston University
3:30 - 4:00 Keith Holyoak, University of Michigan
4:00 - 4:15 Coffee and Donuts
4:15 - 5:45 Panel discussion
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 17:40:07 mst
From: yorick%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Foundations of AI
WORKSHOP ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF AI
Holiday Inn, Las Cruces, New Mexico
Thursday February 6th - Saturday February 8th, 1986
Wednesday, February 5th:
6.00 pm welcome reception
9.00 - 9.30am: WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION: WILKS
9.30 - 12.30: LOGICAL/PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF AI (1) (Chair: Wilks)
CHANDRASEKARAN - Paradigms in AI: An historical and contemporary perspective
HALPERN* - Turing's Test and the ideology of AI
Coffee (15 mins)
NEEDHAM - There's nothing special about AI
General Discussion (30 mins)
2.00 - 5.00pm: LOGICAL/PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF AI (2) (Chair: Hayes, Pat)
DREYFUS - Traditional AI: A degenerating research program
FODOR - Why there still has to be a language of thought
Coffee (15 mins)
DENNETT - The myth of original intentionality
General Discussion (30 mins)
Friday, February 7th:
9.30 - 12.30: RELATION BETWEEN FOUNDATIONS AND PROGRAMS (1) (Chair: Sleeman)
BUNDY - What Kind of Field is AI?
McCARTHY - AI Reasoning Should be Logic with Extensions
Coffee (15 mins)
CAMPBELL* - Novelties of AI: Theories, Programs, and Rational Reconstructions
General Discussion (30 mins)
2.00 - 5.00pm: RELATION BETWEEN FOUNDATIONS AND PROGRAMS (2) (Chair: Brachman)
SPARCK-JONES - What is an experiment in AI?
NEWELL - On Comparing General Cognitive Architectures
Coffee (15 mins)
PYLYSHYN - Programs as models: Can there be a strong equivalence?
General Discussion (30 mins)
6.00 pm An evening in Mexico
Saturday, February 8th:
9.30 - 12.30: AI AND OTHER DISCIPLINES (1) (Chair: Uhr)
ARBIB - How does Brain Theory Relate to AI?
CHURCHLAND - AI and the neurosciences
Coffee (15 mins)
JOSHI - AI and Linguistics
General Discussion (30 mins)
2.00 - 5.00: AI AND OTHER DISCIPLINES (2) (Chair: Schvaneveldt)
RUMELHART - AI: What can Psychology learn?
BODEN - Has AI helped Psychology?
Coffee (15 mins)
MINSKY - AI and Cognitive Science
General Discussion (30 mins)
7.30pm: WORKSHOP BANQUET (Chair: Ortony)
Sunday, February 9th:
Depart for home, skiing etc.
Each presenter will have 30 minutes to present his/her position
followed by 15 minutes allocated for discussion.
* Indicates submitted paper.
Contact: derek@nmsu.csnet or yorick@nmsu.csnet
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Nov-85 1331 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #176
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Nov 85 13:29:53 PST
Date: Fri 22 Nov 1985 10:51-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #176
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 22 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 176
Today's Topics:
Queries - Ordering ICOT Reports & MTSLISP on VM/CMS &
Expert System Shells for IBM PC & Knowledge Ownership,
Intelligence - Man/Machine IQ Tests,
Programming Languages - Hard Typing,
Literature - Spang Robinson Report,
Expert Systems - COBOL Restructuring
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 12:52:35 EST
From: Frank Ritter <ritter@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA>
Subject: Ordering ICOT Reports
How does one order ICOT tech reports?
[I'm haven't had time to really go though the list of reports that I
had copied, but I'm sure many will want the address to order reports.]
Thanks for posting the list,
Frank
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1985 18:42 PLT
From: George Cross <FACCROSS%WSUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: MTSLISP on VM/CMS
Hi,
Does anyone have MTSLISP running on VM/CMS?
---- George
George R. Cross cross@wsu.CSNET
Computer Science Department cross%wsu@csnet-relay.ARPA
Washington State University faccross@wsuvm1.BITNET
Pullman, WA 99164-1210 (509)-335-6319/6636
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 85 15:03 PST
From: kwhite.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Reply-to: kwhite.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Expert System Shells for IBM PC
Does anyone out there have some experience on the IBM PC (or its
compatible clones) using Expert System Shells? I have been giving
consideration to KDS, EXSYS, and the Personal Consultant. I would like
to have the system be capable of running DOS commands which could invoke
other programs (in another language) and return. I am also particularly
interested in shells that support the user when s/he is lost and says "I
don't know" or "I don't understand". The system should be capable of
making suggestions to the user in this situation.
Thanks in advance for your help.
...Kendall...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 85 12:02:13 est
From: mayerk%UPenn-GradEd%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Issues Concerning Expert Systems -- Who Owns What
This article was clipped from the Wall Street Journal,
Thursday, November 14, 1985.
* * *
AFTER 15 YEARS of medical training in Pittsburgh, Caduceus will soon
be ready for its first patients.
Caduceus is a computer program that tries to copy the skill of
72-year-old internist Jack Myers and other physicians at diagnosing about
600 illnesses. The computer will never be as good as the best doctor
because it lacks an imagination, Dr. Myers says. Diseases that haven't
been described or categorized will stump Caduceus, he explains, whereas
"a brilliant human being will realize he's facing something new." Unlike
a human being, however, Caduceus never forgets to order a test or overlook a
symptom, so doctors could use the program to check their diagonoses.
University of Pittsburgh computer engineer Harry Pople says the
long time spent developing Caduceus is partly a result of the system's
complexity: The software had to be designed to rapidly diagnose several
illnesses at once. But the system had some human problems, too.
An early version, call Internist I, was rather authoritarian,
making diagnoses without telling doctors how it had arrived at its
conclusions. That sort of bedside manner invariably stepped on fragile
medical egos.
Caduceus, named for the coiled-snake medical emblem, now reasons
along with a doctor, suggests alternative diagnoses and explains its
"reasoning." The system will be field-tested late next year.
* * *
I now would like to ask for opinions on the following issue;
One reason experts (human) are valuable is because they are scarce. This
scarcity is one of the driving forces behind implementing an expert
system.
My question then, Is knowledge proprietary, if so, who owns it?
The domain expert, or the organization (university, corporation, etc.),
that the domain expert worked for when the special knowledge was acquired?
Is the knowledge "stored" within a domain experts' brain copyrightable?
Obviously an expert system is, the same as any piece of software. But
since, as so many people have said, "In the knowledge lies the power," an
expert system is only as valuable as the domain knowledge it contains.
I think that in the next few years, serious questions like these
will affect the way we think about computer systems. Another hard question
is who is liable? Let's say some expert system in medical diagnosis was
fed data, which is later found to be faulty, or downright wrong. And
a serious injury was related to a physician's use of this information.
If the writers of the expert system could be shown to be negligent in
the verification of their data, could it be possible that they are liable,
just as if it were a case of malpractice?
Kenneth Mayer (mayerk@UPenn-Graded)
------------------------------
Date: 21 Nov 85 07:35:42 EST (Thursday)
From: MJackson.Wbst@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: IQ test for AI
From Laursen.PA@Xerox in V3 #174:
". . .has anyone considered building an AI system that boosts a human
being's performance on IQ tests?"
Of course, *any* computer system which is more than a toy is intended to
boost human performance to some degree (answer questions one could not
answer so quickly, or at all, unaided). Closer to the point, the
unifying principle of Doug Engelbart's work over the years has been
"augmentation of the human intellect."
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 9:13:49 PST
From: Laursen.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: IQ test for AI
"MJackson.Wbst's message of Thu, 21 Nov 85 7:35:42 EST"
"...Of course, *any* computer system which is more than a toy is
intended to boost human performance to some degree (answer questions one
could not answer so quickly, or at all, unaided). "
True, but spreadsheets and inventory programs would be of little
immediate help in sitting down to an IQ test. In the particular domain
of IQ tests, what partitioning of human/machine skills would make sense?
For me it comes down to the question of artificial intelligence as a
replacement or an assistant to human intelligence. Who would you hire
for the job, the computer system with an IQ of 200, a person with an IQ
of 150, or a person with an IQ of 125 who knows how to work with a
computer system with an IQ of 200 :-)?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 08:10 EST
From: D E Stevenson <dsteven%clemson.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Hard Typing
I asked our local software engineer about investigations using
hard typing. His response was that such investigations have
been going on since about 1977. Much of this was done by Gannon.
Anyone interested in such work can contact David Hutchens on
Hutch@clemson.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Nov 85 22:00:11-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Spang Robinson Report
Newsletter news: The TARGET newsletter has merged with The Artificial
Intelligence Report to form the Spang Robinson Report. Sara Spang
is the editor, Louis G. Robinson the publisher. The report is
available on-line through NewsNet and Mead Data Central's Nexis.
For subscription info contact Spang Robinson, 3600 West Bayshore
Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303. (It's $295 U.S. and Canada, $345 elsewhere.)
The contents of the first issue were listed in a recent AIList message
from Laurence Leff.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 13:48:10 EST
From: Norman Haas <nhaas.yktvmz@ibm-sj.csnet>
Subject: A.I. to the rescue!
[Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is a slightly abbreviated version of a recent press release. It's
interesting what applications AI is being put to these days...
Norm
Corporate News Bulletin
November 19, 1985
IBM ANNOUNCES NEW PROGRAM TO STRUCTURE COBOL CODE
IBM today announced a software program that uses "artificial
intelligence" techniques to structure existing programs written
in the COBOL language so they can be maintained and modified more
easily.
COBOL Structuring Facility (COBOL/SF) analyzes complex programs,
structures them into a top-down hierarchy of components and
identifies components for possible re-use in new program
development. This can extend the life of current programs,
reduce the time and cost to develop new ones and improve the
productivity and quality of program maintenance.
The "artificial intelligence" techniques used to organize the
unstructured program into a hierarchy of components resemble the
way a person would analyze and reorganize the program.
Since COBOL (Common Business Oriented Language) was one of the
first and most widely used computer programming languages, many
businesses and organizations depend on COBOL-developed programs
that have been modified repeatedly. This can result in programs
that are more and more complex and difficult to maintain and can
increase the risk of making changes that have hidden
consequences.
Programmers can use it to structure old code -- helping
make programs easier to understand, maintain and modify -- and
keep programs in structured form despite continued modifications.
It has two modes of operation: Analysis Mode and
Generation Mode. In Analysis Mode before structuring, it
analyzes the program and produces a report that identifies
unreachable code and endless loops it has detected. The report
also lists especially complex parts of the program where minor
modifications by a programmer could improve the structuring
process.
In Generation Mode, it structures the program and organizes
it in a hierarchy of individually structured procedures. This
process -- which resembles the way a person would analyze and
reorganize the program -- is an example of what many computer
scientists refer to as "artificial intelligence."
After a program is structured, a report summarizes the changes
by it and provides a structured table of program contents.
The structured program then must be recompiled.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Nov-85 2325 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #177
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Nov 85 23:25:14 PST
Date: Sat 23 Nov 1985 21:40-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #177
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 24 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 177
Today's Topics:
Query - Connectionist BBoard,
Science Fiction - Machines That Talk,
Literature - Technical Translation Group,
Expert Systems - Liability,
Intelligence - Modeling Prejudice
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 23 Nov 85 18:07:06-PST
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: connectionist query
Does anyone know of a connectionist mailing list or bulletin board to read
about the latest stuff in this area?
-Lee Altenberg@sumex-aim.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 85 14:33:59 est
From: ulysses!blade!gamma!mike@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Mike Lukacs)
Subject: Machines That Talk
Fictional accounts of machines that talk:
see: "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" by Robert A. Heinlein
not the earliest account but a good detailed discussion of
the (fictional) process by which Adam Selene (a self-aware
computer) produced natural language and a video self image.
Michael E. Lukacs
Bell Communications Research
NVC 3X-330 (201)758-2876
<any-backbone-site>! \
.OR. \
<AT&T-Bell-labs-machines>! \
.OR. > bellcore!sabre!nyquist!maxwell!mike
direct ----> ----->-----/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 10:37:21 pst
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Misunderstanding about the technical translation group
Recently, several members of the group volunteering technical
translation time (including myself) have been asked by people on the
net for copies of papers we have identified as significant.
PLEASE DO NOT ASK US FOR COPIES, especially translated copies.
We are NOT a translation service: this is too expensive of our time.
We simply identify (by translating the titles, authors, journals,
and subjects for the readership of existing newsgroups) potentially
significant papers. We try to provide source material when ever
possible (institution or publishing house).
Some readers may find this like "Tantalus and the Grapes." We can stop,
and you don't ever to hear about these publications again. Just complain.
This is an international volunteer effort. I've seen some postings
in their native European language (I should have told some people to
use English as a common Aether). It is up to the readership of the net
to obtain foreign language reports just as they obtain other TRs.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 18:57 EST
From: Stephen G. Rowley <SGR@SCRC-PEGASUS.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems and Liability
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 85 12:02:13 est
From: mayerk%UPenn-GradEd%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Issues Concerning Expert Systems -- Who Owns What
I think that in the next few years, serious questions like these
will affect the way we think about computer systems. Another hard question
is who is liable? Let's say some expert system in medical diagnosis was
fed data, which is later found to be faulty, or downright wrong. And
a serious injury was related to a physician's use of this information.
If the writers of the expert system could be shown to be negligent in
the verification of their data, could it be possible that they are liable,
just as if it were a case of malpractice?
The questions get even more interesting than that! Suppose there's a
real zippy expert system available to your doctor. He has to decide
whether or not to use it, and, if he uses it, whether or not to take its
advice.
[1] Suppose he decides NOT to use it, and he later messes up in a way
the program would have warned him about.
Can you sue him for NOT using the latest technology?
If not, how is this different from a doctor who refuses
to use CAT scans, X-rays, tissue-typing, or anything else?
[2] Suppose he decides to use it.
[2a] The program tells him to pursue a particular treatment, which
he does. You are injured as a result.
Can you sue the doctor? Or should you sue the program's
sellers? Suppose the program's sellers and implementors are
not the same; can you sue them both? What if the doctor
"should have known better"? (Never apply a tourniquet about
the neck...)
[2b] He overrides the program and does something else. You are
injured, either as a result of his treatment, or lack of the
treatment the program ordered, or both.
<Same questions as [2a]>
One consistent interpretation is that the doctor is ALWAYS responsible.
[That's why people usually trust a doctor; he's paid to take the
responsibility.] On the other hand, you could reasonably claim that
it's not his fault if the technology misled him...
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 1985 1733-PST (Wednesday)
From: aurora!eugene@RIACS.ARPA (Eugene miya)
Subject: Re: Removing prejudice (actually question on AI)
> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 85 22:32:12 PST
> From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
> Subject: Removing Prejudice
>
> I think modeling prejudice accurately is the mandate for AI systems, not
> removing it.
>
> Rich.
I think the term you mean to use is "discriminate" in the behaviorism
sense. I know the keyword you have in mind is "accurately," but I
cannot escape the problem that Intelligence is merely "accurate
preudice or discrimination." Recently, I stuck the "artificial"
adjective in front of various words: artificial prejudice,
artificial discrimination [all this before Rich's posting]. It occurs
to me that a lot of what is lacking in AI would be illustrated by
the difference of these and what be called "artificial compassion."
I am not arguing for emotion in AI, but let me give you the circumstances
where I thought of this.
Recently, I met with some people who wanted to build an expert system
to help with Federal government procurement. It occured to me that the
Government might get the idea to build expert systems as social workers
to process welfare cases or perhaps scholarship application. That type
of work is not merely accessing numbers or conditions (frames?).
Deception is obviously a problem. It occurs to me that creating
"artificial compassion" in this type of example is much harder than
building artificial discriminators. This type of activity is the type
which humans pride themselves, and perhaps makes up a portion of
"intelligence." Again, take the emotional aspect out of this, and
I wonder one might implement the "social worker" system [high human
goal]. Subexpert systems to aid overworked humans need not apply. Can we
build such a system?
Lastly, the above comment falls into the category of social implications of
AI. I am uncertain about all the AI issues I have raised, but it
seems to me that if corporations get the ideas of making such systems
for things like credit ratings [yes, I know you can argue they do this now],
or in worse cases to support "evil" governments, then ..... My interest
is in the rule-system when "rules" are broken: the welfare worker decides
to give assistance or the student gets the scholarship when rule say NO.
I'm confused, and all explanations are welcome. Cite Turing's original
paper if you would like to show what area I'm getting wrong.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,hao,dual,ihnp4,vortex}!ames!amelia!eugene
eugene@ames-nas.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 14:58 EST
From: Mukhop <mukhop%gmr.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Modeling Prejudice
> From: Richard K. Jennings <jennings@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
> Subject: Removing Prejudice
> Concerning removing prejudice .......
> I think modeling prejudice accurately is the mandate for AI
> systems, not removing it.
Modeling prejudice accurately is the mandate for AI systems
inasmuch as prejudicial inferencing embodies default reasoning and
generalizing. Admittedly, these are powerful techniques, but they
can sometimes cause unsound inferences. Over-generalization from a
small sample size and upward inheritance of defaults (most sports cars
are two-seaters => most cars are two-seaters) are error-prone.
Modeling those aspects of prejudicial reasoning that cause
irrational behavior is certainly not mandated for common-sense
reasoning in AI systems. After all, some people exhibit more (robust)
common sense than others and it would be worthwhile modeling a clear
thinker. The upward inheritance of defaults may actually be used with
great advantage, but the clear thinker is aware of its limitations
and uses it with caution.
My original submission regarding prejudice and
rumor addresses the design issues of a higher level control structure
for selectively invoking the appropriate reasoning techniques. This
requires a good knowledge of the degradation criteria for each
technique--an important component of common sense.
Uttam Mukhopadhyay
Computer Science Dept.
GM Research Labs
Warren, MI 48090-9055
Phone: (313) 575-2105
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂24-Nov-85 0124 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #178
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Nov 85 01:23:57 PST
Date: Sat 23 Nov 1985 21:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #178
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 24 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 178
Today's Topics:
Humor - Confectionist Seminar & SARTRE & Advanced Learning Techniques &
Proof Methodologies & Rinaldo's laws
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11/21/85 14:21:07
From: ELISHA at MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Confectionist Autumn Repast
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
CONFECTIONIST MODELS: AN AUTUMN REPAST
Sponsored by the Pavlov Foundation
ORGANIZERS: Siu-ling Ku Peter Nuth
Margaret St. Pierre Steve Seda
DATE: November 22, 1985
PLACE: MIT A.I. Lab, 8th Floor Playroom
PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM: The purpose of the autumn repast is to familiarize
young researchers with current techniques in the area of confectionist models
of intelligence. This includes search procedures, learning procedures, and
methods for representing knowledge in massively parallel networks of
carbohydrate units. Application areas include vision, speech, associative
memory, natural language and motor control.
FACULTY: There will be four full time Tutors plus several Guest Lecturers.
Tutors: Guest Lecturers:
James Horner Julia Child
(Ms) D. Muffet Charles Beard (on videotape)
Peter Piper Elizabeth Crocker
Thomas Piperson others to be announced
[...]
------------------------------
Date: Thu 21 Nov 85 12:34:58-PST
From: Paul Roberts <ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: A VALGOL-(un)like language......
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A New Programming Language: SARTRE
*SARTRE--Named after the late existential philosopher, SARTRE is an
extremely unstructured language. Statements in SARTRE have no purpose;
they just are. Thus SARTRE programs are left to define their own
functions. SARTRE programmers tend to be boring and depressed and are
no fun at parties. The SARTRE language has two basic data types, the
EN-SOI and the POUR-SOI. The EN-SOI is a completely filled heap,
whereas the POUR-SOI is a dynamic structure which never has the same
value. The structures are accessed through the only operation
defined in SARTRE, nihilation, which usually results in a
?BAD FAITH at PC 02AC040 error. Comparisons in SARTRE have a peculiar
form in that the IF statement can take no arguments and simply reads
IF;
Similarly, assignments can only be of the form
WHAT-IS := (NOT WHAT-IS);
since in SARTRE the POUR-SOI is only, and exactly, what it is not.
Although this sounds confusing, a background process, the NIHILATOR, is
constantly running, making any such statements (or any statements at
all, for that matter), completely meaningless.
Programs in SARTRE do not terminate, of course, since there is No Exit.
--Author Unknown
------------------------------
Date: Mon 11 Nov 85 13:57:56-PST
From: Paul Roberts <ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Advanced Learning Techniques....
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
[Disclaimer: all this is forwarded.
"I" and "me" don't apply to I or me. -- PR]
Columbia is extending its lead the learning field: 3 recent
discoveries have just been made by grad students there.
LEARNING BY EVOLUTION - ako survival of the fitest. Doesn't work for
qualifiers because admission to the department does not extend
to the progeny.
LEARNING BY SENORY DEPRIVATION - staying away from the department in order
to "get some work done", which simply results in (a) having a
comprehensive knowledge of the library or (b) having a very
clean apartment.
LEARNING BY FORGETING EVERYTHING THEY EVER TAUGHT YOU IN SCHOOL -
This should be self-explanatory; if not, see me after class.
Discoveries about learning itself are a perfect example of
"learning by meta-learning". it is well known in ai that if x is good,
meta-x is better (or at least meta-x sounds better in the title of a paper).
in this case, perhaps meta-learning is symptomatic of learning-
avoidance, a common affliction among grad students who prefer to call it
"learning-by-doing-anything-else". i know; i've mastered the technique.
------------------------------
Date: 19 Nov 1985 0026-PST (Tuesday)
From: Stuart Marks <marks@cascade>
Subject: Found! list of proof methodologies
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I have received several responses to my request for proof techniques,
some with pointers, and some with actual "proofs." But credit goes to
Greg Satz, who dug out of his jokes archive the list that I had in
mind. The original author is someone named Dana Angluin, for whom no
professional association was given.
[John McCarthy reports that Dana Angluin is now in the Computer Science
Department at Yale, but probably compiled this list while a graduate
student at UCB. -- KIL]
There were a couple of references to the following work:
Dunmore, Paul V., "The Uses of Fallacy", in R. L. Weber,
@i{A Random Walk in Science}. New York: Crane, Russak, & Co. Inc.,
1973, p. 29.
This contains a similar list of proof techniques. I haven't looked it
up yet, but I'll report if I find anything of interest.
Here is Dana Angluin's list.
=======================================================================
Proof by example:
The author gives only the case n=2 and suggests that it contains most
of the ideas of the general proof.
Proof by intimidation:
'Trivial.'
Proof by vigorous handwaving:
Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
Proof by cumbersome notation:
Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.
Proof by exhaustion:
An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
Proof by omission:
'The reader may easily supply the details.'
'The other 253 cases are analogous.'
'...'
Proof by obfuscation:
A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless syntactically related
statements.
Proof by wishful citation:
The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem
from the literature to support his claims.
Proof by funding:
How could three different government agencies be wrong?
Proof by eminent authority:
'I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-complete.'
Proof by personal communication:
'Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete' [Karp, personal
commmunication].
Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
'To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable,
we reduce it to the halting problem.'
Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately
circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.
Proof by importance:
A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in
question.
Proof by accumulated evidence:
Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
Proof by cosmology:
The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular
for proofs of the existence of God.
Proof by mutual reference:
In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference B,
which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is an
easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.
Proof by metaproof:
A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the
method is proved by any of these techniques.
Proof by picture:
A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by
omission.
Proof by vehement assertion:
It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.
Proof by ghost reference:
Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference
given.
Proof by forward reference:
Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often
not as forthcoming as at first.
Proof by semantic shift:
Some standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement
of the result.
Proof by appeal to intuition:
Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 85 2304 PST
Don Woods <DON@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Proof Methodologies
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The list of proof methodologies also appeared in SIGACT News, v15 #1
(Spring '83). Incidentally, it omits the one I first heard from RPG, who
suggested the following as the generic form of proof methodology used in
some theological argument or other:
Proof by elimination of the counterexample:
'Assume for the moment that the hypothesis is true. Now, let's suppose
we find a counterexample. So what? QED.'
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 1985 9:37-PST
From: Soon Yau Kong <soon@su-whitney.ARPA>
Subject: addendum to list of proof methodologies
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
"For the last century no one acquainted with the facts has disputed ...
- An equivalent statement is "I didn't look up the actual facts but
since most people I know think this way,it follows that everyone else
does too".
Also called proof by assumption
-Soon
[This was in reference to a bboard discussion on evolution. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Nov 85 02:24:47-PST
From: William "Chops" Westfield <BILLW@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Humor: Rinaldo's laws
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
***** sri-unix:net.ham-radio / eagle!karn / 4:17 pm Apr 18, 1983
The following was written by Paul Rinaldo, W4RI, until recently the President
of AMRAD (the Amateur Research and Development Corp, a Washington-area
organization of experimentally-minded radio amateurs.) Paul has accepted
an opportunity to run the Technical Department of the ARRL.
Rinaldo's Laws
As I will be leaving the Washington area in early May, I thought
it appropriate to share the wisdom that I have accumulated thus far.
These truths have come not as a vision but by observation over time.
Accordingly, I have synthesized the following laws:
First Law. Choreography is its own reward.
Some things are done only for the sake of form. Don't fight it
by looking for substance in everything. Do it long enough and you'll
find enjoyment in an elephant dance.
Second Law. He who does the work shapes it.
As applied to computers, he who writes the code rules (the
Codin' rule).
In meetings, he who writes the minutes determines the outcome.
Third Law. The less the knowledge, the more jealously it is preserved.
Societies with only a few precious facts make their people
memorize them and pledge to faithfully abide by them.
In contrast, highly developed disciplines quit worrying about
losing knowledge (unless the computer crashes and there is no backup).
Fourth Law. Excellence increases demands.
Critics gather to spot tinier flaws as work nears perfection.
Promptness invites impatience. In correspondence, the faster
you answer a letter, the faster your correspondent will answer giving
you something with a shorter deadline. This reaches a fever pitch with
electronic mail.
Fifth Law. Skills diminish professionalism.
Engineers who admit to drafting skills are vulnerable to
assignment of drafting work, just to help out.
Similarly, female professionals should hide any clerical skills
lest they be asked to pinch hit for one of the secretaries in the event
of illness.
Sixth Law. What separates the competent from the incompetent is the
ability to cover up mistakes.
Many successful sales demonstrations have been made with
defective products in the hands of competent persons who avoid
demonstrating the features which don't work. Beautiful Xerox copies can
be made from originals riddled with correction fluid. Recovery from
some grievous errors can be attained by simply announcing, "No problem.
We'll just put it back in the word processor!" The computer software
profession seems to be the exception; who else is so blatant as to have
a term such as "debugging" to let the world know that they need extra
time funded by the customer to correct their own errors.
Seventh Law. Silence is not acquiescence.
Contrary to what you may have heard, silence of those present is
not necessarily consent, even the reluctant variety. They simply may
sit in stunned silence and figure ways of sabotaging the plan after they
regain their composure.
Eighth Law. Quick-reaction and slow-reaction facilities rotate.
Once people discover that there is a quick-reaction facility (QRF),
they will try to get all their work done there, bogging it down in work
and leaving the slow-reaction facility (SRF) nothing to do, thus
becoming the faster of the two.
Ninth Law. Complexity attracts brilliance.
The KISS (keep it simple, stupid) principle is no fun and
certainly not a professional approach. If you want brilliant people to
do work for you make it complex and demanding.
The true professional will spend 20 hours at the computer
writing a one-time-use program that will replace 10 hours of clerical
work. Anyway, 20 hours at professional rates pays more than 10 hours at
clerical rates. Also, it's more intellectually rewarding. The greatest
achievement is to use one's finest professional talents to accomplish
something that didn't need to be done.
Tenth Law. Bad guys are replaced.
Did you ever rejoice over the departure of someone that you
couldn't get along with only to find that a replica has shown up?
When you are trying to make a U-turn and you have someone
tailgating you, have you pulled off on a sidestreet, then into an alley
only to find that two other cars are right behind you?
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂25-Nov-85 1246 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #179
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Nov 85 12:46:30 PST
Date: Mon 25 Nov 1985 09:26-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #179
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 25 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 179
Today's Topics:
Literature - Recent Articles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Nov 1985 19:55-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Articles
%A Christine McGeever
%T Databases: Artificial Intelligence Breeds Competition for Established
Vendors
%J Infoworld
%V 7
%N 43
%D OCT 28, 1985
%K Paradox Symantec Q&A ANSA micro database
%X Describes two database management systems which run on IBM PC's
and which are allegedly using Artificial Intelligence.
Paradox is a system which uses Query by Example with an
Artifical Intelligence system that optimizes the query.
Q&A uses an English front end and also uses query by example.
%A Keith Thompson
%T Paradox: Powerful Pricey, and Easy
%J Infoworld
%V 7
%N 43
%D OCT 28, 1985
%K Database query by example micro
%X review of the Paradox system which uses artificial intelligence
to optimize queries. It earned three diskettes out of five and had
the following ratings
performance: very good
documentation: satisfactory
ease of learning: very good
ease of use: very good
error handling: poor
support: satisfactory
value: satisfactory
%A Dick Pountain
%T Computers as Consultants
%J BYTE
%P 367-376
%V 10
%N 10
%D OCT 1985
%K Expert-Ease Tess EMYCIN micro Expert Edge
%X reviews expert-ease (a decision tree generating system) and Tess which
is an EMYCIN like program.
%A Kenneth W. Kerber
%T Review of Computer Culture: The Scientific, Intellectual and Social
Impact of the Computer
%J BYTE
%P 57-58
%V 10
%N 10
%D OCT 1985
%X This book includes papers by John McCarthy (on the need for commonsense
in expert sytems), Pamela McCorduck (on the promise of fifth generation
computers), Seymour Papert (on cognitive reasoning), Daniel Dennett (on
using computers to extend senses and imagination) and Feigenbaum (on
automated knowledge acquisiton in expert systems)
%A B. W. Wah
%A C. F. Yu
%T Stochastic Modeling of Branch-and-Bound Algorithms with Best-First Search
%J IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
%V SE-11
%N 9
%D SEP 1985
%P 922-923
%X reprint of paper from Compsac 82
%A B. P. McCune
%A R. M. Tong
%A J. S. Dean
%A D. G. Shapiro
%T RUBRIC: A System for Rule-Based Information Retrieval
%J IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
%V SE-11
%N 9
%D SEP 1985
%P 939-944
%A D. Keirsey
%A J. Mitchell
%A B. Bullock
%A T. Nussmeier
%A D. Y. Tseng
%T Autonomous Vehicle Control Using AI Techniques
%J IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
%D SEP 1985
%V SE-11
%N 9
%P 9086-991
%A Richard Fikes
%A Tom Kehler
%T The Role of Frame Based Representation in Reasoning
%J CACM
%D SEP 1985
%V 28
%N 9
%P 904-920
%K STAR←PLAN satellite alarms KEE
%X describes STAR-PLAN which uses alarms to wake certain parts of
an expert system when conditiosn requires its analysis. Also discusses
frames in general and KEE.
%A Frederick Hayes-Roth
%T Rule-Based Systems
%J CACM
%D SEP 1985
%V 28
%N 9
%P 921-932
%A Michael R. Genesereth
%A Matthew L. Ginsbert
%T Logic Programming
%J CACM
%D SEP 1985
%V 28
%N 9
%P 933-941
%X prolog
%A James R. Slagle
%A Henry Hamburger
%T An Expert System for a Resource Allocation Problem
%J CACM
%D SEP 1985
%V 28
%N 9
%P 994-1004
%K Battle
%X describes a system for deciding how to allocate weapons.
Goes into detail on its variation of A* to come up with a good approximation
to the optimum configuration and how values are propagated through the
network. The techniques described could be used in such applications as
allocating advertising time in dealing with competitors in the marketplace.
%A S. D. Morgera
%T Information Theoretic Covariance Complexity and its Relation to
Pattern Recognition
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%D SEP/OCT 1985
%V SMC-15
%N 5
%P 608-619
%A A. Goshtasby
%A G. C. Stockman
%T Point Pattern Matching Using Convex Hull Edges
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%D SEP/OCT 1985
%V SMC-15
%N 5
%P 631-636
%A R. Jakubowski
%T Extraction of Shape Features for Syntactic Recongition of Mechanical Parts
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%D SEP/OCT 1985
%V SMC-15
%N 5
%P 642-651
%T See $980M Sales in Vision Systems in 90
%J Electronic News
%D SEP 16, 1985
%V 31
%N 1567
%P 21
%X Frost and Sullivan predicts a 980 million market in vision systems in
1990 with 480 million of which would be inspection and 200 million for
identification and sorting
%A Paul J. Besl
%A Ramesh C. Jain
%T Three-Dimensional Object Recognition
%J ACM Computing Surveys
%V 17
%N 1
%D MAR 1985
%P 75-145
%T New Configuration Added, Price Cut, For Processor
%J Computer
%P 122
%D MAY 1985
%V 18
%N 5
%K Symbolics lisp machine
%X Symbolics announced a new configuration of its 3640 processor,
the 3640-1711 which has two 140 MB Winchester disks and
costs $71,080 and with one 140MB hard drive it costs $65,900.
2MB add-in board is $9,900 and an eight megabyte add-in memory board is $35,
000.
%T TI Offers Personal Consultant Version
%J ComputerWorld
%D SEP 16, 1985
%V 19
%N 37
%P 61
%K micro
%X discusses the new Personal Consultant Plus at $2950 and the new price
for the old Personal Consultant of $950.00
%T Microcomputers
%J ComputerWorld
%D SEP 16, 1985
%V 19
%N 37
%P 66
%K RuleMaster Radian micro
%X discusses enhancements to its Rulemaster with new screen and
menu handling facilities.
%A Takehisa Kondoh
%T Japanese Consortium Set
%J ComputerWorld
%D SEP 16, 1985
%V 19
%N 37
%P 85
%K Nissin Structural Planning Institute JGC Intelligence Engineering
Research Institute German Center for Comptuer Science
%X describes a consortium called Intelligence Engineering Research
Institute to be formed by European, US and Japanese companies.
%T Insight to Interpret with Expert Reports on Mac
%J Infoworld
%V 7
%N 37
%D SEP 16, 1985
%P 61
%K Macintosh micro Layered Inc. accounting
%X describes an accounting system with an AI program to help interpret
the reports
%T A Device that Heads Off Road Collision
%J Business Week
%D SEP 2, 1985
%P 77
%K Vehicle Radar Safety Systems, Inc.
%X Describes a system to warn drivers of impending collisons. It does
not falsely alarm for road signs and radar overpasses.
%T Frey Associations to Exhibit Enhanced Version of Themis
%J DEC HARDCOPY
%V 14
%N 5
%P 94
%D MAY 1985
%K natural language database
%X this is one of those systems that allow the user to give his queries
in English to the database. It supports 1000 word vocabulary which
can be expanded by the user. It works with Oracle's Relational
Database Managmenet System and VaX Datatrieve. It sells for $24,000.
%T Natural Language Software Builds Mainframe Databases
%J ElectronicsWeek
%D JAN 7, 1985
%V 58
%N 2
%P 49
%K Artificial Intelligence Corporation Intellect
%X They announced Intellect/SX which allows users to set up their own
lexicons, databases and manipulate their own databases.
%T Bureaucracy Spawns Entrepreneurs
%J High Technology
%D FEB 1985
%P 20
%V 5
%N 2
%K Lockheed pilot airplain Getex navigation
%X Describers AI system to airplane navigation making it possible to
have a one pilot airplane.
%A C. P. Neuman
%A V. D. Tourassis
%T Discrete Dynamic Robot Models
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 193-203
%A J. D. Wolter
%A R. A. Volz
%A Anthony C. Woo
%T Automatic Generation of Gripping Positions
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 204-212
%A B. K. Kim
%A K. G. Shin
%T Minimum-Time Path Planning for Robot Arms and Their Dynamics
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 213-223
%A R. A. Brooks
%A T. Lozano-Perez
%T A Subdividsion Algorithm in Configuration Space for Findpath with
Rotation
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 224-233
%A J. Rasmussen
%T The Role of Hierarchical Knowledge Represenation in Decisionmaking and
System Management
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 223-243
%A Mark R. Laff
%A Brent Halpert
%T SW 2 - An Object-based Programming Environment
%J SIGPLAN 85 Symposium on Language Issues in Programming Environments
%C Seattle, Washingto/n
%D JUN 25-28, 1985
%I ACM
%P 1-11
%A James Purtilo
%T Polylith: An Environment to Support Management of Tool Interfaces
%J SIGPLAN 85 Symposium on Language Issues in Programming Environments
%C Seattle, Washingto/n
%D JUN 25-28, 1985
%I ACM
%P 12-18
%K Macsyma
%X Describes a front end for Macsyma to allow interfacing it with
various other tools as well as general concepts for front-ends.
%A Nissim Francez
%A Shalom Goldenberg
%A Ron Y. Pinter
%A Michael Tiomkin
%A Shalom Tsur
%T An Environment for Logic Program
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 179-190
%A Mark Moriconi
%A Dwight F. Hare
%T PegaSys: A System for Graphical Explanation of Program Designs
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 148-160
%A Henryk Jan Komorowski
%A Shigeo Omori
%T A Model and an Implementation of a Logic Programming Environment
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 191-198
%A Stephen Fickas
%T Design Issues in a Rule-Based System
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 2
%D MAR/APR 1985
%P 208-215
%A P. E. Lehner
%A M. A. Probus
%A M. E. Donnell
%T Building Decison Aids: Exploiting the Synergy Between Decison Analysis and
Artificial Intelligence
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 469-474
%A Y. J. Tejwani
%A R. A. Jones
%T Machine Recognition of Partial Shapes Using Feature Vectors
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 504-516
%A A. L. Porter
%A F. A. Rossini
%A J. Eshelman-Bell
%A D. Jenkins
%A D. J. Cancelleri
%T Industrial Robots - A Strategic Forecast Using the Technological Delivery
System Approach
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 521-526
%A S. B. Ahuja
%A J. A. Reggia
%T Automated Classification of Complex Errors in Discrete Sequential Tasks
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 527-531
%A S. Gaglio
%A R. Minciardi
%A P. P. Puliafto
%T Multiperson Decision Aspects in the Construction of Expert Systems
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 536-539
%A Y. Ichikawa
%A N. Ozaki
%T A Heuristic Planner and an Executive for Mobile Robot Control
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 4
%D JUL/AUG 1985
%P 558-563
%A Charles L. Cohen
%T AI Comes to the Aid of Pencil Pushers
%J Electronics
%P 58
%N 14
%D AUG 26, 1985
%P 18-19
%K pattern recognition VLSI Toshiba Expert System
%X Describes an expert system that transforms pencil sketches of
integrated circuit masks to computer compatible sketches. This was
developed by Toshiba Corporation.
It uses 2000 rules and a structure-matching
method using model-based segmentation and hypothesis verfication.
%A Alexander Wolfe
%T How NASA Will Use AI in Space
%J Electronics
%D SEP 16, 1985
%P 32-327
%V 58
%N 37
%K expert systems space shuttle space station Empress LOX
%K AI applications at NASA
management of space resources
controlling experiments, assisting in repairng
planning and scheduling system for payload processing
diagnostic system for loading liquid oxygen into the shuttle
scheduling the operations of the tracking and data-relay satellite
%A James Clifford
%A David S. Warren
%T Formal Semantics for Time in Databases
%J ACM Transactions on Database Systems
%D JUN 1983
%V 8
%N 2
%P 214-254
%A R. Emeett Carlyle
%T Can AI Save Cobol
%J Datamation
%D SEP 15
%D SEP 15, 1985
%V 31
%N 18
%K expert systems T. Capers Jones maintenance
%X T. Capers Jones has developed expert systems that will structure COBOL that
produce code that takes 25 to 50 percent less time to maintain.
%A Neil C. Rowe
%T Top-down Statistical Estimatation on a Database
%J SIGMOD Record
%V 13
%N 4
%P 135-145
%K expert systems
%X This system uses a set of general-purpose statistics on a database and
then a set of inference rules to estimate other arbitrary statistics
requested by users
%A Janet L. Koldoner
%T Indexing and Retrieval Strategies for Natural Language Fact Retrieval
%J ACM Transactions on Database Systems
%V 8
%N 3
%P 434-464
%D SEP 1983
%K Cyrus information retrieval
%T Xerox Adds Low-End Workstations
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1566
%D SEP 9, 1985
%P 37
%K lisp machines
%X Describes new 1185 and 1186 with prices form 10,000 to 19,ppp.
The 10,000 gets you an 1185 with 1.1 Mbytes RAM, 10 Mbyte Winchester
and a 15 inch display. The 19 grand gets you
3.6M bytes RAM, 80 Mbyte disk and 19 inch display.
%T Tektronix Unveils 2 New AI Systems
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1566
%P 39
%T Kurzweil Names Financial Chief
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1566
%P 39
%K Bernard F. Bradstreet
%X Kurzweill Applied Intelligence named Bernard F. Bradstreet,
a former Prime Computer vice president and treasurer, as
vice president of finance and administration.
%T Thoughtware Set To Buy Lightyear
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1566
%D SEP 9, 1985
%P 52
%X Thoughtware, a delvoloper of decision support
systems has agreed to acquire Lightyear, Inc.
%T Raster, TI Sign Marketing PACT
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1566
%D SEP 9, 1985
%P 42
%K Lisp Machine Graphics Explorer
%X Raster Technologies has agreed to market its color graphics system
for TI's Explorers.
%T Expert System Language May Improve 1-2-3
%J InfoWorld
%D NOV 4, 1985
%V 7
%N 44
%P 3
%K Teknowledge Lotus user interface expert system error correction M.1
%X Teknowledge is developing an M.1 front end to Lotus 1-2-3 which will
distinguish semantic errors from syntax errors and to allow the user
to express logic relationships. It also provides a query by example
front end.
M.1 is being rewritten in the C programming language.
%T Advertisement
%J InfoWorld
%D NOV 4, 1985
%V 7
%N 44
%P 28
%X Advertisement for AI:Typist which is a $79.00 word processing system that
has a spelling corrector that checks words
as they are entered. Billed as "AIRUS-A Technology is so new it's still
baffling the experts."
%T Lisp Machines Adds 2 New Directors
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1576
%D NOV 18, 1985
%P 27
%X Lisp Machines has added two new people to its board of directors:
George J. Demos and Harold Shattuck.
Art Marks has replaced Neil Bond on the board.
%T Robotic Vision Taps Marketing V-P
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1576
%D NOV 18, 1985
%P 90
%K Robotic Vision Systems
%X Robotic Vision Systems Systems reported a loss for the second
quarter of $319,000 compared with a $299,00 loss in the 1984 period.
The sales for the three months was 2.7 million up from 1.3 million.
Robotic Visions sell three-dimension vision-based robotic systems.
They also named L. Knox Johnstone, formerly marketing manager
of Robot Defense Systems, as vice president of marketing.
%T System for Automated Troubleshooting
%J NASA Tech Briefs
%D Winter 1985
%V 9
%N 4
%P 166-167
%K maintenance expert system
%X Describes software done by Leonard Friedman of Caltech in the area
of diagnostic system for electromechanical mechanisms
%T Automatic Guidance for Remote Manipulator
%J NASA Tech Briefs
%D Winter 1985
%V 9
%N 4
%P 68-69
%K robotics
%X System based on maintaining a mirror on the object to be grasped
with detectors and light sources on the end effector of the robot.
It is patented (NO. 3,888,362)
%A James A. Marti.n
%T Nixdorf Expert System Shell Out
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 4, 1985
%V 19
%N 44
%P 31
%K Prolog MProlog Twaice Logicware
%X Nixdorf announced an expert system shell based on Logicware's Prolog.
The system supports a taxonomy model, rule compiler and a general lease
is $70,000.
%T News from the Industry Front
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 4, 1985
%V 19
%N 44
%P 31
%K Inference Carnegie Group Ford Motor
%X Ford Motor purchased interest in Inference Corp and Carnegie Group..
These represent $14 million each.
%A T. M. Mitchell
%A L. I. Steinberg
%A J. S. Shulman
%T A Knowledge-Based Approach to Design
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 502-510
%K VLSI Design
%A G. Kahn
%A S. Nowlan
%A J. McDermott
%T Strategies for Knowledge Acquisition
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 511-522
%K maintenance MUD oil extraction MORE
%X describes a general theory for when a domain is suited for
diagnostic expert system based on shallow knowledge and how to
construct the base. Then this was automated in a tool called MORE
%A R. Rada
%T Gradualness Facilitates Knowledge Refinement
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 523-530
%X describes a method to determine the weights of rules in expert
systems based on the closeness of answers of the expert systems
on the given answers
%A A. Sathi
%A M. S. Fox
%A M. Greenberg
%T Representaton of Activity Knowledge for Project Management
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 531-552
%A P. K. Fink
%A J. C. Lusth
%A J. W. Duran
%T A General Expert System Design for Diagnostic Problem Solving
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 553-560
%X describes a structure to which any domain that needs to be diagnosed
can be described as. This is for diagnostic system based on deep
reasoning.
%A P. S. Rosenbloom
%A J. E. Laird
%A J. McDermott
%A A. Newell
%A E. Orciuch
%T R1-Soar: An Experiment in Knowledge-Intensive Programming in a
Problem-Solving Architecture
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 561-569
%A D. M. McKeown, Jr.
%A W. A. Harvey, Jr.
%A J. McDermott
%T Rule-Based Interpretation of Aerial Imagery
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 570-585
%K vision
%A C. V. Apte
%A S. M. Weiss
%T An Approach to Expert Control of Interactive Software Systems
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 586-591
%K well-log geology ELAS
%X describes a system for dynamic selection and interpretation
fo appropriate programs and parameters in the area of well-log
analysis
%A Yizong Cheng
%A King-Sun Fu
%T Conceptual Clustering in Knowledge Organization
%J IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
%V PAMI-7
%N 5
%D SEP 1985
%P 592-598
%K Huato traditional Chinese medicine
%X describes an expert system for "traditional Chinese medicine."
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂27-Nov-85 1833 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #180
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Nov 85 18:33:40 PST
Date: Wed 27 Nov 1985 15:44-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #180
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 28 Nov 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 180
Today's Topics:
Queries - AI Workstations & Expert System on COBOL,
Science Fiction - Machines That Talk,
Humor - Doonesbury on Artificial Intelligence,
Expert Systems - Liability & ES Strategies Newsletter,
Literature - DNA Analysis & Recent Tech Reports,
Seminar - The Riddle of STRIPS (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 26 NOV 85 12:08-N
From: MANUEL%CGEUGE52.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: AI Workstations
We are looking for an AI workstation for research purposes and would
appreciate any comments that you have concerning your favorite (or not
so favorite) workstation. In particular, Sun vs. Symbolics arguments
would be appreciated. Here are some of the workstations that we are
considering:
Apollo DOMAIN family Symbolics 3600
DEC VAXstation II Tektronix TEK 4406
LMI Lambda family TI Explorer
Sun 2 & 3 Xerox 1100 series
Please send your comments directly to me. If you would like the contest
results posted then please let me know.
Thanks very much for your consideration.
... James Stewart
Department of Physics
University of Geneva
MANUEL @ CGEUGE52 (on BITNET)
------------------------------
Date: Mon 25 Nov 85 13:10:38-EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@BBNG.ARPA>
Subject: Expert system defeats halting problem?
I'd be curious to know just which kinds of infinite loops are detected
by IBM's COBOL restructuring program. No doubt that some cases can be
detected by rudimentary kinds of template matching, but in general what
we're talking about is the halting problem. Anybody out there have more
information on this?
marc.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 85 10:59:02 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Re: Fictional accounts of machines that talk (Vol 3 # 172)
The natural language capabilities of a machine are amply illustrated
in Robert Heinlein's ``The Moon is a Harsh Mistress'', (cf AIList Vol
3 # 39), written in the sixties. Here the machine, called Mike, talks
to the programmer who realizes that Mike is now large enough to be
self-aware. Not only does Mike hold quite normal conversations, he
eventually creates a fictional character ``inside his head'', called
Adam Selene. He then gives this character life by building a video
and voice image. Many people would like to meet Mr. Selene in person!
Also worth a mention in this context is ``Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep?'', by Philip K. Dick. These are not quite the ancient
Greeks, or particularly early.
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Sun 24 Nov 85 17:14:02-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Doonesbury on Artificial Intelligence
[ Doonesbury - Sunday Nov 24, 1985 ]
[ Mike and Bernie, in front of a desk with a MACish computer facing them ]
B: You see Mike, most of the computer breakthroughs we're making today have
to do with Artificial Intelligence.
The computer recognizes patterns in the user's behavior that enable it
to make decisions on its own. Of course, the machine is still only as
ethical as its owner.
Let me show you a hypothetical model. Say I called up my company spread-
sheet and transferred $100,000 to my personal account, okay?
<tip-a-ti-type-tap-tap>
Watch.
>BING!< EMBEZZLEMENT TRANSACTION COMPLETED.
M: Good Lord !!!
B: Mindless compliance, right? ...
RESERVATIONS FOR RIO CONFIRMED.
B: ... but it anticipated my every need !
------------------------------
Date: Sun 24 Nov 85 12:30:41-PST
From: PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: Expert Systems and Liability
Given current litigation practices, I would think the answer to your
questions is rather simple: you sue everyone in sight (doctor, program
seller, program developer, hospital, city, state, Santa Klaus,...). With
the ``joint and several'' legal doctrine currently used in liability
cases, at least one of them will end up paying... (unless all go
bankrupt, of course...)
-- Fernando
------------------------------
Date: Wed 26 Nov 85 12:30:41-PST
From: Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Expert Systems Strategies Newsletter
I have received a flyer for another AI newletter, Expert Systems Strategies.
Paul Harmon is one of the editors, and his AI in Business book (with David
King) is offered free to charter subscribers. The newsletter covers the
usual mix: market trends, user profiles, vendor critiques, systems application
analyses, performance engineering, hardware reviews, languages and tools,
survey reports, knowledge engineering, events calendar, show updates,
literature reviews, major contract announcements, and new business ventures --
all focussed on expert systems rather than AI in general. Current price is
$207 ($40 off) for 12 monthly issues of 16 pages each. Cahners Newsletter
Center, P.O. Box 59, New Town Branch, Boston, MA 02258; (617) 964-3030;
Cable/CAHNERS BOSTON; Telex 94-0573 CPC BSN.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 25 Nov 85 01:23:34-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: interesting article in CACM of 85/11
1164 DISCOVERING THE SECRETS OF DNA. Peter Friedland and Laurence H Kedes
Symbolic Pattern Recognition and the AI methodologies model building
and theory formation will be critical to the next stage of discovery
in regulatory molecular genetics.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Nov 1985 19:55-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Tech Reports
ADDRESSES TO REQUEST TECH REPORTS LISTED:
Department of Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Department of Computer Science, Univeristy of Illinois at Urbana-Champign
1304 West Springfield Avenue, Urbana, Illinois 61801 OR erna@uiuc OR
Engineering Docurments Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
1308 West Green Street, Urbana, Illinois 61801
Washington State University, Computer Science Deparmtent, Pullman, Washington
99164-1210
Computing Research Laboratory, University of Michigan, Room 1079,
East Engineering Building, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
UCLA Computer Science Department, 3732 Boelter Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90024
%A Asya Campbell
%T Comparison of Dynamically and Statically Scoped Lisp
%R CSD-850024
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $2.75
%A Rina Dechhter
%T Studies in the Use and Generation of Heuristics
%R CSD-850033
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $12.50 (Ph. D. Thesis)
%K A*
%A Judea Pearl
%T Bayesian Networks: A Model of Self-Activiated Memory for Evidential
Reasoning
%R CSD-850021
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $0.50
%A Judea Pearl
%T A Constraint-Propagation Approach to Probabilistic Reasoning
%R CSD-850020
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $0.75
%A Judea Pearl
%T Fusion, Propagation, and Structuring in Bayesian Networks
%R CSD-850022
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $4.25
%A Judea Pearl
%T Bayes Decision Methods
%R CSD-850023
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $2.00
%A Judea Pearl
%A Michael Taria
%T Structuring Causal Trees
%R CSD-850029
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $1.75
%A Judea Pearl
%T How to Do With Probabilities What People Say You Can't
%R CSD-850031
%X $1.75
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%X $1.75
%A Judea Pearl
%T On Evidential Reasoning in a Hierarchy of Hypotheses
%R CSD-850032
%X $0.75
%I UCLA Computer Science Department
%A Michael A. Langston
%A Chul E. Kim
%T Movement Coordination for Single-Track Robot Systems
%R CSD-84-125
%X $2.50 (discusses dealing with multiple robots)
%I Washington State University Computer Science Department
%A Jerzy Tiuryn
%T An Introduction to First-Order Programming Logics
%I Washington State University Computer Science Department
%R CSD-84-126
%X $4.20
%A Keshav Sharma
%T Syntactic Aspects of the Non-Deterministic Lambda Calculus
%R CSD-84-127
%I Washington State University Computer Science Department
%X $7.20
%A Jerzy Tiuryn
%T A Simplified Proof of DDL < DL
%R CS-85-130
%I Washington State University Computer Science Department
%X 1.50 (compares Deterministic Dynamic Logics and Dynamic Logics of
regular programs)
%A David Matthew Dahlbacka
%T An ATN-Based Restricted Natural Language
Front End for A Data-Flow Design Aid
%R Department of Computer Science File No. 944
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D JUL 1985
%K software engineering
%A Tomoyasu-Taguti Nakagawa
%A Hung-Chi Lai
%T Reference Manual of Fortran Program ILLOD-(NOR-B) for Optimal
NOR Networks
%R Department of Computer Science Report No. 1129
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D JUL 1985
%K branch and bound
%A Simon M. Kaplan
%T Verification of Recursive Programs: A Temporal Proof Approach
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1207
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D SEP 1985
%A Larry Rendell
%T Induction, Of and By Probability
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1209
%I University of Illinois
%D JUL 1985
%X This paper examines some methods and ideas underlying the author's
successful probabilistic learning systems (PLS). These systems have
proven uniquely effective and efficent for generalization learning
(induction) in heuristic search. Aspects of PLS include use of
probabilities to guide both task performance and learning,
incremental revision and normalization of probabilities, and
localization and correction of their errors. Construction of new
terms (features) for heuristic functions may be feasible.
%A Larry Rendell
%T Genetic Plans and the Probabilistic Learning System:
Synthesis and Results
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1217
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D JUL 1985
%X describes PLS2 which clusters data into economical cells in augmented
feature space, and a genetic level which selects successful regions by
a genetic algorithm.
%A Nachum Dershowitz
%T Termination of Rewriting
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1220
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D AUG 1985
%A Jean-Luc Remy
%T Review of Several Closure Properties in Universal Algebra and
First Order Logic
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1221
%I Univeristy of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D JUL 1985
%A John Shilling
%T Initial Report on ISADORE: A Reference Librarian Generator
%R Department of Computer Science Report NO. 1225
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D SEP 1985
%A S. R. Ray
%A W. D. Lee
%A C. D. Morgan
%A W. Airth-Kindree
%T Computer Sleep Stage Scoring - An Expert System Approach
%R Department of Computer Science Report No. 1228
%I University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
%D September 1985
%A T. G. Lewwis
%T An Operator Calculus for Computer Programs
%R CSTR-78-1-5
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%D 1978
%A W. S. Bregar
%A A. M. Farley
%T Interactive Problem Solving in Elementary Algebra
%R CSTR-78-3-1
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%D 1978
%A P. Cull
%A W. Frank
%T Flaws of Form
%D 1978
%R CSTR-78-20-3
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%X G. Spencer Brown's book \fBLaws of Form\fR has been enjoying
a vogue among social and biological scientists.
Proponents claim that the book introduces a new logic ideally
suited to their fields of study, and that the new logic solves the
problems of self-reference. These claims are false. We show that Brown's
system is Boolean algebra in an obscure notation, and that his "solutions"
to the problems of self-reference are based on a misunderstanding of
Russell's paradox.
%A B. Levin
%T The Automated Inference of Tree Systems
%D 1979
%R CSTR-79-20-6
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%A B. Blanchard
%A W. S. Bregar
%T A Production Environment
%D 1982
%R CSTR-82-3-1
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%A D. Kogan
%A M. J. Freiling
%T SIDUR: A Structuring Formalism for Knowledge Information Processing Systems
%D 1984
%R CSTR-84-40-2
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%A S. Rehfuss
%A M. J. Freiling
%A J. Alexander
%T Particularity in Engineering Data
%D 1984
%R CSTR-84-40-3
%I Oregon State University, Department of Computer Science
%X discusses inferential data in three engineering expert system databases
%A Soveig A. Viste
%A Chul E. Kim
%T The Recognition of Digital Cylindrical Surfaces and Digital Moebius Strips
%R CS-85-133
%I Washington State University Deparment of Computer Science
%X $3.50
%A Y. Gurevich
%A S. Shelah
%T Fixed-Point Extension of First-Order Logic
%R CRL-TR-5-85
%I Computing Research Laboratory, University of Michigan
%D May 1985
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 85 1432 PST
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - The Riddle of STRIPS (SU)
The Riddle of STRIPS and Its Solution
Vladimir Lifschitz
Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
Wednesday, November 27, 2pm
MJH 252
STRIPS (STanford Research Institute Planning System) operates
with world models represented by sets of formulas of first-order
logic. A STRIPS system describes the effect of an action by a rule
which defines how the current world model should be changed when the
action is performed.
The big mystery about STRIPS is why it does not produce
incorrect results. Presumably, this happens because the rules
correctly describe properties of the corresponding actions. But what
do we mean by the "correctness" of a STRIPS rule? Straightforward
attempts to define the semantics of STRIPS rules turn out to be
unsatisfactory; we will examine a classical STRIPS system and show
that, from some points of view, its rules are incorrect. The purpose
of that exercise is not to criticize the system, but rather to show
that defining the semantics of STRIPS is a tricky business.
In the last part of the talk, a solution to the problem will
be proposed. We will see that, under some conditions, STRIPS rules
can be viewed as perfectly legitimate tools for formalizing knowledge
about the effects of actions.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂03-Dec-85 1537 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #181
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Dec 85 15:37:03 PST
Date: Tue 3 Dec 1985 13:02-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #181
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 3 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 181
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Truth Maintenance and Multiple Worlds in KEE (SU) &
Model and Temporal Proof System for Processes (CMU) &
Reasoning about Control in Vision (SRI) &
An Approach to Conscious Experience (UCB),
Conferences - Expert Systems and Their Applications &
Knowledge and Data &
Workshop on AI for Design Automation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 2 Dec 85 08:54:31-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Truth Maintenance and Multiple Worlds in KEE (SU)
DAY December 3, 1985
EVENT Computer Science Colloquium
PLACE Skilling Auditorium
TIME 4:15
TITLE "Truth Maintenance and Multiple Worlds in KEE"
PERSON Paul Morris, Robert Nado, Richard Fikes
FROM IntelliCorp
TRUTH, MAINTENANCE AND MULTIPLE WORLDS IN KEE
We describe the integration of an assumption-based truth maintenance
system (ATMS) into the frame-based representation facilities of the
KEE system, and the use of the ATMS to implement a multiple-world
context graph system for KEE. Integration into the frame system
involves associating with potential slot values ATMS nodes that are
used to determine in which worlds (contexts) the slot values are
believed. Built-in inferences provided by the frame system, such as
inheritance and the checking of value class and cardinality
constraints, are recorded, when needed, as explicit justifications in
the ATMS. In addition, the default reasoning capabilities of KEE have
been refined and extended to take advantage of the ATMS. Tradeoffs in
the integration between flexibility of use and run-time efficiency are
examined. We describe the multiple-world context graph system with
particular attention to an interpretation of the graph as a network of
actions. In this framework, the semantics of graph merges are
investigated and restrictions to ensure valid action sequences are
discussed.
------------------------------
Date: 2 December 1985 1654-EST
From: Theona Stefanis@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Seminar - Model and Temporal Proof System for Processes (CMU)
Date: Monday, 9 December
Place: 5409 WeH
Time: 3:30
PS SEMINAR
A model and temporal proof system for processes
Van Nguyen
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
(joint work with Alan Demers, David Gries and Susan Owicki)
There exist several models of processes, e.g. those of
Brock-Ackerman, Hoare, Milner and Pratt. None of these models handles
both synchronous and asynchronous communication in a single framework.
In addition, their modeling of temporal properties
(e.g. liveness properties) is generally unsatisfactory.
The models that seem most promising, due to their
simplicity and ability to hide information, are those based on traces.
A trace is a finite sequence of communication events, which can be
thought of as an abstraction of a process state in which all irrelevant
internal details are hidden.
A number of proof systems for processes have also been proposed. The
Hoare-like proof systems, e.g. those of Chen-Hoare, Levin-Gries and
Misra-Chandy, are simple but lack expressive power and cannot
deal with temporal properties. Temporal proof systems, e.g. those of
Manna-Pnueli and Barringer-Kuiper-Pnueli, are expressive but more
complicated.
We present a model for processes that is based on the notion of
behavior (a generalization of trace). The model can handle either
synchronous or asynchronous communication, and can describe temporal
properties. We also describe a sound and complete temporal proof system
that is based on the model. Due to the modularity of the model, the
proof system is compositional. Both the model and proof system are
simple. Thus we show that temporal proof systems can be made
------------------------------
Date: Tue 3 Dec 85 11:44:55-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Reasoning about Control in Vision (SRI)
REASONING ABOUT CONTROL IN A HIGH-LEVEL COMPUTER VISION SYSTEM
Leonard Wesley
SRI International, AI Center
11:00 AM, MONDAY, December 9
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
If you built an expert system, how would you expect it to decide what to
do next in complex situations? Typically there are several alternative
actions it might take to reach some goal. In some cases, the best alternative
is clear or the choices do not warrant extensive analysis. At times the
consequences of pursuing some action justify expending the effort to obtain
the necessary information to analyze the pros and cons of choosing a
particular alternative.
Most would agree that the information that is needed to reach any decision is,
to some degree, uncertain, imprecise, and occasionally inaccurate (called
"evidential" information). Clearly knowledge about the certainty, precision,
and accuracy of information can be used to improve a system's
ability to reason about (i.e., control) its actions. In this talk, we shall
describe how this might be accomplished by an expert system in the domain
of high-level computer vision. We shall explain why we view Shafer's theory
of belief functions as being better suited than some other models as a
theoretical foundation for representing evidential information and reasoning
about control. Results from a large number of image interpretation
experiments will be presented to demonstrate how a system's performance can be
improved when Shafer's theory is soundly exploited. Finally, we shall briefly
describe how our approach to control might be extended to an evidential-based
framework for planning under uncertainty.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 85 09:43:33 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Subject: Seminar - An Approach to Conscious Experience (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Fall 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, December 3, 11:00 - 12:30
240 Bechtel Engineering Center
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 in 200 Building T-4
``An Approach to Conscious Experience''
Bernard J. Baars
Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute, U.C.S.F.
Conscious experience has been widely viewed as a confusing
and ill-defined issue, and most psychologists have avoided it
until quite recently. However, there are straightforward ways
to specify reliable empirical constraints on the problem, sim-
ply by contrasting comparable pairs of events, one of which is
conscious and the other not. For example, we are typically
unconscious of highly predictable stimuli, though there is
strong evidence that such stimuli continue to be represented in
the nervous system. We are unconscious of automatized actions,
of the unattended stream in a selective attention paradigm, of
conceptual presuppositions, of the unconscious meaning of per-
ceptual and linguistic ambiguities, of lexical access, syntac-
tic rule-application, etc. In all these cases the unconscious
information continues to be represented and processed. Any
complete theory of conscious experience is bounded by, and must
ultimately account for, the entire set of such contrasts.
The empirical constraints converge on a model of the ner-
vous system as a distributed collection of specialists---
automatic, unconscious, and very efficient. Consciousness is
associated in this system with a "global workspace"---a memory
whose contents are broadcast to all the specialists. Special-
ists can complete or cooperate for access to the global
workspace, and those that succeed can recruit and control other
specialists in pursuit of their goals. Over the past seven
years this Global Workspace approach has been extended to a
number of puzzling issues, including action control and the
neurophysiological basis of consciousness.
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 30 November 1985 21:06:58 EST
From: Duvvuru.Sriram@cive.ri.cmu.edu
Subject: Conference - Expert Systems and Their Applications
SIXTH INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON
EXPERT SYSTEMS & THEIR APPLICATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Following the success of the 5th International Workshop in Expert
Systems and their Applications at the prestigious 14th century fortess
Palace of the Popes in Avigon (France), the Agence de l'Informatique
has scheduled the 6th Workshop for April 28-30, 1986.
Papers are solicited which describe expert systems actually applied in
industry, currently under assessment by users, or currently
commercially available.
INSTRUCTION TO AUTHORS
Five copies of submitted papers (not exceeding 20 pages in 8 x 11"
camera-ready format) should reach the Workshop Chairman before January
15, 1986. Papers may be written either in English or French.
Simultaneous translation will be provided at the conference.
Submitted papers should include a page with:
- title of the paper
- author's name
- author's address
- phone number and extension
- telex number
- a 10 line abstract
- a list of key words
All papers will be refereed by an international program committee;
notification of acceptance will be given by March 4, 1986. A best
paper award will be presented at the conference.
OTHER ACTIVITIES
Tutorials and panel discussions are planned. Send suggestions for
topics to Workshop Chairman at the address indicated.
INFORMATION
For further information contact:
Jean-Claude Rault
Workshop Chairman
Agence de l'Informatique
Tour Fiat - Cedex 16
92084 Paris - La Defence
France
Tel. (331) 47 96 43 14
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 85 19:05:15 EST
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Knowledge and Data
IFIP
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING
ANNOUNCEMENT
TC2 WORKING CONFERENCE organized by Working Group 2.6
Knowledge and Data (DS-2)
November 3-7, 1986 in Albufeira (Algarve), Portugal
Scope: Questions of meaning are more important for the design
of a knowledge base than methods of encoding data in bits and bytes.
As database designers add more semantic information to their systems,
their conceptual schemata begin to look like AI systems of
knowledge representation. In recognizing this convergence on issues of
semantics, IFIP Working Group 2.6 is organizing a working conference
on Knowledge and Data. It will address the issues and problems
of knowledge representation from an interdisciplinary point of view.
Topics:
Design of a conceptual schema
Knowledge and data modeling
Database semantics
Natural language semantics
Expert database systems
Logic, databases, and AI
Methods of knowledge engineering
Tools and aids for knowledge acquisition
Invited speakers:
Herve Gallaire, Germany
Robert Meersman, Belgium
J. Alan Robinson, USA
Roger Schank, USA
Dana Scott, USA
An IFIP working conference is oriented towards detailed discussion of
the topics presented. Participation is by invitation, with optional
contribution of a paper that is refereed by the program committee.
Anyone who is interested in participating should send an abstract
of current research or a prospective paper to either of the
program cochairmen. Abstracts are due March 14, 1986. Complete
papers are due May 16, 1986. Papers presented at the conference
will be published in book form by North Holland Publishing Co.
General Chairman: Amilcar Sernadas, Portugal
Program cochairmen:
John F. Sowa Robert Meersman
IBM Systems Research Institute L.U.C. -- Dept. WNIF
500 Columbus Avenue Universitaire Campus
Thornwood, NY 10594 B-3610 Diepenbeek
U.S.A. Belgium
CSNET: sowa.yktvmt@ibm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 85 15:58:44 est
From: Scott C McKay <scm%gitpyr%gatech.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Workshop on AI for Design Automation
FIRST AFWAL* RESEARCH WORKSHOP
TO
DEVELOP AND AUTOMATE A SCIENCE OF DESIGN
FOR
MILITARY WEAPONS SYSTEMS
VIA
APPLIED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Georgia Tech Research Institute
Atlanta, Georgia
March 24-26, 1986
The premise of this workshop is that appropriate research can
create a new, invented Science of Design to support CAE/CAD in a
CAE/CAD/CAM Military Weapons System Foundry. A Foundry is required
for rapid design and production of complex weapons systems demanded by
changing military mission requirements. CAE/CAD is viewed as a domain
of Applied AI called Design Automation (DA), and Design Science is
considered a subdiscipline of Design Automation. DA is viewed as a
totally generic discipline whose domain is both weapons systems and
their embedded electronics, including multiplatform systems. The
discipline of DA incorporates requirements engineering, weapons system
and subsystem configuration, the design of mission-specific system and
subsystem functions, signal and data processing algorithm design,
software engineering (including firmware), multiprocessor and
processor design, and structural, mechanical, thermal, electrical,
electromagnetic, and electronics (including analog) engineering.
For this workshop the domain of DA will be limited to military
embedded electronics systems (including multiplatform systems). Within
this domain the workshop is generic, in that it includes all the
preceding DA disciplines from requirements engineering to electronics
engineering.
The workshop's purpose is to prepare approximately five detailed
near-term project plans for initial vectoring of DA-relevant research
towards Weapons System Foundry objectives. One project plan will
detail development of a DA Testbed. Additional special interest
project plans may also be prepared.
All workshop attendance expenses are the responsibility of
attendees, and include a nominal registration fee for lunches and
refreshments. Only US citizens will be allowed to attend the
workshop. There is no a priori restriction on attendees' technical
background or employer. An attendance limit of 40 participants may
cause rejection of some attendance applications; however, all
applicants will be provided copies of the draft workshop report for
review.
An Attendance Application Package is available on request. It
contains a white paper defining AFWAL objectives for long term DA
technology development, a detailed workshop description, and a
questionnaire to establish individual applicant's DA-relevant
qualifications and interests.
To request an Attendance Application Package please contact:
Mr Harold Noffke
AFWAL/AARM-3
WPAFB OH 45433-6543
Tel: (513) 255-3655/5097/6071
*AFWAL stands for Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-Dec-85 0113 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #182
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Dec 85 01:13:00 PST
Date: Wed 4 Dec 1985 23:30-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #182
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 5 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 182
Today's Topics:
Queries - Knowledge Base Management System & Machine Learning &
Subconscious Reasoning & Decision Theory & Natural Language &
Distributed Computing using AppleTalk,
AI Tools - Smalltalk & Object-Oriented Programming in Lisp,
Expert Systems - Artificial Empathy,
Programming Languages - Type Checking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 85 22:10:06 est
From: mex107@mitre (Michael Leavitt)
Subject: First use of phrase "knowledge base management system"
I'm trying to track down the first use of the phrase "knowledge base management
system" to refer to expert system shells like KEE and ART. I've heard it in
oral presentations, but not seen it in writing. Can anyone help? Replies to
me please. Many thanks.
Mike Leavitt <mex107@mitre.arpa>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 85 12:48 CDT
From: Joseph←Tatem <tatem%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Query - paper on machine learning
In Artificial Intelligence #25, Kurt VanLehn, reviewing Machine
Learning, says "Carbonell's more recent papers report that further
implementation uncovered fundamental flaws in the design presented
[in Carbonell's chapter in Machine Learning]". Can anyone direct me
to these papers and/or give me an idea what theses flaws are??
Thanx,
Joe Tatem
tatem.ti-eg@csnet-relay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 85 11:46:44 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@ucl-cs.arpa
Subject: Subconscious Reasoning : Discovery and Invention
subconscious, adj. ``of our own mental activities of which we are
not aware'',
n. ``the part of the mind in which these
activities take place.''
The Oxford Paperback Dictionary.
What does cognitive science have to make of the discovery of the
structure of the benzene molecule? It is said to have been the result
of a chemist having a dream in which serpents were biting their own
tails. He interpreted this when waking as the long sought after ring
configuration that would make sense of the ratios of hydrogen to
carbon atoms that had been discovered by experiment.
Gordon Joly
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
[An even more impressive feat was the translation of Samuel Pepys'
diary, written in a code (actually an ancient shorthand, for which
the key was later found in his personal library) which had resisted
many cryptographic efforts. The owner of the diary one night dreamt
a full page of cleartext, including the page number, and was then
able to translate the whole thing. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 27-NOV-85
From: PETER PIRRON <H29%DHDURZ2.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Request - Decision Theory and Natural Language
HALLO
I am a new member in the AIList. My name is Peter Pirron. I am
living in Heidelberg/West Germany. I am working as an computer
advicer for statistical problems at the Psychochological Institut.
At the moment my interests are normative decision theory and
programming of natural language.
It would be very helpful for me if you could send me references
of articles and books of these subjects. It would also be interesting
for me to know people who work on these subjects.
I am especially interested in programs dealing with the subjects
mentioned above.
Thank you very much in advance!!!
Peter Pirron (h29@dhdurz2.bitnet)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 85 13:25 PST
From: "Watson Mark%SAI.MFENET"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: SMALLTALK, LISP, DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING, APPLETALK, MACINTOSH
Date: 12/4/85
FROM: WATSON#M%SAI@LLL-MFE
Subject: Lisp and Smalltalk on the Macintosh
In response to Fabio Favata's request for a public domain
version of the Smalltalk language, I would suggest contacting
Apple Computer Inc. Apple has made the original Xerox Smalltalk
language available on the Macintosh for $50 (for 7 disks!!).
The Smalltalk system runs on a 512K Mac. To order Smalltalk,
call 1 408 747-1288 and ask for Paula.
I would like to hear from anyone attempting to use the Appletalk
network to build testbed distributed computing systems. The
Appletalk network has a fairly low bandwidth (.25 megabits/sec),
but the availability of two good symbolic programming languages
on the Mac (Smalltalk and ExperLisp) would provide a very low
cost system for software development. I can be reached at
1 619 456-6816. - Mark Watson
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, December 4, 1985 17:11:12
From: snyder@hplabsd
Subject: Object-Oriented Programming in Lisp
From: Nick Davies (at GEC Research) <YE85%mrca.co.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Object oriented programming in Common Lisp
> Does anyone have or know of an implementation of Flavors or any other
> object-oriented programming system in Common Lisp ?
Hewlett-Packard has developed an object-oriented extension to Common Lisp,
which we are proposing as a candidate for standardization. Our extension is
similar in syntax to Flavors, but is stricter in its support of encapsulation.
Like Common Lisp itself, our extension has been designed to serve as a common
language subset for object-oriented programming (in Common Lisp). It also has
been designed to permit a very efficient implementation, even on conventional
hardware.
At Hewlett-Packard, we have been using object-oriented programming in Lisp for
many years. The Common Lisp version of our objects dialect has been in use
since last February. Our AI workstation software, which was demonstrated at
IJCAI in August, uses object-oriented programming heavily in its extensible
user interface, and in applications. For example, the configuration I am
running contains 132 class definitions. The object-oriented extensions will
be included in our forthcoming Common Lisp development product for HP Series
300 workstations (68020 based).
To receive a copy of a memo describing our Common Lisp object-oriented
extensions, send your U.S. mail address to Mingus%hplabs@csnet-relay.arpa
and ask for ATC-85-1, "Object-Oriented Programming for Common Lisp".
Alan Snyder
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 85 11:39:39 mst
From: ted%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: expert systems move on
TI just distributed a marketing flyer in which they described
expert systems AT WORK TODAY (original emphasis) solving problems
like:
...
credit approval
...
policy and procedure administration
It seems that the marketing folks at TI haven't heard about
the discussions recently on the digest about how artificial
empathy will be required to properly implement these sorts of
applications.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 85 18:23:01 CST
From: reddy@a.CS.UIUC.EDU (Uday S. Reddy)
Subject: Type checking
I do not see why it would be easier to locate "type errors" (errors
detectable by a type checker) than other kinds of errors. The effects of
errors get propagated the same way and their symptoms are exhibited the same
way. My experience with programming in LISP was that I was indeed spending
an inordinate amount of time locating errors that could have been detected
by a type checker.
The real advantage of a type checker is that it not only detects type
errors, but also locates them. While detection can be done by run time
type checking, location is not done.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Dec-85 0040 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #183
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Dec 85 00:40:48 PST
Date: Mon 9 Dec 1985 22:24-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #183
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 10 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 183
Today's Topics:
Seminars - CAKE Knowledge Representation and Reasoning System (MIT) &
- SOJA Scheduling System (CMU) &
- Fault Analysis using Dynamic Behavior (Rutgers) &
- Toward a Theory of Algorithm Improvement (Oregon State) &
- Inheritance, Data Models and Data Types (MIT) &
- STRIPS and Circumscription (SU) &
- Semi-Applicative Programming (SRI) &
- Connectionist Talk Talk (SU) &
- Possible Worlds and Situations Semantics (UPenn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 85 09:22 EST
From: Brian C. Williams <WILLIAMS@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - CAKE Knowledge Representation and Reasoning System (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Thursday , December 5 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
CAKE:
An Example of a Hybrid Knowledge Representation
and Reasoning System
Charles Rich
MIT AI Lab
Cake is a knowledge representation and reasoning system being developed
to support automated programming (the Programmer's Apprentice). The
first part of this talk describes the architecture of Cake, which is
divided into the following nine layers, each with associated
representations and reasoning procedures:
Plan Synthesis
Plan Recognition
Plan Calculus
Frames
Types
Algebraic
Demons
Equality
Truth Maintenance
The second part of the talk takes a look at some of the issues in the
design of hybrid systems generally, such as
What is a hybrid system?
Why would you want one?
Who is developing them?
Where do we go from here?
Nelson & Oppen's cooperating decision procedures, KL-Two, Krypton, and
Cake will be discussed as examples of hybrid systems.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Dec 85 11:30:50 EST
From: Jeanne.Bennardo@ISL1.RI.CMU.EDU
Subject: Seminar - SOJA Scheduling System (CMU)
Intelligent Systems Lab Seminar
Topic: Presentation of SOJA project.
Speaker: Claude Le Pape
Place: DH3313
Date: Friday, Dec. 6
Time: 10:30am - 11:30am
Speaker:
Claude Le Pape is a visiting researcher from the Laboratoires de Marcoussis
in France, and is currently working in the Intelligent Systems Lab with the
Phoenix/Opis project.
Abstract:
We have implemented in the Laboratoires de Marcoussis - in Franz Lisp -
a daily scheduling system called SOJA. Given the state of the shop in the
evening, SOJA builds a scheduling plan for the next day. This implies :
- selecting the operations to be performed over the day
- scheduling them and computing a time-table for each machine.
Two planning steps are distinguished in SOJA : Selection and Scheduling.
- Selection is done according to the state of the shop and the orders to
be completed. Selection rules are used to build a tagged graph,
which nodes are phases (operations). Each arc is tagged according to a
reason for selecting its extremity, and valued in order to measure the
significance of this reason. Then SOJA examines this graph and the
resource requirements to decide which phases should be scheduled.
- Scheduling is considered as a constraint-directed reasoning task.
However, preferences are not represented as constraints, but as scheduling
rules that are used to make decisions.
Both selection and scheduling processes use an inference engine that has
been specially designed for SOJA. We will describe this engine and the
solutions we have implemented to make it efficient :
- combination of forward and backward chaining
- preservation of partial instances of rules (and propagation)
- compilation of rules.
We will also discuss our constraint representation and backtracking.
A short comparison between SOJA and ISIS is also scheduled.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Dec 85 10:38:59 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - Fault Analysis using Dynamic Behavior (Rutgers)
III Seminar
Title: Using Dynamic Behavior of Physical Systems for Fault Diagnosis
Speaker: Kathy Abbott
Date: Thursday, December 5, 1985, 11:30-12:30PM
(*** notice date and time change ***)
Place: Hill Center, room 423
Kathy Abbott, a Ph.D. candidate in our department and
researcher at NASA - Langley, will discuss her dissertation research
on fault diagnosis. Here is her abstract:
One consideration when performing real-time diagnosis of
physical systems is that the system's behavior may change as time
progresses. The effect of a failure may propagate through the system
under consideration as well as to systems either functionally or
physically adjacent to it. This dynamic behavior can be used to prune
fault hypotheses by using models of the physical system to identify
how the fault is propagating, the type of fault, and what components
of the physical system are affected. An advantage of using functional
and physical models in this manner is that it permits reasoning about
incomplete information, such as, lack of measurements due to physical
damage, system parameters that are not sensed, or sampling times that
are not frequent enough to detect all system changes.
In this talk I will discuss a model-based diagnosis system
which uses the dynamic behavior of physical systems in the diagnosis
process. The diagnosis system is not yet completely fleshed out in
all details, so any constructive comments or suggestions are
particularly welcome at this time.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 85 14:00:35 pst
From: Tom Dietterich <tgd%oregon-state.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Toward a Theory of Algorithm Improvement (Oregon State)
This colloquium has already happened, but I thought you might still
be interested in sending it to AILIST. --Tom
Departmental Colloquium
Oregon State University
Department of Computer Science
Wednesday, Nov. 20, 1985
TOWARD A THEORY OF ALGORITHM IMPROVEMENT
Thomas G. Dietterich
Department of Computer Science
Oregon State University
This talk will sketch a theory of algorithm improvement called the "test
incorporation" theory. The basic premise of test incorporation theory is
that all algorithms can be usefully viewed as improvements of a naive
generate-and-test algorithm. The improvements can take one of two forms:
(a) movement along the space-versus-time tradeoff curve and (b)
INCORPORATION of test information into the generator of possible solutions.
Examples will be presented for each kind of performance improvement. The
talk will then take up the questions of WHEN these improvements take place
and WHAT PROGRAM is performing the improvements. Traditional compilers
perform simple kinds of improvements at "compile-time". However, many more
powerful algorithms make these improvements to themselves dynamically at run
time, particularly when new input data is made available.
Test incorporation theory can be employed in two ways: (a) to analyze
existing programs and understand why they are successful, and (b) to design
new programs. The test incorporation perspective also provides some
interesting answers to the questions "What is computer science?" "What is
knowledge?" and "What is intelligence?"
This work is a joint project with James Bennett of Teknowledge, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 85 16:21:29 est
From: nikhil at MIT-NEWTOWNE-VARIETY.MIT.EDU (Rishiyur S. Nikhil)
Subject: Seminar - Inheritance, Data Models and Data Types (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Inheritance, Data Models and Data Types
Peter Buneman
University of Pennsylvania
The notion of type inheritance (subsumption, ISA hierarchies) has long been
recognised as central to the development of programming languages, databases
and semantic networks. Recent work on the semantics of programming languages
has shown that inheritance can be cleanly combined with functional
programming and can itself serve as a model for computation.
Using a definition of partial functions that are well behaved with respect to
inheritance, I have been investigating a new characterization of the
relational and functional data models. In particular, I want to show the
connections of relational database theory with type inheritance and show how
both the relational and functional data models may be better integrated with
typed programming languages.
Host: Prof. Rishiyur Nikhil
Date: Friday, December 6, 1985
Time: 2:00 pm - Refreshments
2:15 pm - Lecture
Place: Room NE43-512A
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science,
545 Technology Square,
Cambridge, MA 02139
------------------------------
Date: 05 Dec 85 1134 PST
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - STRIPS and Circumscription (SU)
STRIPS and Circumscription:
Two Approaches to the Frame Problem
Vladimir Lifschitz
Wednesday, December 11, 2:00
MJH 252
The frame problem consists in defining which properties of
situations do not change across events. We will compare two well-known
attempts to solve the frame problem. One, the STRIPS approach, is
based on using a language which has no explicit references to
situations. The other approach uses circumscription to express the
"commonsense law of inertia", according to which the differences
between two situations separated by an event are minimal, given the
properties of the event. We will show on a simple example how to
transform a circumscriptive theory into the description of the
corresponding STRIPS operator.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 6 Dec 85 15:05:51-PST
From: Phil Cohen <PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Semi-Applicative Programming (SRI)
N. S. Sridharan, of BBN Labs, will give a seminar next Tues, the 10th,
10:30 am, in EJ228. Title and abstract below.
Title: Semi-applicative Programming
Most current parallel programming languages are designed
with a sequential programming language as the base language and have
added constructs that allow parallel execution. We are experimenting
with an applicative base language that has implicit parallelism
everywhere, and then we introduce constructs that inhibit parallelism.
The base language uses pure LISP as a foundation and blends in
interesting features of Prolog and FP. Proper utilization of
available machine resources is a crucial concern of programmers. We
advocate several techniques of controlling the behavior of functional
programs without changing their meaning or functionality: program
annotation with constructs that have benign side-effects, program
transformation and adaptive scheduling. This combination yields us a
SEMI-APPLICATIVE programming language and an interesting programming
methodology.
Starting with the specification of a context-free recognizer, we have
been successful in deriving variants of the recognition algorithm of
Cocke-Kasami-Younger. One version is the CKY algorithm in parallel.
The second version includes a top-down predictor to limit the work
done by the bottom-up recognizer. The third version uses a cost
measure over derivations and produces minimal cost parses using a
dynamic programming technique. In another line of development, we
arrive at a parallel version of the Earley algorithm.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 85 06:03:17 pst
From: gluck@SU-PSYCH (Mark Gluck)
Subject: Seminar - Connectionist Talk Talk (SU)
NETTALK: Teaching a Massively-Parallel Network to Talk
Dec. 18th, 1:00 pm, at Redwood hall
Terrence J. Sejnowski
Biophysics Department
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD 21218
ABSTRACT
Text to speech is a difficult problem for rule-based systems
because English pronunciation is highly context dependent and there are
many exceptions to phonological rules. An alternative knowledge
representation for correspondences between letters and phonemes will be
described in which rules and exceptions are treated uniformly and can
be determined with a learning algorithm in a connectionist model. The
architecture is a layered network of 400 simple processing units with
9,000 weights on the connections between the units. The training
corpus is continuous informal speech transcribed from tape recordings.
Following training on 1000 words from this corpus the network can
generalize to novel text. Even though this network was not designed to
mimic human learning, the development of the network in some respects
resembles the early stages in human language acquisition. Following
damage of the network by either removal of units or addition of random
values to the weights the performance of the network degraded
gracefully. Issues which will be addressed include scaling of the
learning algorithm with the size of the problem, robustness of
learning to predicate order of the problem, and universality of
learning in connectionist models.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 85 11:58 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Possible Worlds and Situations Semantics (UPenn)
Forwarded From: Dale Miller <Dale@UPenn> on Mon 9 Dec 1985 at 8:58
Joint Mathematics / Computer Science
LOGIC COLLOQUIUM
Possible Worlds and Situations Semantics
Greg Hager
CIS Department, UPenn
Monday 9 December 1985
4:40 pm, DRL 4E17
Situation theory is an attempt by its developers (philosopher John Perry and
mathematician Jon Barwise) to provide an alternative framework for the study
of language and meaning. Their approach has been to start over from first
principles and construct a theory which does not rely on classical logic as
developed by Frege -- in particular emphasizing the notions of partial
information, a relational theory of meaning, and mathematical realism.
Needless to say this has provoked substantial interest, debate, and
skepticism from a variety of sources.
Any complete understanding of pros and cons of this theory requires a
substantial knowledge of philosophy, mathematics, and linguistics (none of
which I can lay claim too). However, from one point of view, situation
theory can be loosely construed as an alternative to possible worlds theory
and its application to the study of language by Montague. In this talk, I
will focus on the development of possible worlds semantics and its use in
linguistics, and point out where situation theory diverges or disagrees.
This discussion will be fairly general and open-ended, so audience
participation is welcomed and encouraged.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Dec-85 0235 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #184
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Dec 85 02:34:54 PST
Date: Mon 9 Dec 1985 22:31-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #184
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 10 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 184
Today's Topics:
Query - Translator: SAIL --> LISP?,
AI Tools - Object-Oriented Programming in Common Lisp,
Bindings - AI&DS Name Change,
Journal - Machine Learning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 8 Dec 85 00:59:07-PST
From: Kashi.Rao%dworkin@usc-eclc.ARPA, 220P%dworkin@usc-eclc.ARPA,
Subject: Translator: SAIL --> LISP?
I have a large program in SAIL that I would like to convert to LISP.
I would like to know if there's any program available to translate
code from SAIL to LISP (COMMON or FRANZ).
Any quick pointers/references/suggestions would be deeply appreciated.
Kashi Rao
Intelligent Systems Group, USC.
rao%dworkin@usc-oberon
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 85 14:52 CDT
From: Joseph←Tatem <tatem%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: RE: Object-Oriented Programming in Common Lisp
The TI Explorer supports Flavors in Common Lisp.
Joe Tatem
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 85 13:33:35 pst
From: clif@aids-unix (Clif McCormick)
Subject: Name Change
Advanced Decision Systems
201 San Antonio Circle
Suite 286
Mountain View, California 94040
(415) 941-3912
Advanced Information & Decision Systems, a leader in defense and
commercial applications of artificial intelligence and other advanced
information processing technologies, has changed its name to:
ADVANCED DECISION SYSTEMS
Founded in 1979, Advanced Decision Systems specializes in applied
research and prototype development involving a number of technologies,
including artificial intelligence, computer science, estimation and
control theory, signal and image processing, and decision theory.
Specific projects include image understanding for scene analysis
and object classification, oil exploration, fault diagnosis, distributed
sensor networks, multi-target tracking, autonomous land vehicle navigation,
avionics expert systems, and a battlefield commander's assistant.
Primary among the clients for these projects are defense organizations
such as the Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency, and
research laboratories of the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force. The name
change comes as Advanced Decision Systems seeks to expand its involvement
in the commercial marketplace and add to its list of commerical clients,
which currently includes Bank of America, McGraw-Hill, and Kodak.
Advanced Decision Systems, with headquarters in Mountain View,
California and a recently opened office in Arlington, Virginia, is
completely employee-owned and had revenues of $6.5 million in fiscal
1985. The company currently has a total of 86 employees.
The name change, from Advanced Information & Decision Systems to
Advanced Decision Systems, will become effective December 1, 1985.
Thanks.
Clif McCormick
clif@aids-unix
(415) 941-3912
------------------------------
Date: 5 December 1985 0703-PST (Thursday)
From: west@nprdc.arpa (Larry West)
Subject: New Journal: ``Machine Learning''
I'm sure many of you received the same flyer I did, but for
those who didn't, the new journal ``Machine Learning'' is
about to begin its first volume, and is soliciting subscriptions
and submissions.
Executive Editor: Pat Langley, UCI
Editors: Jaime G. Carbonell, CMU
Ryszard S. Michalski, UIllinois
Tom M. Mitchell, Rutgers
The Editorial Board:
Saul Amarel, John R. Anderson, Bruce G. Buchanan, Thomas
G. Dieterrich, Geoff Hinton, John H. Holland, Yves
Kodratoff, Douglas B. Lenat, Jack Mostow, J.R. Quinlan,
Paul S. Rosenbloom, Roger Schank, Derek Sleeman, and the
omnipresent Patrick Winston.
Quoting:
Machine Learning will publish papers on the processes through
which intelligent systems improve their performance over time,
and will cover areas such as:
* Concept Acquisition
* Strategy Learning
* Language Development
* Reasoning by Analogy
* Scientific Discovery
The main emphasis will be on symbolic learning methods as
opposed to numeric ones [boo], and the editors will give
preference to papers that describe theories or principles of
learning that are supported by running computer programs.
However, the journal also welcomes theoretical treatments and
comparisons of existing systems, and encourages computational
models of human learning. Although the journal will emphasize
basic research in the emerging field of Machine Learning, it
will also consider applications of learning methods to
real-world domains.
...
Machine Learning publishes articles on the processes through
which intelligent systems improve their performance over
time. Authors are invited to submit papers describing
computational approaches to any aspect of learning. We
encourage attempts to formulate principles of learning to
integrate previous research results, and to model human
learning in a computational framework.
Four issues per year, $35 individual, $78 institutional; first
issue due out in January 1986.
Kluwer Academic Publishers
190 Old Derby Street
Hingham, MA 02043
617-749-5262 (for Credit Card orders)
Larry West USA+619-452-6771
Institute for Cognitive Science non-business hrs: 452-2256
UC San Diego (mailcode C-015)
La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
UUCP: {ucbvax,ihnp4,sdcrdcf,decvax,gatech}!sdcsvax!sdcsla!west
or {sun,ulysses}!sdcsla!west
ARPA: <west@nprdc.ARPA> or <west@ucsd.ARPA>
DOMAIN: <west@nprdc.mil> or <west@csl.ucsd.edu>
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Dec-85 0038 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #185
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Dec 85 00:38:39 PST
Date: Thu 12 Dec 1985 22:16-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #185
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 13 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 185
Today's Topics:
Queries - Expert Systems for Building Configuration & LIPS,
Policy - AI&DS Name Change and Advertising,
Literature - Spang Robinson Report No. 2 &
Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Law and Technology,
Seminars - Parallel Depth-First Search (MIT) &
Quantitative Operators in Design (UTexas) &
An Object Model of Information (CMU) &
Massively Parallel Networks that Learn Representations (MIT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 December 1985 1207-EST
From: William Proffer@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Bldg Config. KBES
I'd like to know if anyone has any information on
expert systems used in the configuration of office
buildings for tenants. For instance, configuration of
utilities, space, parking, etc.
Please mail replies to proffer@s3sun.css.gov
Thanks. Bill Proffer
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 85 21:08 CST
From: Jerry Bakin <Bakin@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Subject: fLIPS, pLIPS, nLIPS, uLIPS, mLIPS, LIPS, KLIPS, MLIPS, GLIPS,
In many Prolog discusions, I have heard people talk about the speed of
an implementation in terms of Logical Inferences per Second (LIPS). I
don't recall ever seeing a formal definition of this.
Would someone care to discuss what a LIP is? Is it one unit of
unification? Some sort of average time it takes prolog to scan
a clause?
As benchmarks go, is apples and oranges, or red delicious and golden
delicious?
How can it be compared to lisp?
In terms of LIPS, how fast are current Prolog implementations?
DEC-10? DEC-20? Symbolics? Micro-Prolog?
And finally, in terms of LIPS, how fast are LISP implementations for the
DEC-20 and Symbolics (or other machines)?
Thanks,
Jerry Bakin <Bakin at HI-Multics>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1985 05:50 CST
From: AI.DUFFY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: Name Change: Banned AIDS!
Date: Thursday, 5 December 1985 15:33-CST
From: clif at aids-unix (Clif McCormick)
Advanced Information & Decision Systems
... advertising deleted ...
has changed its name to:
ADVANCED DECISION SYSTEMS
... advertising deleted ...
The name change comes as Advanced Decision Systems seeks to expand
its involvement in the commercial marketplace and add to its list
of commerical clients, which currently includes
... assorted multinationals deleted ...
Come on, tell us WHY you've changed your name! All you've done is
removed the word INFORMATION from your name. What do you have against
information? Are you trying to promote RANDOMNESS? Or maybe it's
your commercial clients who don't like information. Is that it?
Hmmmm.... Maybe its the acronym. Maybe you don't like the acronym
AIDS because you're not really in the business of AIDing anybody
(except of course your commercial clients) and you don't want people
bothering you whenever they need some AID. You've now changed the
acronym to ADS. So that must be it. You aren't against information
at all. You've just decided to change your name to ADS to let people
know you like to place ADS on AIList.
Right?
[The original message was sent to AIList as a "press release". I
chose to run it under "Bindings", although much of it fell under "Lab
Descriptions". I have permitted such reports from other sites (as does
the SIGART Newsletter) -- I usually decide in favor of the transmission
of new information and the suppression of repeated information, but
do screen out job ads and anything that I consider blatantly
commercial. My criteria have been partly shaped by the feedback or
lack thereof from readers, and such feedback is always welcome. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 10 Dec 1985 18:03-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Spang Robinson Report, No 2
Summary of Spang Robinson Report, Dec 1985 Vol 1 NO. 2
AI AND MANUFACTURING
Carnegie makes 70 percent of its 8 million in revenue from custom
applications to clients in manufacturing.
Teknowledge makes 50 percent of its revenues from custom consulting
30 percent of KEE applications are in manufacturing.
A. D. Little has developed a "Smart Foreman" expert system
Arthur Anderson has developed KIOSK, which helps process special orders,
and Cell Designer which assigns parts and assigns machines to processes
and cells.
Applicon has demonstrated a knowledge based CAD/CAM workstation for
sheet metal fabrication.
International Systems Operations is developing systems to assist
in quality control and material movement.
Cognition is developing a system that captures design knowledge in
handbooks and standard textbooks as well as corporate design standards.
TIPNIS will provide manufacturing expertise to the company's designers.
LMI will offer connectivity between PICON, it's real-time expert system
tool and MAP, the new standard for factory floor networking. This
will involve a < $7,000 board set.
REVIEW of Texas Instruments satellite AI broadcast.
News Section:
ICONICS has changed its name to Transform LOGIc corporation. They are
devleoping an AI-based software engineering system.
RCA has established an AI chair at the University of Pennsylvania.
VOTAN has announced a voice system for entering or verifying data which
costs $4950.00.
Carnegie Group has introduced Version 3 of Knowledge Craft.
Artelligence and Computer*Thought have filed a law suit
regarding breaches of non-competition agreements.
Teknowledge has named Michael P. Chan, vice president of product sales
for its Knowledge Engineering
LISP machine has elected three new members of its board of directors.
Summary of Artificial Intelligence: Towards Practical Applications
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 85 15:09:29 pst
From: George Cross <cross%wsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Proceedings: 1st Annual Conference on Law and Technology
Here is the table of contents of the recently published proceedings of the
First Annual Conference on Law and Technology, held at the University of
Houston in August 1984 and sponsored by the University of Houston Law Center
Program on Law and Technology. There was a Second Conference in 1985, but the
proceedings are not available yet. The book is:
%B Computing Power and Legal Reasoning
%E Charles Walter
%I West Publishing Company
%C St. Paul, MN
%D 1985
ISBN 0-314-95570-4
and is available from
West Publishing Company
50 West Kellogg Boulevard
P.O. Box 64526
St. Paul, MN 55164-1003
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
%A Layman Allen
%A Charles Saxon
%T Computer-Aided Normalizing and Unpacking:
Some Interesting Machine-Processable Transformations of Legal Rules
%P 495-572
%A Kevin Ashley
%T Reasoning by Analogy: A Survey of Selected AI Research
with Implications for Legal Expert Systems
%P 105-127
%A Helene Bauer-Bernet
%T Beyond Keyword Interaction: Computerized European
Community Law
%P 337-374
%A Daniele Bourcier
%T About Intelligence in Legal Information Systems
%P 319-336
%A William Boyd
%T Choosing Between a Chapter 7 and a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy:
An "Expert System" to Assist an Attorney in Making the Choice
%P 699-763
%A Constantino Ciampi
%A Deirdre Exell Pirro
%A Elio Fameli
%A Giuseppe Trivisonno
%T THES/BID: An Expert System for Constructing
a Computer-Based Thesaurus for Legal Informatics and Computer Law
%P 375-412
%A Cary deBessonet
%A George Cross
%T Representation of Some Aspects of Legal Causality
%P 205-214
%A Michael Dyer
%A Margot Flowers
%T Toward Automating Legal Expertise
%P 49-68
%A Jerald Feinstein
%T A Knowledge-Based Expert System Used to Prevent
the Disclosure of Sensitive Information at the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
%P 661-697
%A Thomas Gordon
%T Object-Oriented Predicate Logic and Its Role in
Representing Legal Knowledge
%P 163-203
%A Grayfred Gray
%T Statutes Enacted in Normalized Form:
The Legislative Experience in Tennessee
%P 467-493
%A Grayfred Gray
%T Law & Technology Conference Expert System Workshop Report
%P 621-626
%A Michael Heather
%T Demand-Driven Model for a Half-Intelligent System
%P 69-103
%A Jay Hook
%T Semantic Representations of Children's Blame Rules
%P 29-47
%A Robert Krovetz
%T The Use of Knowledge Representation Formalisms in
the Modeling of Legal Concepts
%P 275-317
%A Sydney Lamb
%T Information and its Representation in English Texts
%P 145-155
%A C. Duncan MacRae
%T Tax Problem Solving with an If-Then System
%P 595-620
%A Antonio Martino
%T Why an Automated Analysis of Legislation?
%P 413-466
%A L. Thorne McCarty
%T Permissions and Obligations
%P 573-594
%A Mark Peterson
%A Donald Waterman
%T An Expert Systems Approach to Evaluating Product Liability Cases
%P 627-659
%A Edwina Rissland
%T Argument Moves and Hypotheticals
%P 129-143
%A Dean Schlobohm
%T TA -- A Prolog Program which Analyzes Income Tax Issues
under Section 318(A) of the Internal Revenue Code
%P 765-815
%A Franciszek Studnicki
%T Computational Aspects of Legal Interpretation
%P 157-161
%A Charles Walter
%T Introduction
%P 1-4
%A Charles Walter
%A Michael Parks
%T Natural Models of Intelligence
%P 5-27
%A Marshall Willick
%T Professional Malpractice and the Unauthorized Practice of Professions:
Some Legal and Ethical Aspects of the use of Computers and Decision-Aids
%P 817-863
%A Gian Piero Zarri
%T Inference Techniques for Intelligent Information Retrieval
%P 247-274
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
George R. Cross cross@wsu.CSNET
Computer Science Department cross%wsu@csnet-relay.ARPA
Washington State University faccross@wsuvm1.BITNET
Pullman, WA 99164-1210 Phone: 509-335-6319 or 509-335-6636
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 85 10:50:41 EST
From: "Lisa F. Melcher" <LISA@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Parallel Depth-First Search (MIT)
DATE: Friday, December 13, 1985
TIME: 12:45.....Refreshments
1:00.....Lecture
PLACE: NE43 - 512A
"A PARALLEL ALGORITHM FOR DEPTH FIRST SEARCH"
Richard Anderson
MSRI
A new parallel algorithm for constructing a depth first search tree in an
undirected graph will be described. The algorithm is a P-RAM algorithm and
uses several probabilistic algorithms as sub-routines.
The run time of the algorithm is 2 sq.rt. log n. This makes it an almost RNC
eps.
algorithm, since the run time is less than n for any eps.>0.
The standard sequential algorithm for depth first search can be shown to be
"inherently sequential", so this shows that substantial speed up for depth
first search is possible when a different approach is taken.
David Shmoys
Host
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 85 12:57:28 cst
From: Ted Briggs <briggs@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - Quantitative Operators in Design (UTexas)
Quantitative Operators in Design
by
David R Throop
noon Friday Dec. 13
PAI 3.38
Doing design problems involves reasoning about quantities.
AI methods have not made great headway into engineering
design problems so far. They have lacked the power to
reason about quantities. Meanwhile, other numeric
techniques have lacked the AI systems' abilities in handling
heuristic knowledge.
I propose to extend AI representations to allow reasoning
about quantities in design. My approach has these features:
Encoding heuristic knowledge as frames with quantita-
tive operators, operators with an action and a
strength.
Beginning design by solving subproblems, guided by the
arbitration of conflicting quantitative heuristics.
Reasoning quantitatively about the aggregate design,
modifying it using non-local knowledge.
Encoding the procedures to arbitrate conflicting
heuristics as knowledge at a general level: the para-
digm level.
To test the power of this approach, I will apply it to an
outstanding problem in Chemical Engineering: the synthesis
of heat exchanger networks. This problem has many published
non-AI computer approaches. This literature provides a test
of my representation and its adequacy for real design prob-
lems.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Dec 1985 1331-EST
From: David A. Evans <DAE@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - An Object Model of Information (CMU)
Speaker: David Beech,
Center for Integrated Systems, Stanford University, and
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Palo Alto
Time: Wednesday, 11 December 1985, 1:30-3:00 PM, Wean 5409
Title: Towards an Object Model of the Representation
and Use of Information
Future general-purpose information systems will need to deal with a wide
range of information, and offer flexible access to it, if they are to
appeal to the potential millions of non-specialist users. For example,
they should process pictures and sounds as naturaly as numbers and
texts; they should answer questions which require some deduction from
the often incomplete information previously given to the system; and
they should move towards the support of natural language interfaces,
including spoken inputs.
An object-oriented model of the representation and use of information is
proposed, with the necessary generality for the desription and design of
such systems. Fundamental concepts including those of agent, object,
type, action, formula, process, transaction, predicator and generator
are intro- duced. Recursive functions, predicate calculus, and n-ary
relations are brought together in a data abstraction framework, with an
emphasis on intensional definition of concepts and their instantiation
by means of predicators and generators.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1985 10:21 EST
From: ELIZABETH%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Seminar - Parallel Networks that Learn Representations (MIT)
MASSIVELY PARALLEL NETWORKS THAT LEARN REPRESENTATIONS
Geoffrey Hinton
Carnegie-Mellon University
Monday, December 9
Eighth Floor Playroom, AI Lab
4:00 pm
I shall describe a new learning procedure for massively parallel
networks of neuron-like processing elements. The procedure adjusts
the connection strengths in a multi-layered network so as to make it
give the correct output vector when given an input vector. The units
in the intermediate layers come to represent important implicit
features of the task domain that generates the pairs of input/output
vectors. As a result, the network can generalise appropriately to new
cases. I shall describe a pattern recognition example in which the
network constructs a balanced ecology of feature detectors, and a
higher level task in which the network learns a set of relationships.
The second example illustrates the ability of the network to recognize
isomorphisms and make use of them in encoding and generalizing
knowledge.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Dec-85 1340 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #186
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Dec 85 13:40:13 PST
Date: Sun 15 Dec 1985 11:38-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #186
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 15 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 186
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Learning Objects from Images (MIT) &
SDI Debate (SU) &
Deduction as a Programming Methodology (UTexas) &
Typed Equational Logic Programming (UTexas),
Conference - Expert Systems in Government &
Object-Oriented Programming System, Languages, and Applications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 85 20:06 EST
From: Brian C. Williams <WILLIAMS at OZ.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Seminar - Learning Objects from Images (MIT)
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Thursday , December 12 4:00pm Room: NE43- 8th floor Playroom
The Artificial Intelligence Lab
Revolving Seminar Series
"Learning Symbolic Object Models From Images"
Jonathan Connell
MIT, AI Lab
This talk will present the results of an implemented system for
learning structural prototypes of objects directly from gray-scale
images. The vision component of this system employs Brady's Smoothed
Local Symmetries to divide an object into parts which are then
described symbolically. The learning component takes these
descriptions and forms a model of the examples presented in a manner
similar to Winston's ANALOGY program. The problem of matching complex
structured descriptions and the difficult task of reasoning about
function from form will also be briefly discussed.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 17:56:01-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - SDI Debate (SU)
``SDI: How Feasible, How Useful, How Robust?''
This will be a technical debate, covering both hardware and software aspects
of SDI.
Sponsor: Stanford Computer Science Department
Date: December 19, 1985
Time: 8:00 p.m.
Place: Terman Auditorium
Organizer: Barbara Simons, IBM-SJ
Moderator: Dr. Marvin L. Goldberger, President of Cal Tech.
Former member of President's Science Advisory Committee
and Consultant on Arms Control and International Security.
Panelists:
Advocates:
Professor Richard Lipton, Professor of Computer Science at Princeton
University, Current member of SDIO's Panel on Computing and Support of Battle
Management.
Major Simon Peter Warden, the Special Assistant to the Director of the SDIO
and Technical Advisor to the Nuclear and Space Arms Talk with the USSR
in Geneva.
Opponents:
Dr. Richard L. Garwin, IBM Fellow and Adjunct Professor of Physics at
Columbia University, Physicist and Defense Consultant.
Professor David Parnas, Lansdown Professor of Computer Science at the
University of Victoria, Former member of the SDI Organization's
Panel on Computing and Support of Battle Management.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 11:56:26-CST
From: <AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Deduction as a Programming Methodology (UTexas)
Gerard Huet
INRIA (on Sabbatical at CMU)
MCC-AI Lecture
Thursday, December 19 at 10:00am
Echelon I, Room 409
"Intuitionistic Higher-Order Natural Deduction
as a Programming Methodology"
The talk will review various aspects of the correspondence between
types and propositions and its applications to type-checking and
program proving.
A higher-order intuitionistic natural deduction formalism, the
Calculus of Constructions, is introduced and motivated by examples.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 11:55:40-CST
From: <AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Typed Equational Logic Programming (UTexas)
Typed Equational Logic as a Programming Language
Gert Smolka
Cornell University
MCC-AI Lecture
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18 at 3:00pm
Echelon I, Room 409
I will present a logic programming notation called TEL, which is based
on typed equational logic. TEL avoids many of Prolog's difficulties
since it has equality and functions, an expressive type system, and
more satisfying control features. Furthermore, employing equational
rather than relational logic supports term rewriting in addition to
logic programming a la Prolog. TEL's major innovations come with its
type system:
* Both type containment (subtypes as in OBJ2) and parametric
polymorphism (as in ML) are available. This requires type
checking algorithms that solve inequalities.
* Although, in general, types are computationally significant,
every program can be automatically translated into an
equivalent TEL program in which all type information is
redundant. Thus TEL can be implemented with untyped narrowing.
* Type declarations in TEL contain control information that enables
a compiler to decide whether a function can be implemented by
rewriting instead of full narrowing. This is a crucial
optimization since rewriting requires neither backtracking nor
unification.
* The control information in TEL's type declarations also
facilitates the exploitation of and-parallism. A straight-
forward compile-time analysis can determine most subterms that
will not share variables at run-time.
------------------------------
Date: 13 Dec 85 10:30:25 EST (Fri)
From: Duke Briscoe <duke@mitre.ARPA>
Subject: Conference - Expert Systems in Government
CALL FOR PAPERS
THE SECOND ANNUAL CONFERENCE
ON
EXPERT SYSTEMS IN GOVERNMENT
Tyson's Westpark Hotel, McLean, VA in suburban Washington, D.C.
October 20 - 24, 1986
The conference is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society and
the Mitre Corporation in cooperation with AIAA/NCS.
The objective of the conference is to explore the following:
- knowledge based applications and supporting technologies
- implementation and impact of emerging application areas
- future trends in available systems and required research
Classified and unclassified papers which relate to the use of
knowledge based systems are solicited. The topics of interest
include, but are not limited to, the following applications:
Professional: engineering, finance, law, management, medicine
Office Automation: text understanding, intelligent DBMS, intelligent
systems
Command & Control: intelligence analysis, planning, targeting,
communications, air traffic control, battle management
Exploration: outer space, prospecting, archaeology
Weapon Systems: adaptive control, electronic warfare, Star Wars,
target identification
Equipment: CAD/CAM, design monitoring, maintenance, repair
Software: automatic programming, maintenance, verification and
validation
Architecture: distributed knowledge based systems, parallel computing
Project Management: planning, scheduling, control
Education: concept formation, tutoring, testing, diagnosis
Imagery: photo interpretation, mapping
Systems Engineering: requirements, preliminary design, critical
design, testing, quality assurance
Tools and Techniques: PROLOG, knowledge acquisition and
representation, uncertainty management
Plant and Factory Automation
Space Station Systems
Human-Machine Interface
Speech and Natural Language
The program will consist of submitted and invited papers, which will
provide an overview of selected areas. Contributed papers should be
consistent with the following outline:
1. Introduction- state clearly the purpose of the work
2. Description of the actual work- must be new and significant
3. Results- discuss their significance
4. References
Completed papers are to be no longer than 20 pages, including
graphics. Four copies of the complete paper are to be submitted to:
Dr. Kamal Karna, Conference Chairman
IEEE Computer Society
1730 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20036-1903
Author's Schedule:
Four copies of manuscript May 1, 1986
Acceptance letter June 15, 1986
Camera-ready copy July 15, 1986
Conference Chairman:
Dr. Kamal Karna
Washington AI Center
Mitre Corporation
karna@mitre
Program Committee:
Co-chairman: Classified and Unclassified:
Dr. Richard Martin
Associate Director, Software Engineering Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
AIMARTN@MCC
Co-chairman: Unclassified
Dr. Kamran Parsaye
President
Intelliware, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 85 15:48:07 PST
From: Bay.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Reply-to: Ingalls%Apple.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Conference - Call for Papers, OOPSLA86
Call For Papers and Participation
ACM Conference on
Object Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications
September 29 - October 2, 1986, Portland, Oregon
OOPSLA-86 is a new ACM-sponsored conference that brings together users and
implementors of object oriented systems. Through tutorials, papers, panel
discussions and workshops, as well as demonstrations, exhibits and videotapes,
OOPSLA-86 will provide a forum for sharing experience and knowledge among
experts and novices alike.
We invite technical papers, case studies, and surveys in the following areas:
Theory: Including core definition of object oriented
programming, semantic models and methodology.
Languages: Existing object oriented languages, extensions to
conventional languages, and new languages.
Implementation: Including architectural support, compilation and
interpretation, and special techniques.
Tools and Environments: Including user interfaces, utilities and operating
system support.
Applications: Commercial, educational, and scientific applications
that exploit object oriented programming.
Related Work: The object oriented paradigm in other fields such as
databases and operating systems.
Papers on other relevant topics are welcome, as are proposals for workshops
and panel discussions.
All papers will be refereed prior to selection and inclusion in the conference
proceedings. Technical papers will be selected on the basis of originality and
contribution to the state of the art of design, implementation, methodology, or
practice. Survey papers will be selected on the basis of how well they
crystallize and integrate, in a way not previously presented, knowledge about
one or more aspects of the field.
Papers must be submitted in English, and should be no longer than 25
double-spaced pages. The cover page should include a title, an abstract of not
more than 100 words, and author's name, affiliation, address and phone number.
Five copies must be received by the Program Chairman at the address below, no
later than April 1, 1986. Authors will be notified of acceptance by May 1,
1986, and final versions of accepted papers will be due by June 15, 1986. As
the proceedings of this conference will be widely disseminated, publication of
more than an abstract of a submitted paper is likely to inhibit republication
in ACM's refereed publications.
A room at the conference will be reserved for video presentations that
illustrate or supplement the concepts conveyed in other presentations.
Submissions must run no longer than 15 minutes, and should be on 3/4-inch
U-Matic format tape. Tapes must be received by the Video Chairman at the
address below, no later than July 1, 1986.
Conference Chairmen Daniel Bobrow (Xerox PARC) (bobrow.pa@XEROX.ARPA)
Alan Purdy (Servio Logic Development)
<alpurdy@oregon-grad.CSNet>
Program Chairman Daniel Ingalls, MS 22-Y
(ingalls%apple.csnet@CSNET-RELAY)
Apple Computer
20525 Mariani Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Video Chairman David Robson (robson.pa@XEROX.ARPA)
Xerox PARC
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂15-Dec-85 1538 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #187
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Dec 85 15:37:57 PST
Date: Sun 15 Dec 1985 11:47-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #187
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 15 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 187
Today's Topics:
Humor - Alice's LISP Machine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 5 Dec 85 11:25:15-CST
From: AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA
Subject: Humor - Thanksgiving Story
[Forwarded from NIKHIL@MIT-XX]
[Forwarded from the UTexas bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
ALICE'S LISP MACHINE
Chris Stacy, Alan Wecsler, and Noel Chiappa
This song is called "MIT's AI Lab". It's about MIT and the
AI Lab, but "MIT's AI Lab" is not the name of the lab, that's just the
name of the song. That's why I call the song "MIT's AI Lab."
Now it all started two full dumps ago, on Thanksgiving, when
my friend and I went up to visit the hackers at AI lab on the ninth
floor. But the hackers don't always live on the ninth floor, they just
go there to use these complex order code stack machines they call Lisp
Machines.
And using a special purpose processor like that, they got a
lot of room upstairs where DDT used to be, and havin' all that ROOM
they decided that they didn't have to collect any garbage for a long
time.
We JFCLed up here and found all the garbage in there and we
decided that it'd be a friendly gesture for us to take all the garbage
down to the system dump.
So we took the half-a-meg of garbage, put it in the back of
a red ECL Multibus, took subrs and hacks and implementations of
defstruction, and headed on toward the system dump.
Well, we got there and there was a big pop up window and a
write protect across the dump sayin', "This Garbage Collecter Under
Development on Thanksgiving," and we'd never heard of a garbage
collector NOP'd out on Thanksgiving before, and with tears in our
eyes, we CDR'd off into the sunset lookin' for another place to put
the garbage.
We didn't find one 'til we came to a side area, and off the
side of the side area was three hundred megabyte disk, and in the
middle of the disk was another heap of garbage. And we decided that
one big heap was better than two little heaps, and rather than page
that one in, we decided to write ours out. That's what we did.
Branched back to the Lisp Listener, had a Chinese
Thanksgiving dinner that couldn't be beat, went to SI:PROCESS-WAIT
SLEEP, and didn't get up until the next quantum, when we got a funcall
from Mr. Greenblatt. He said, "Kid, we found your name on a cons at
the bottom of a half-a-meg of garbage and I just wanted to know if you
had any information about it".
And I said, "Yes sir, Mr. Greenblatt, I cannot tell a lie. I
put that structure under that garbage." After speakin' to Greenblatt
for about forty-five million clock ticks on the telnet stream, we
finally arrived at the truth of the matter and he said that we had to
go down and link up the garbage, and also had to go down and speak to
him at the Lisp Machine Factory. So we got in the red ECL Multibus
with the subrs and hacks and implementations of defstruction and
headed on toward the Lisp Machine Factory.
Now, friends, there was only one of two things that
Greenblatt could've done at the Lisp Machine Factory, and the first
was that he could've given us another 64K board for bein' so brave and
honest on BUG-LISPM (which wasn't very likely, and we didn't expect
it), and the other thing was that he could've flamed at us and told us
never to be seen BLTing garbage around in the vicinity again, which is
what we expected.
But when we got to the Lisp Machine Factory, there was a
third COND-clause that we hadn't even counted upon, and we was both
immediately Process-Arrested, Deexposed, and I said, "Greenblatt, I
can't GC up the garbage with these here ARREST-REASONS on". He said:
"Output-Hold, kid, and get in the back of the Control CAR." ...And
that's what we did...sat in the back of the Control CAR, and drove to
the sharpsign quote open scene-of-the-crime close.
I wanna tell you 'bout the town of Cambridge, Massachusetts,
where this is happenin'. They got seven hunnert stop signs, no turn on
red, and two campus police CARs, but when we got to the
sharpsign-quote-open scene-of-the-crime close, there was five Lisp
Machine hackers and three scope carts, bein' the biggest hack of the
last ten years and everybody wanted to get in the HUMAN-NETS story
about it.
And they was usin' up all kinds of digital equipment that
they had hangin' around the Lisp Machine Factory. They was takin'
backtraces, stack traces, plastic wire wraps, blueprints, and
microcode loads...And they made seventeen 1K-by-32 pixel
multi-flavored windows with turds and arrows and a scroll bar on the
side of each one with documentation panes explainin' what each one
was, to be used as evidence against us.
...Took pictures of the labels, blinkers, the cursors, the pop
up notification windows, the upper right corner, the lower left corner
...and that's not to mention the XGP'd screen images!
After the ordeal, we went back to the Factory. Greenblatt
said he was gonna locate us in a cell. He said: "Kid, I'm gonna INTERN
you in a cell. I want your manual and your mouse."
I said, "Greenblatt, I can understand your wantin' my
manual, so I don't have any documentation about the cell, but what do
you want my mouse for?" and he said, "Kid, we don't want any window
system problems". I said, "Greenblatt, did you think I was gonna
deexpose myself for litterin'?"
Greenblatt said he was makin' sure, and, friends, Greenblatt
was, 'cause he took out the left Meta-key so I couldn't double bucky
the rubout and cold-boot, and he took out the Inspector so I couldn't
click-left on Modify, set the PROCESS-WARM-BOOT-ACTION on the window,
*THROW around the UNWIND-PROTECT and have an escape. Greenblatt was
makin' sure.
It was about four or five hours later that Moon--(remember
Moon? This here's not a song about Moon)-- Moon came by and, with a
few nasty sends to Greenblatt on the side, bailed us out of core, and
we went up to the Loft, had another Chinese dinner that couldn't be
beat, and didn't get up until the next evening, when we all had to
go to court.
We walked in, sat down, Greenblatt came in with the
seventeen 1K-by-32 pixel multi-flavored windows with turds and arrows
and documentation panes, sat down.
McMahon came in, said, "All rise!" We all stood up, and
Greenblatt stood up with the seventeen 1K-by-32 pixel multi-flavored
windows with turds and arrows and documentation panes, and the judge
walked in, with an LA36, and he sat down. We sat down.
Greenblatt looked at the LA36... then at the seventeen multi
flavored windows with the turds and arrows and documentation panes...
and looked at the LA36... and then at the seventeen 1K-by-32 pixel
multi-flavored windows with turds and arrows and documentation panes,
and began to cry.
Because Greenblatt came to the realization that it was a
typical case of LCS state-of-the-art technology, and there wasn't
nothin' he could do about it, and the judge wasn't gonna look at the
seventeen 1K-by-32 pixel multi-flavored windows with turds and arrows
and documentation panes, explainin' what each one was, to be used as
evidence against us.
And we was fined fifty zorkmids and had to rebuild the world
load...in the snow.
But that's not what I'm here to tell you about.
I'm here to talk about the Lab.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
They got a buildin' down in Cambridge called Technology
Square, where you walk in, you get your windows Inspected, detected,
neglected and Selected!
I went down and got my interview one day, and I walked in,
sat down (slept on the beanbag in 926 the night before, so I looked
and felt my best when I went in that morning, 'cause I wanted to look
like the All-American High School Tourist from Sunnyvale. I wanted to
feel like ... I wanted to be the All-American Kid from Sunnyvale), and
I walked in, sat down, I was gunned down, brung down, locked out and
all kinds of mean, nasty, ugly things.
And I walked in, I sat down, KAREN gave me a piece of paper
that said: "Kid, see the CLU hackers on XX."
I went up there, I said, "Eliot, I wanna lose. I wanna lose!
I wanna see hacks and kludges and unbound variables and cruft in my
code! Eat dead power supplies with cables between my teeth! I mean
lose! lose! lose!"
And I started jumpin' up and down, yellin' "LOSE! LOSE!
LOSE!" and Stallman walked in and started jumpin' up and down with
me, and we was both jumpin' up and down, yellin', "LOSE! LOSE! LOSE!
LOSE!!" and some professor came over, gave me a 6-3 degree, sent me
down the hall, said "You're our distinguished lecturer." Didn't feel
too good about it.
Proceeded down the infinite corridor, gettin' more
inspections, rejections (this IS MIT), detections, neglections, and
all kinds of stuff that they was doin' to me there, and I was there
for two years... three years... four years... I was there for a long
time goin' through all kinds of mean, nasty, kludgy things, and I was
havin' a tough time there, and they was inspectin', injectin', every
single part of me, and they was leavin' no part unbound!
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Proceeded through, and I finally came to see the very last
man. I walked in, sat down, after a whole big thing there. I walked
up, and he said, "Kid, we only got one question: Have you ever been
arrested"?
And I proceeded to tell him the story of the half-a-meg of
garbage with full orchestration and five-part harmony and stuff like
that, and other phenomenon.
He stopped me right there and said, "Kid, have you ever been
to court"? And I proceeded to tell him the story of the seventeen
1K-by-32 pixel multi-flavored windows with turds and arrows and
documentation panes...
He stopped me right there and said, "Kid, I want you to go
over and sit down on that bench that says 'LISP Machine Group'... NOW,
KID!"
And I walked over to the bench there, and there's... The
LISP Machine Group is where they put you if you may not be moral
enough to join Symbolics after creatin' your special form.
There was all kinds of mean, nasty, ugly-lookin' people on
the bench there ... there was Microcoders, DPL hackers, File System
hackers, and Window System Hackers!! Window System hacker sittin'
right there on the bench next to me! And the meanest, ugliest,
nastiest one... the kludgiest Window System hacker of them all... was
comin' over to me, and he was mean and ugly and nasty and horrible and
all kinds of things, and he sat down next to me. He said, "Kid, you
get a new copy of the sources?" I said, "I didn't get nothin'. I had
to rebuild the world load."
He said, "What were you arrested for, kid?" and I said,
"Littering..." And they all moved away from me on the bench there,
with the hairy eyeball and all kinds of mean, nasty things, 'til I
said, "And making gratuitous modifications to LMIO; sources..." And
they all came back, shook my hand, and we had a great time on the
bench talkin' about microcoding, DPL designing, file-system hacking,
... and all kinds of groovy things that we was talkin' about on the
bench, and everything was fine.
We was drinking Coke smoking all kinds of things, until the
RA came over, had some paper in his hand, held it up and said:
"KIDS-THIS-EXAM-S-GOT-FOURTY
SEVEN-WORDS-THIRTY-SEVEN-MULTIPLE-CHOICE-QUESTIONS
FIFTY-EIGHT-WORDS-WE-WANT-TO-KNOW-THE-DETAILS
OF-THE-HACK-THE-TIME-OF-THE-HACK-AND-ANY
OTHER-KIND-OF-THING-YOU-GOT-TO-SAY
PERTAINING-TO-AND-ABOUT-THE-HACK-ANY-OTHER
KIND-OF-THING-YOU-GOT-TO-SAY-WE-WANT-TO-KNOW
THE-ARRESTED-PROCESS'-NAME-AND-ANY
OTHER-KIND-OF-THING..."
And he talked for forty-five minutes and nobody understood a word that
he said. But we had fun rolling the mice around and clickin' on the
buttons.
I filled out the special form with the four-level macro
defining macros. Typed it in there just like it was and everything
was fine. And I put down my keyboard, and I switched buffers, and
there ... in the other buffer... centered in the other buffer...
away from everything else in the buffer... in parentheses, capital
letters, backquotated, in 43VXMS, read the following words: "Kid, have
you featurized yourself"?
I went over to the RA. Said, "Mister, you got a lot of
damned gall to ask me if I've featurized myself! I mean, I mean, I
mean that you send, I'm sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin'
here on the Lisp Machine Group bench, 'cause you want to know if I'm
losing enough to join the Lab, burn PROMs, power supplies, and
documentation, after bein' on SF-LOVERS?"
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind!
We're gonna send your user-id off to the DCA in Washington"! And,
friends, somewhere in Washington, enshrined on some little floppy
disk, is a study in ones and zeros of my brain-damaged programming
style...
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
And the only reason I'm singin' you the song now is 'cause
you may know somebody in a similar situation. Or you may be in a
similar situation, and if you're in a situation like that, there's
only one thing you can do:
[ CHORUS ]
You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may
think he's really dangerous and they won't take him.
And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're
both LISP hackers and they won't take either of them.
And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people
walkin' in, singin' a bar of "MIT's AI Lab" and walkin' out? They may
think it's an re-implementation of the window system!
And can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people
a day, walkin' in, singin' a bar of "MIT's AI Lab" and walkin' out?
Friends, they may think it's a MOVEMENT, and that's what it is: THE
MIT AI LAB ANTI-LOSSAGE MOVEMENT! And all you gotta do to join is to
sing it the next time it comes around on the circular buffer.
With feelin'.
You can hack anything you want
on MIT Lisp Machines
You can hack anything you want
on MIT Lisp Machines
Walk right in and begin to hack
Just push your stuff right onto the stack
You can hack anything you want
on MIT Lisp Machines
(but don't forget to fix the bug...on MIT Lisp Machines!)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂16-Dec-85 1132 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #188
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Dec 85 11:31:28 PST
Date: Mon 16 Dec 1985 09:11-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #188
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 16 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 188
Today's Topics:
Query - Superset of Common LISP on a Chip,
Logic Programming - LIPS,
Policy - ADS Discussion,
Literature - Correction: Law and Technology Bibliography,
Logic - Factual Counterfactuals
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 11:52:12-PST
From: Ali Ozer <ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Superset of Common LISP...
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
...on a chip? I just read in this month's Byte (Dec 1985, p10):
"Texas Instruments is developing a 32-bit CMOS LISP processor chip...
Roughly 10 times more complex than a 68000, the 40-MHz processor will
directly execute a superset of Common LISP with extensions like
object-oriented programming and message-passing..."
This sounds truly amazing to me. A superset of what is described in
Steele's Common Lisp manual? That would be a *powerful* chip. Has anyone
read more about this? (All Byte had was the above sentence...)
Ali
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 85 10:36 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: LIPS
For a good discussion of the systematic benchmarking and analysis of a
Prolog implementation, see "THE PRODUCTION AND EVALUATION OF A SET OF
PROLOG BENCHMARKS" by Paul F. Wilk, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence,
University of Edinburgh. I've cliped the following from this paper:
The program "Nrev" is seen as a standard measurement for benchmarking Pro-
log implementations. This is a simple symbol-crunching program for the
naive reversal of a list (see Appendix B). It seems fairer to use this
program as a standard measure rather than any program involving arithmetic;
which favours the DEC-10 compiler. The following table shows the estimated
Logical Inferences Per Second (LIPS) for these Prolog system configura-
tions. Nrev performs 496 logical inferences (procedure calls) each time it
is executed. Therefore, dividing the number of logical inferences for one
execution by the execution time, in seconds, gives the number of LIPS.
|===============|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|
|Implementation |PrologC|PrologI|Cprolog|Cprolog|PDP-11 |POPLOG |York |
|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|System range |DEC-10 |DEC-10 |VAX-11 |ICLPerq|PDP-11 |VAX-11 |ICLPerq|
|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|Processor |KL-10 |KL-10 |11-750 |2910 |11-60 |11-780 |2910 |
|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|Translator |Compil.|Interp.|Interp.|Interp.|Interp.|Compil.|Interp.|
|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|LIPS (Nrev) | 45592| 2385| 800| 484| 888| 1858| 56|
|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|Cputime ratio | 1 | 19.12| 56.99| 94.20| 51.34| 24.54| 814.14|
|===============|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|=======|
Table 3. Nrev: LIPS comparison.
The paper discusses measuring other attributes (e.g. memory utilization) and
provides a variety of benchmarks to measure particular language features
(e.g. time to assert a unit clause).
I've checked several implementations/machines here. For CProlog, I
recall measures like 2400 LIPS for a 785, 400 LIPS for a HP9836, and
140 LIPS for a MacIntosh. Our Symbolics-prolog (compiled) tested out
at about 40K LIPS.Here is the program I've used to do the benchmarking.
I think it comes from Paul Wilk.
% lips runs the nrev benchmark 10 times and writes the estimated lips.
lips :- lips(10,L), nl,write(L),write(' lips').
% Lips(N,L) runs the nrev benchmark N times and binds L to
% an estimate of the LIPS.
lips(N,L) :-
init(X),
T1 is cputime,
tests(N,X),
T2 is cputime,
control(N,X),
T3 is cputime,
Testtime is T2-T1,
Overhead is T3-T2,
Nettime is Testtime-Overhead,
write(' '),
write(Testtime-Overhead=Nettime),
nl,
L is (496*N)/Nettime.
tests(N,X) :- from(1,N,I), test(X), fail.
tests(N,X).
control(N,X) :- from(1,N,I), dummy(X), fail.
control(N,X).
from(I,I,I) :- !.
from(L,N,I) :- N1 is (L+N)//2, from(L,N1,I).
from(L,N,I) :- L1 is (L+N)//2+1, from(L1,N,I).
%NREV: Naive Reverse of 30 element list
init([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,
21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]).
dummy(L).
test(L0) :- nreverse(L0,L1).
nreverse([X|L0],L) :- nreverse(L0,L1), concatenate(L1,[X],L).
nreverse([],[]).
concatenate([X|L1],L2,[X|L3]) :- concatenate(L1,L2,L3).
concatenate([],L,L).
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 17:29:27-PST
From: LOUROBINSON@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: For AIList
Ken:
(For AIList:)
In response to AI.Duffy at UTexas and his message regarding the
AI&DS name change:
Why the cheap shot? It's obvious why the name change was necessary.
Why exploit them for the sake of Duffy's unsigned, heavy-handed
cleverness?
Lou Robinson
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1985 13:23 PLT
From: George Cross <FACCROSS%WSUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Correction: Law and Technology Bibliography
In my posting of the table of contents of the Proceedings of the First
Annual Law and Technology Conference (Ailist V3 #117, 12/13/85), I left
out Anne Gardner's paper and mispaged Zarri's:
%T Overview of an Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning
%A Anne v.d.L. Gardner
%B Computing Power and Legal Reasoning
%E Charles Walter
%I West Publishing Company
%P 247-274
%D 1985
%C St. Paul
%X ISBN 0-314-95570-4
%T Inference Techniques for Intelligent Information Retrieval
%A Gian Piero Zarri
%B Computing Power and Legal Reasoning
%E Charles Walter
%I West Publishing Company
%P 215-246
%D 1985
%C St. Paul
%X ISBN 0-314-95570-4
---- George
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
George R. Cross cross@wsu.CSNET
Computer Science Department cross%wsu@csnet-relay.ARPA
Washington State University faccross@wsuvm1.BITNET
Pullman, WA 99164-1210 (509)-335-6319/6636
Acknowledge-To: George Cross <FACCROSS@WSUVM1>
------------------------------
Date: 13 Dec 85 1143 PST
From: Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: interesting counterfactual
> From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
> . . .
> (0) Suppose a class consists of three people, a 6 ft boy (Tom), a 5 ft girl
> (Jane), and a 4 ft boy (John). Do you believe the following statements?
>
> (1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then if the tallest
> is not Tom, then the tallest will be John.
> (2) A boy is the tallest person in the class.
> (3) If the tallest person in the class is not Tom then the tallest
> person in the class will be John.
>
> How many readers believe (1) and (2) imply the truth of (3)?
It seems to me that this example gives insight as to what the status
is of a counterfactual whose premise is true. The general view among
philosophers on this is that the truth or falsity of a counterfactual
with a true premise depends simply on the truth or falsity of its conclusion,
but this example seems to run against this view.
The reason seems to me to be that the conclusion should be investigated
as if the premise had read, "If the tallest person in the class is
*necessarily* a boy." In other words, in constructing possible worlds
in which "the tallest is not Tom" (i.e., in investigating the truth of the
conclusion of (1)), possible worlds in which the tallest is not a boy are
disallowed. Thus (1) and (2) can be true while (3) is false.
I don't know what to make of this generally. It appears that the problem
can only arise with enbedded counterfactuals; perhaps it is reasonable
to treat them specially, rewriting (1) as:
If the tallest person in the class is a boy and the tallest is not Tom,
then the tallest will be John.
The two approaches are equivalent, but I fear there may be substantial
ramifications to messing around with the semantics in this fashion.
Matt Ginsberg
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Dec-85 1216 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #189
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Dec 85 12:16:17 PST
Date: Wed 18 Dec 1985 09:17-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #189
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 18 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 189
Today's Topics:
Query - Finding Loops in Prolog & CAI,
AI Tools - Object oriented programming in Common Lisp,
Policy - ADS Message & Advertisements,
Logic - Counterfactuals
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 85 15:34:54 est
From: Catherine A. Meadows <meadows@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: loops
Does anyone out there know of any work that has been done on
checking for loops in Prolog (other than the papers recently published
in ACM Sigplan)?
Cathy Meadows
meadows@nrl-css
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 85 23:38 EST
From: Gunther @ DCA-EMS
Subject: REQUEST FOR INFO ON CAI ORIENTED SHELLS
IF ANYONE IS WORKING IN THE AREA OF EXPERT CAI DEVELOPMENT
SYSTEMS, I'D LIKE SOME INFORMATION ON APPROACHES, OTHER WORK,
PACKAGES, ETC ...
THANKS,
J.L. FEINSTEIN
[Contact AI-Ed-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA to get in touch with
a like-minded group. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 17 DEC 85 13:32-N
From: DESMEDT%HNYKUN52.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: Object oriented programming in Common Lisp
In reply to the following request:
From: Nick Davies (at GEC Research) <YE85%mrca.co.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Object oriented programming in Common Lisp
> Does anyone have or know of an implementation of Flavors or any other
> object-oriented programming system in Common Lisp ?
I would like to mention CORBIT, which is ORBIT rewritten in NIL Common
Lisp at the University of Nijmegen (the Netherlands).
CORBIT is an object oriented extension of Common Lisp which is NOT based
on message-passing but on the idea of generic functions. An ultra-short
example illustrating the difference:
Flavors: (send window-1 :expose)
CORBIT: (expose window-1)
What is seen as a message in Flavors is a function in CORBIT. So it is
not the object, but the message which is functional. This has a number of
advantages. One advantage is that it is straightforward to use ordinary
lambda-binding to localize inherited definitions. Another one is that the
generic functions can be traced like any other Lisp function. The overall
consequence is that CORBIT fits more neatly in the Lisp way of thinking
than message-passing systems, is simpler to understand and implement, and
yet offers the same possibilities.
Koenraad De Smedt, DESMEDT@HNYKUN52 (bitnet)
Psychological Laboratory
University of Nijmegen
The Netherlands
[The recent Xerox PARC work on CommonLoops has a similar functional
flavor -- as does ADA, of course. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Mon 16 Dec 85 14:00:25-PST
From: Wilkins <WILKINS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: AIDS
Despite Duffy's bafflement, it seems obvious why they changed
their name and it is important to the community to learn of
such name changes. But, isn't there already someone named
Advanced Decision Systems? Sounds familiar, but I cannot recall . . .
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 85 17:40:04 EST
From: David←West%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Policy
You said in AIList v3 #185:
"I [...] do screen out job ads [...]"
For those of us out here in the boonies, the nets are the only available
*current* source of information on what's really happening: the print media
are agonizingly slow, particularly if one must rely on a university library.
From time to time, we boonie-dwellers even need to find jobs, and most AI
jobs are outside the boonies.
You didn't say whether you screen out job ads because of ARPAnet policy,
or because they have a better home elsewhere. If it's the former, I think
the policy is misguided, at least for academic/research jobs. If it's the
latter, and there is in fact a network source for this kind of information,
I don't know of it, and would like to.
(I have seen *very* occasional academic fellowship announcements here:
perhaps as many as two in the last year. Presumably there were more that
went unreported.)
[There are many reasons for the policy. (1) There are the Arpanet
restrictions on commercial use: academic ads are generally considered
acceptable but industrial ads are not. (I don't understand the
distinction -- placement of personnel in the defense industry is in
the interest of the net's military sponsors -- but rules are rules.)
Even if Arpanet sponsors and host administrators did not object,
a fair proportion of any such messages draw flak from other readers;
I don't need the hassle of defending my editorial policies that often.
(2) There is already a channel, Arpanet-BBoards@MIT-MC, for academic
announcements and certain commercial announcements; I prefer to
avoid duplicate traffic. (3) AIList carries enough traffic without
adding another class of messages, particularly one that is of little
interest to most readers and of no value in the historical archive.
One difficulty in pruning the list is in screening out duplicates
of messages submitted in previous months or years -- I have to pull
the archives and scan for half-remembered occurrences. (4) I am
unable to draw a clean distinction between messages of AI interest
and those that are not. A search for a lab director or lecturer
is of interest, but how about an ad for students to run an AI lab's
computers? (4) A few of the people submitting ads lack perspective
and are difficult to deal with -- any attempt to reject just some
of the messages or to modify them to make them less commercial
may lead to multiple interchanges with the authors. It is easier
to reject such messages entirely.
If someone else wants to moderate a list of placement ads or of
resumes, he (or she) will probably find it acceptable to the net
community. The volume of such solicitations put out by certain
AI departments indicates a desire for such a service. (IEEE tried to
serve this need among electrical engineers and computer scientists
with their Professional Abstracts Registry; it couldn't be sustained,
but the task has been passed on to a commercial information server.)
I just find it better not to mix this traffic with AIList. I suggest
that you check CACM and IEEE Computer for recent classified ads, or
just contact companies listed in any recent AI magazine or conference
proceedings. There are also some recruiters specializing in AI
(Halbrect Associates, Inc.; JDG Associates, Ltd; Klein/Thaler Executive
Search; Artificial Intelligence Referral Service; S.J. Parker and
Associates); look for their ads in IEEE Spectrum and the AI magazines.
-- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 85 08:48:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: counterfactuals
>> From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
>>
>> (0) Suppose a class consists of three people, a 6 ft boy (Tom),
>> a 5 ft girl (Jane), and a 4 ft boy (John). Do you believe the
>> following statements?
>>
>> (1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then if the tallest
>> is not Tom, then the tallest will be John.
>> (2) A boy is the tallest person in the class.
>> (3) If the tallest person in the class is not Tom then the tallest
>> person in the class will be John.
>>
>> How many readers believe (1) and (2) imply the truth of (3)?
> It seems to me that this example gives insight as to what the status
> is of a counterfactual whose premise is true. The general view among
> philosophers on this is that the truth or falsity of a counterfactual
> with a true premise depends simply on the truth or falsity of its
> conclusion, but this example seems to run against this view.
> The reason seems to me to be that the conclusion should be investigated
> as if the premise had read, "If the tallest person in the class is
> *necessarily* a boy." In other words, in constructing possible worlds
> in which "the tallest is not Tom" (i.e., in investigating the truth of the
> conclusion of (1)), possible worlds in which the tallest is not a boy are
> disallowed. Thus (1) and (2) can be true while (3) is false.
I don't think there's a problem here. If we read the phrase "if
the tallest is not Tom, then the tallest will be John"
truth-functionally, in BOTH (1) and (3) then it's clearly true,
since the antecedent is false - Tom is the tallest - and hence
(1) and (3) are both true. If we read it counterfactually, eg:
"what would happen if Tom shrank to a height of 3 angstroms,
leaving only John and Jane? Would John be the tallest, true or
false?" then it's clearly false in both cases, and so (1) and
(3) are BOTH false. If we read (1) as:
(1) If the tallest person in the class is a boy, then what would
happen if Tom shrank to a height of 3 angstroms, leaving only
John and Jane? Would John be the tallest, true or false?
Modus ponens remains with its virtue intact, in either case.
It's only when we read the phrase truth-functionally in (1),
and counterfactually in (3) that an apparent conflict arises.
Further confusing the issue is that (1) contains two implications,
and the first sounds very truth-functional, leading you to read
the second implication in the same way; but in isolation, in (3),
it sounds counterfactual. If someone regards this as a real
problem let him/her express it formally, and use different
signs for different implication, eg "=>" for truth-functional,
"->" for counterfactual.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 85 16:51:21 EST (Tue)
From: Dana S. Nau <dsn@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Re: interesting counterfactual
From: Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
> From: Mike Dante <DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA>
> (0) Suppose a class consists of three people ...
... the conclusion should be investigated as if the premise had read,
"If the tallest person in the class is *necessarily* a boy." In other
words, in constructing possible worlds in which "the tallest is not
Tom" (i.e., in investigating the truth of the conclusion of (1)),
possible worlds in which the tallest is not a boy are disallowed. ...
I don't think this solves the problem. Regardless of whether you allow such
worlds or disallow them, you will still be allowing some worlds in which
John is the tallest, and allowing others in which he is not.
I don't know what to make of this generally. It appears that the problem
can only arise with enbedded counterfactuals ...
I disagree. In Dante's example, the APPARENT problem was that the strict
logical interpretation of the statements didn't pin us down to the particular
counterfactual world that we "obviously" wanted. But I think the real
problem is more general. It's analogous to the frame problem: if we're
going to deny some fact in order to create a counterfactual world, then what
OTHER things are to be changed and what things are to remain the same? In
general, it may not be clear which counterfactual world we want.
In Dante's example above, the "obvious" counterfactual world was one in
which Tom did not exist and all the other axioms were unchanged. But one
could easily specify examples in which the removal of Tom would cause
inconsistency unless some of the other axioms were changed too. In cases
such as this, there may be many possible ways to change the axioms. It
shouldn't be too difficult to construct an example in which different kinds
of changes would seem best to different people--and thus different people
would reach conflicting conclusions about what the changed world would be
like.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Dec-85 1248 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #190
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Dec 85 12:48:23 PST
Date: Fri 20 Dec 1985 09:25-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #190
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 20 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 190
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Example-Based Reasoning (UPenn) &
Clausal Intuitionistic Logic (UPenn) &
Robot Control with Kinesthetics (UPenn) &
HORNLOG: Horn Clause Logic with Graph Rewriting (UPenn),
Course - Deduction and Computation (CMU) &
Symbolic Computation (UTexas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 85 09:50 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Example-Based Reasoning (UPenn)
3pm Tuesday, December 17, 1985
Room 216 Moore School
University Of Pennsylvania
EXAMPLE-BASED REASONING
EDWINA L. RISSLAND, HARVARD
In this talk, I shall discuss example-based reasoning, particularly in the
contexts of assisting in the preparation of legal arguments and offering
on-line explanations. In the case of legal argumentation, I discuss how
hypotheticals serve a central role in analyzing the issues in a case and
describe a program, called HYPO, which generates legal hypotheticals, and an
environment, called COUNSELOR, which provides support for legal reasoning and
other strategic tasks, like resource management. I'll briefly describe our
current work on on-line assistance and how we are trying to make it more
intelligent by embedding custom-tailored examples in the explanations. I'll
also discuss some general issues about examples such as their generation,
structure and importance in reasoning, especially in the domains of mathematics
and the law.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 85 09:50 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Clausal Intuitionistic Logic (UPenn)
3pm Thursday, December 19, 1985
Room 216 Moore School
University of Pennsylvania
FIXED POINT SEMANTICS AND TABLEAU PROOF PROCEDURES
FOR A CLAUSAL INTUITIONISTIC LOGIC
L. THORNE MCCARTY
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY
Since the advent of Horn clause logic programming in the mid-1970's, there have
been numerous attempts to extend the expressive power of Horn clause logic
while preserving some of its attractive computational properties. This talk
will present a clausal language which extends Horn clause logic by adding
negations and embedded implications to the right hand side of a rule, and which
interprets these new rules intuitionistically, in a set of partial models. The
resulting system will be shown to have a fixed point semantics which resembles
the fixed point semantics of Horn clauses, and a tableau proof procedure which
generalizes Horn clause refutation proofs. Soundness and Completeness results
will also be presented. Finally, the talk will outline some connections
between this clausal intuitionistic logic and several familiar forms of
non-monotonic reasoning.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 14:10 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Robot Control with Kinesthetics (UPenn)
Ph.D. Dissertation Proposal Presentation
3:00pm Friday, Dec. 20, 1985
554 Moore School
University of Pennsylvania
ROBOT CONTROL WITH KINESTHETICS: A REAL TIME EXPERT SYSTEM
Russell L. Andersson
The utility of robots is directly determined by the activities they can
perform and the speed with which they can perform them. The purpose of
this research is to develop means to improve the performance of robots,
both in speed and especially in functionality. We maintain that the
robots are already being limited by their controllers; rather than
redesign the robot itself, we address the problem of how to improve the
controller. Our approach is to create a sense of kinesthetics: to make
more information about the robot available to the controller, and to
find ways to use it. Kinesthetics requires operation in both the
numeric and symbolic domains, so the system must be capable of using
and interconverting both domains. We propose an expert system and a
means to compile it to a form executable in real time.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 14:10 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - HORNLOG: Horn Clause Logic with Graph Rewriting (UPenn)
Ph.D. Dissertation Proposal Presentation
3:00pm Friday, Dec. 20, 1985
554 Moore School
University of Pennsylvania
INVESTIGATIONS INTO HORNLOG:
A HORN CLAUSE INTERPRETER BASED ON GRAPH REWRITING
Stan Raatz
HORNLOG, due to Jean Gallier, is a Horn clause proof procedure that can
be used to interpret logic programs. The system is not resolution-based,
but rather is based on a form of graph-rewriting and a linear-time
algorithm for testing the unsatisfiability of propositional Horn
formulae. HORNLOG applies to a class of logic programs which is a
proper superset of the class of logic programs handled by PROLOG
systems. In particular, negative Horn clauses used as assertions and
queries consisting of disjunctions of negations of Horn clauses are
allowed. This class of logic programs admits answers which are
indefinite, in the sense that an answer can consist of a disjunction of
substitutions. The method does not use negation by failure semantics in
handling these extensions.
In this proposal, using the HORNLOG procedure, we develop a theory and
give examples of a type of logic programming called "general Horn clause
programming. We give soundness and completeness results,
show that the procedure has an immediate parallel interpretation, and argue
that the method compares favorably with SLD-resolution in a parallel
environment. In addition, two extensions are outlined: (1) the inclusion of
term-rewriting to handle certain instances of equational programming,
and (2) an uncertainty calculus for expert system applications.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Dec 1985 1005-EST
From: Lydia Defilippo <DEFILIPPO@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Course - Deduction and Computation (CMU)
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DEDUCTION AND COMPUTATION
A Spring Seminar Proposal
Gerard huet
Course No.: 15-850B
Starting Date: 9 January 1986
Tuesdays and Thursdays from 10:00 - 11:30 am
Place: 5409 Wean Hall
The seminar will consist in two distinct phases. The first phase will be
a standard course, and will last 8 weeks. The topics covered include basics of
proof theory, such as sequent calculus, equational logic, canonical rewriting
and natural deduction, and foundations of applicative programming languages,
such as lambda calculus, combinators, sequential computations, types and
polymorphism. The course ends with a more advanced section on the
Constructions Calculus. The course is completely self-contained, there is no
pre-requisite. Course notes will be available.
The second phase, for the remaining 6 weeks, will be an advanced seminar
on the computer automation of constructive mathematics. The participants will
group themselves in teams, and attempt to develop mechanical proofs of selected
theorems on the implementation of the Constructions Calculus. A team may
consist in 1 to 3 participants. It is expected that terms will balance
mathematical and programming talents for maximum efficiency. Each team will
have access to a computer running an implementation of the Constructions
Calculus. The goal of the seminar is to produce a uniform document describing
the results of the experiments.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 17 Dec 85 18:48:00-CST
From: AI.HASSAN@MCC.ARPA
Subject: Course - Symbolic Computation (UTexas)
[Forwarded from the UTexas bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SYMBOLIC COMPUTATION
Graduate Seminar Proposal
CS395-T
Spring 1986
Dr. Hassan Ait-Kaci
This course is intended as a bridge between Theory and Practice. It
will consist of a tutorial on symbolic computation models based on
functional, algebraic, and logical calculi, as well as advanced
state-of-the-art in next-generation programming language research. The
main focus will be on explaining how some abstract concepts derived
from Logic and Universal Algebra can be used to describe symbolic
computation and data structures, and how these concepts may be
implemented efficiently. During the course, many existing as well as
original experimental examples will be scrutinized in detail.
TENTATIVE OUTLINE
1. Mathematics for Symbolic Computation
a. Lambda-Calculus
b. Universal Algebra
c. Predicate Logic
2. Functional Computation
a. Applicative Programming
b. Interpreting the Lambda-Calculus
c. Compiling the Lambda-Calculus (SECD Machine)
d. Extensions
i. Delayed-Evaluation and Streams
ii. Non-Deterministic Computations
iii. Binding by Unification
3. Algebraic Computation
a. Term Rewriting
b. Knuth-Bendix Completion Method
c. Rewriting Termination
d. Resolution of Equations (Narrowing, Congruence Closure)
e. Equational Logic Programming
4. Logic Computation
a. Horn Clause Resolution
b. Compiling Horn Clause Resolution
c. Extensions
i. Building-In Equations
ii. Building-In Inheritance
iii. Non-Horn Logic Programming
iv. Higher-Order Logic Programming
5. Unifying Principle: The Categorical Abstract Machine
6. Data Types
a. Algebraic Abstract Data Types
b. Polymorphic Types (Universal and Existential)
c. Constructive Type Theory
PREREQUISITE: Although meant to be self-contained, this course will
offer optimal benefit to anyone acquainted with senior-level discrete
mathematics and computer programming. The only *real* prerequisite is
an open mind.
PARTICIPATION: Students will be expected to participate actively in
presentations of assigned readings, implementation of experimental
programs, and in completing either a term paper or a programming
project.
TEXT: Most of the material covered will be taken from articles, and
extensive notes written by the instructor. A (far from exhaustive)
list of recommended books would be (1) Burge's "Recursive Programming
Technique", (2) Henderson's "Functional Programming" (3) Campbell's
(Ed.) "Implementations of Prolog", as well as anything else related to
the outlined topics.
ENROLLMENT: This course will be given only if at least 5 students
register. Anybody interested in *registering* is encouraged to contact
Hassan Ait-Kaci at 834-3354, ARPA address "Hassan@mcc", AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE!
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Dec-85 1542 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #191
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Dec 85 15:41:13 PST
Date: Fri 20 Dec 1985 09:34-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #191
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 20 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 191
Today's Topics:
Queries - LISP Tools for the MicroVax II & Security Applications &
Intensional and Higher-Order Logic & Experience with the TI Explorer,
AI Tools - TI Superset of Common LISP & Object-Oriented Programming,
Psychology - Dreams & Lateral Thinking,
AI Tools - Equational Logic Programming Language
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 11:41:14 GMT
From: Topexprs%cs.ucl.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: LISP Tools and Environments for the MicroVax II
I'd like to know about any LISP based, KBS development environments for the
Microvax II. I'm looking for something that runs under microVMS, is up and
running OK, more or less debugged, reasonably documented, and available now;
is this too unrealistic? All useful pointers would be appreciated, also
approx. prices etc.
I'm used to LOOPS etc., so I'm not too keen on going to far down market.
Please reply to
HWB1.ARE @ CAM.PHX @ UCL-CS.ARPA
Thanks, Hal Blackburn.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 07:43 CST
From: Sankar Virdhagriswaran <Araman@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Reply-to: Sankar Virdhagriswaran <Araman@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Subject: AI technology application to computer security
Is anyone out there aware of applications of AI technology for computer
security issues. I am aware of the pseudo object oriented models being
used in developing completely secure systems. Is there more of this
kind of research.
I will collect the responses and post it in the net
thanks in advance
send replies to Araman -at hi-multics
------------------------------
Date: 19 Dec 85 10:25:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Reply-to: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: intensional and higher-order logic
Anyone doing any work on using intensional or higher-order logic
in knowledge representation? Any references (books, articles)
would be appreciated - thanks.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 08:50:48 pst
From: Rolf Pfeifer
<pfeifer%ifi.unizh.chunet%ubc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Experience with the TI Explorer
How does the TI Explorer compare with other LISP Machines (e.g. Symbolics,
LMI, or XEROX)? In particular:
- availability of software
- compatibility with Symbolics (effort to transport programs developed on
Symbolics (or LMI) to the Explorer)
- subjective experiences after having used it (heavily) for some time
- support environment for AI applications development
- getting to know the Explorer (e.g. how useful are their utilities
they have apparently designed to support a new user?)
- performance
- other
Comments of any sort welcome.
Thanks.
--Rolf Pfeifer, University of Zurich, Switzerland
cernvax!unizh!pfeifer
------------------------------
Date: Tue 17 Dec 85 16:14:14-PST
From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Superset of Common LISP...
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
What TI's developing is a set of 4 4"*4" boards that implement
an MIT CADR including a number of chips almost at wafer scale. The
design differs from general purpose hardware only in the same way that
a CADR does and doesn't really implement "Common Lisp" per se.
When they say a "superset of Common Lisp" they mean MIT Lisp
Machine Lisp plus an additional package that implements Common Lisp.
This is rather like saying that a Shopsmith with the belt-sander
attachment is a $1500 belt-sander that happens to come with a free
Shopsmith. Whatever.
The processor is called a "Hummingbird" and TI gives a talk on
it locally every six months or so though they seem to have been by invitation.
--Christopher
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Dec 85 20:51:44-EST
From: Randy Haskins <rh%MIT-EECS@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Object-Oriented Programming
Re: AIList Digest V3 #189
> Flavors: (send window-1 :expose)
> CORBIT: (expose window-1)
>
> What is seen as a message in Flavors is a function in CORBIT. So it is
> not the object, but the message which is functional. [...]
>
> Koenraad De Smedt, DESMEDT@HNYKUN52 (bitnet)
I have a hard time seeing the advantage to such a system, but then, I
was brought up on object-oriented programming. The advantages of
smart-objects/ dumb-messages is that functions that you write can be
more generic. I have written a fair number of utilities in ZetaLisp
for both ZL machines, and it's unbelievably quick and easy. One of the
functions I use a lot is called GET-OBJECTS-NAMED which follows.
(DEFUN GET-OBJECTS-NAMED (LST STRING &OPTIONAL (MSG :NAME))
(DELETE NIL
(MAPCAR
#'(LAMBDA (OBJ)(IF (STRING-SEARCH STRING (SEND OBJ MSG)) OBJ))
LST)))
(The actual function I wrote is much more general, but this is the part
that deals with Flavor instances pretty well.)
Since :NAME is a fairly common operation for most objects to support
(processes, most streams, zmacs-buffers), this function writes itself.
Another example is the fact that the PRINT function will see if its
argument is willing to handle a :PRINT-SELF method and will do that
instead of trying to deal with the object. The same is true for DESCRIBE;
I could go on for hours, but this article's already long enough.
Besides, I have to get back to my ZL-style Flavors I'm implementing in
MacLisp.
Random
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 85 15:55 CDT
From: Randy←Boys <boys%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Response to query regarding dreams, the unconscious, and revelations
In response to a posting of 29-Nov-85 (G. Joly - Subconscious Reasoning:
Discovery and Invention)
My background is in physiological psychology and I was a staff member
at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Dallas' Cognitive
Psychophysiology Laboratory for five years, doing sleep research most of the
time. I have been working in the field of AI for three years now, always
trying to find avenues to blend my knowledge of cognitive and computer
science. I'm not sure that the following is very helpful to the progress of
either field, but I was compelled to respond to Gordon and Ken's comments
regarding "exceptional" insights that seemed to be associated with dream
state cognition.
Subconscious reasoning (if there is such a thing) is NOT the same as dream
state cognition. The cortex is active during REM sleep (I'm not going to go
into the REM = dream state issue) but may not be "processing" anything more
than random phasic events (similarly, I'm not going into the nature or
genesis of the dream state). Dreams do, however, exist and often reflect
"subconscious" elements. To assume that there is some particular significance
to this "window on the subconscious," as opposed to anything that may exist
for "conscious" cognition, would be stretching the state of our knowledge
(not that this should slow down the theorists!). In light of the fact that 2
billion people dream 4-5 times every night of their life and that only a few
(and usually highly personal) dream "revelations" are cited, my response to
postulations about dreams and discovery is "so what?" I do not believe that
this is an area of cognition that is well enough understood to direct our
inquiries into AI.
Randy Boys
boys@ti-eg
p.s. - after 30 years of heavily funded research, science can tell us what
sleep is not, but not what it is. Yes, you guessed it...the same is true of
dreaming.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 12:12:43 GMT
From: gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: 42
The term ``lateral thinking'' has been in the English language for
a some time. de Bono opposes lateral thinking to vertical thinking
in the following sense. Vertical thinking is the logical straight-
forward part of the mind, which is responsible for pattern
recognition, concerned with addition and gradual modification.
Lateral thinking is more concerned with making the best possible
use of the information that is already available, rearranging it
so that it is snapped out of the established pattern.
This is a paraphrase of de Bono's words, and it would take much
more space to give a really good account. The proposal that I want
to suggest is that de Bono's model fits into a plan for the hopes
of AI research. The vertical part of thought processes could be
carried out by a machine but the lateral (creative, humorous) part
could not.
In mathematics, the notion exists of ``factoring out'' onto a sub-
space, ie projecting down into a lower dimensional region. Perhaps
a defintion of machine intelligence could be that part of the mind
this left after the process of factoring out lateral subspace.
Gordon Joly,
gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 85 9:14:41 EST
From: Robert Strandh <strandh@hopkins-eecs-bravo.ARPA>
Subject: Equational Logic Programming Language
EQUATIONAL LOGIC AS A PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE
Michael J. O'Donnell Robert I. Strandh
The University of Chicago The Johns Hopkins University
Department of Computer Science Department of Electrical Engineering
Ryerson Hall and Computer Science
1100 East 58th Street Barton Hall
Chicago, Illinois 60637 Baltimore, Maryland 21218
odonnell@uchicago.csnet strandh@hopkins.arpa
A processor for an Equational Logic Programming Language is available
for distribution to Berkeley UNIX 4.2BSD VAX installations. To get a
general idea of the capabilities of the interpreter, see "Programming
With Equations", by Christoph M. Hoffmann and Michael J. O'Donnell,
ACM ToPLAS, v. 4, no. 1 (January 1982) pp. 83-112. A user's manual is
included in "Equational Logic as a Programming Language", by Michael
J. O'Donnell, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1985).
The main novelties of the interpreter are 1) strict adherence to
simple semantics based on logical consequences of the given equations;
2) "lazy evaluation" (outermost evaluation) applied to all operators;
3) an implementation based on table-driven pattern matching, so that
there is no run-time penalty for large sets of equations.
A first experimental version was distributed in 1983. Recently,
Robert Strandh has replaced the table-driven interpreter written in
Pascal by compiled VAX machine code, producing an order-of-magnitude
improvement in performance. Preliminary timings indicate a
performance between interpreted and compiled Franz LISP.
The entire interpreter system, including source files, occupies about
3.5 megabytes. ARPANET users may acquire a copy on line by executing
ftp hopkins
then logging on as "anonymous'' with password "anonymous",
and executing the ftp commands:
cd pub
get equations.tar
The copying process will take an hour or more. After copying the
interpreter, please send a message indicating where you have installed
it. Others may acquire a 1600 BPI tape copy, in "tar" format, by
writing to Michael J. O'Donnell. Once the distribution file has been
acquired, it should be processed by the command
tar x (for the tape)
tar xf equations.tar (for the tar file)
Then, the instructions 2-4 in the file README should be followed. The
system is in the public domain, and may be copied freely. We request
notification from each site installing a copy. To defray the costs of
distribution, we also request a donation of $50 to The University of
Chicago for each tape, and of $5 to The Johns Hopkins University for
copies taken on the ARPANet.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂27-Dec-85 1725 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #192
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Dec 85 17:25:32 PST
Date: Fri 27 Dec 1985 15:25-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #192
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 28 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 192
Today's Topics:
Archives - The Lisp Museum & Oxford Text Archive,
Expert Systems - 3rd Jnt. BCS and ACM Symposium,
Literature - Recent Articles on AI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Monday, 23 December 1985, 14:12-CST
From: Oliver Gajek <Gajek at UTEXAS-20>
Subject: News Item - The Lisp Museum
The LISP Museum was founded by Herbert Stoyan. It's aim is to gather each
paper on LISP which was ever printed (at least all important ones): Books
papers in periodicals and conference proceedings, memos manuals and adver-
tisements. There's a complete list of all objects which contains over 900
entries. Everybody is invited to ask for a copy of this list. It's netto
price is $5. (We hope to have the list available on a computer in the US
soon.) For the appropriate amount we copy (if the copyright is open) every
object in the museum. Paying in advance is a necessary condition! In addi-
tion, everybody who owns some material which the museum has not available
is kindly asked to send us a copy. (We appreciate original listings of old
and famous LISP-programs like SIR, MLISP, MLISP2 etc. etc.)
The address is: The LISP-Museum, c/o Herbert Stoyan, IMMD6, University of
Erlangen, Martensstr.3, D-8520 Erlangen, Germany
Oliver Gajek
Linguistics Research Center
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78713-7247
(512)471-4166
Internet: Gajek@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
uucp: ...allegra!ut-ngp!gajek
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Dec 85 17:38:07-CST
From: Martha Morgan <AI.MORGAN%mcc.arpa@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: Pointer to Oxford Text Archive
[Forwarded from the IRList Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Recently John Roach enquired of IRLIST,
"Is there an index available of machine readable texts?"
You replied, "The Oxford Text Archive has an index of its holdings..."
I would like to get in touch with the Oxford Text Archive and become
aware of what is contained in the index of their holdings. Can you
give me an address, name, whatever?
[Note: The Oxford University Computing Service Text Archive was
established in 1976 as a repository of machine-readable texts to serve
the research needs of scholars working with one of many different
languages. It is one of the largest such collections. Texts are in
many different formats and some are cleaner than others. Enquiries
about texts held at Oxford or about the Archive can be sent to
ARCHIVE at UK.AC.OX.VAX3, via the British Joint Academic Network.
Address is Oxford Text Archive, Oxford Univ. Computing Service,
13 Banbury Rd, Oxford OX2 6NN. A modest payment and signed declara-
tion form indicating that tapes will only be used for research is
required. The Archive will send you forms and a list of holdings,
indicating size of each item (which suggests how much tape is needed.)
Be aware that many items are direct from the typesetter, without much
information to help in decoding them. - Ed Fox]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 85 00:11:33 cst
From: "V.J. Raghavan" <ihnp4!sask!regina!raghavan@ucbvax.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Abstracts - 3rd Jnt. BCS and ACM Symposium
[Excerpted from the IRList Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Selected Abstracts from the Proceedings
of the third joint BCS and ACM Symposium,
Kings' College, Cambridge, 2-6 July 84
by G. Salton
(Proceedings published by Cambridge Univ. Press, Editor:
C.J. van Rijsbergen)
BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN AI AND IR
W.S. Cooper
School of Library and Information Studies
University of California
Berkeley, California 94720
Information retrieval, in the broadest sense of the term,
includes a conern with 'expert' or 'knowledge-based' systems and
their potential future successors. It is unlikely that
sophisticated systems of this sort can be developed in such a way
as to use an entire natural language without the assistance of an
advanced, unified theory of language and logic. The need for and
probable character of such a theory are discussed.
KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS VERSUS THESAURUS: AN ARCHITECTURE PROBLEM
ABOUT EXPERT SYSTEMS DESIGN
Mr. B. Defude
Equipe Systemes intelligents de recherche d'information
Laboratoire Genie Informatique (IMAG)
BP 68 38402 St. Martin D'heres Cedex
FRANCE
The use of expert systems (ES) within information retrieval
systems (IRS) seems to be an interesting way, particularly for
the query process. Nevertheless we must examine what kowledge we
need. We think that the thesaurus may be the kernel of which
knowledge: for this, we must define it larger than in classical
IRS.
After some recalls about what may be the principal features
of a query ES, we discuss about the relationship between
thesaurus and a query expert system. The problem is to determine
if the thesaurus must be integrated within the knowledge base.
In fact this choice is an architecture problem of the ES.
We analyze, in parallel, the effects of this choice about
thesaurus representation, ES functionalities, ES architecture.
The choice of an architecture depends on the goal searched:
i.e. a general IR expert system able to handle a set of thesauri
(independent thesaurus) or a specialized IR expert system which
can be very performant but strongly tied to a specific area
(integrated thesaurus).
[...]
------------------------------
Date: 25 Dec 1985 23:29-CST
From: leff%smu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Recent Articles
%A Peter Friedland
%A Laurence H. Kedes
%T Discovering the Secrets of DNA
%J CACM
%V 28
%N 11
%D NOV 1985
%P 1164-1186
%K biology theory formation MOLGEN trp-operon heat shock
%X describes work on an AI tool to assist scientists in theory formation
They are using the Yanofsky trp-operon system as a testbed.
%A Alan B. Chambers
%A David C. Nagel
%T Pilots of the Future: Human or Computer
%J CACM
%V 28
%N 11
%D NOV 1985
%P 1187-1199
%K aviation airplane
%X general overview of automation techniques for aircraft piloting including
AI issues
%A Eric Bender
%T Guru AI Environment Out
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 18, 185
%V 19
%N 46
%P 47+
%K Micro Data Base Managment System expert shell database telecommunications
mainframes configuration shipping natural language
%X Guru, priced at $2995, will allow users create expert systems for their
applications and link those systems with database and natural language front
ends. The system also integrates spread sheets, forms management,
statistics, mathematics, report generators, business graphics, word processing
and communications. MDBS uses GURU internally to relieve the overnight
shipping manager of answering questions. 15 rules resolve 75 percent of the
questions. General Electric has used the system for configuring
comunications for mainframe installations.
%A O. Richard Fonorow
%T Users Press Icon into Commercial Service
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 18, 185
%V 19
%N 46
%P 75-92
%X tutorial on ICON, the language from Ralph Grisworld, the founder
of SNOBOL. This language is recommended for AI work.
%T Advertisement
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 18, 185
%V 19
%N 46
%P 138
%K WIZDOM Microcomputer Expert System
%X Ad for Wizdom which is an expert system for commercial applications
Software Intelligence Laboratory, Inc. Department C, 1593 Locust Ave,
Bohemia, NY 11716 (516) 589-1676
%T News
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 11, 185
%V 19
%N 45
%P 12
%K Edward Feigenbaum Netherland Europe
%X Edward Feigenbaum addressed the inaugural seminar for Netherlands's
national research institute for knowedge systems. He predicted the main
uses for AI would be speech generation, factory automation and
financial applications
%A David Wyland
%T Software that Learns
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 11, 185
%V 19
%N 45
%P 93-104
%K Prolog Lisp
%X tutorial on Prolog, Lisp and Forth, NOT machine learning
%T New Products
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 11, 185
%V 19
%N 45
%P 127
%K Sourceview Micromind expert system microcomputer Macintosh
%X Sourceview Software International has released Micromind Knowledge
Engineering Tool for creating knowledge based expert systems on the
the Macintosh. It is a rule based system. Price $495.00.
%A Steven Burke
%T Natural-Language Speech Recognition Product Announced
%J InfoWorld
%V 7
%N 47
%P 3
%K microcomputer
%X Dragon Systems Inc. has developed a research prototype program that
allows an IBM PC AT to recognize 2000 words spoken by a single person.
It will be on the market within 18 months and cost approximately $3000.
%T Full Speed Ahead for Britain's Fifth-Generation Computer
%J Electronics
%D DEC 9, 1985
%V 58
%N 49
%P 11
%K ICL Alice Flagsip International Computers Limited Inmos.
%X The British Government agreed to provide 60 per cent of the cost
for the Flagship system. This is a successor to Alice, a graph-reduction
machine. One of the sixteen nodes went on line at ICL. The system
will be built from Inmost transputers.
%T New Products
%J ComputerWorld
%D DEC 9, 1985
%V 19
%N 49
%P 92
%K Expert Systems International microcomputer prolog expert system
%X Expert Systems International has released version 2 of its
expert systems development shell, ESP advisor, written in Prolog.
The system supports 3000 rules and can invoke programs written in Prolog.
%A I. Peterson
%T Soliloquy for a Comptuer's Ear
%J Science News
%V 128
%N 23
%D DEC 7, 1985
%P 359
%K speech recognition Dragon Systems stochastic modeling IBM
%X discusses the Dragon technology system, which handles 2000 words
and responds in less than a second. Both the Dragon and IBM
speech recognitions systems use "stochastic modeling."
%A Donald F. Baxter, Jr.
%T Forging Shapes Up
%J Metal Progress
%D DEC 1985
%P 26-33
%V 128
%N 8
%K Camel Robotics Letts Pioneer Forge Teksid Alfa Romeo Italy Forjas de Basouri
Peugeot Renault France FMC General Motors crankshafts ALPID 2.0 metallurgy
die manufacturing blocker
%X A CAE system was developed for design and manufacture of dies being
developed for the Air Force by Schultz steel. AI components are
used for the automatic design of blocker and finisher dies.
*
An Automatic Forging Design Program, three expert systems are used
sequentially to design a geometry for forgers. The first system transforms
the forging geometry to design features. The second step determines
parting line, forging plane, finish allowance, web thickness,
rib width, draft angle, corner radii and fillet radii. The third
step constructs and validates the forging geometry.
*
a system to design blocker die cross sections
for the closed die forging of rib-web type parts.
*
FORMEX, to select the optimum sequence of steps in performing extrusions
*
Describes use of robotics at many plants to load and unload forging
operations. Use of robotics can increase productivity a factor of
three over human loaded systems.
%A Stewart A. Denenberg
%T A Service Project for an Introductory Artificial Intelligence Course:
Implementing SOLO in LOGO
%J SIGCSE
%V 17
%N 4
%D DEC 1985
%P 8-20
%K semantic net Cognitive Psychology
%X describes an AI course at State University of New York at Plattsburgh
where the student implemented a system called SOLO to model
human memory in LOGO.
%A Jerry Lyman
%T Expert Systems Tackle VLSI Testing
%J Electronics
%D NOV 25, 1985
%V 58
%N 47
%P 56-57
%K testability diagnosis expert systems Teradyne J941 GenRad Texas Instruments
BLISS Kyushik Son Cirrus Computers
%X Teradyne has expert systems for in-circut fault analysis and an expert
system for diagnosing system faults in the J941 very large-scale-integeration
logic designer.
The diagnostic system selects appropriate in-circuit tests for
each device and will deal with constraints from circuit topology and user
needs. The system will then analyze test failures and determine additional
actions needed after a failure to perform diagnosis.
GenRad has a system to check the testability of digital IC designs.
The system uses a simulator running Hitest and software by Cirrus Computers
which determines apporpriate wave forms to use.
Texas Instrumetns has a system for classifying switch-level faults in CMOS
circuits.
%A Bernard Conrad Cole
%T A Pride of New CPUs Runs High-Level Languages
%J Electronics
%D NOV 25, 1985
%V 58
%N 47
%P 58-60]
%X Lisp Machine Texas Instruments Xenologic Tantivity Associates
%X Texas Instruments is developing a Compact Lisp Machine, a system
designed to support Common Lisp. They expect to be sampling the chip
near the end of 1985. It is fabricated in sub-2-micron
CMOS and will operate at 40 Megahertz.
*
Xenologic has developed a two board system for prolog systems.
It can perform between 200,000 and 300,000 lips.
*
Tantivity Associates is designing a structured language computer that can
be configured to be a Lisp machine as well as a Pascal, C, Ada or Forth
machine.
%A Joseph J. Lazzaro
%T Talking Instead of Typing
%J High Technology
%D JAN 1986
%V 6
%N 1
%P 58-59
%K speech recognition Kurzweil IBM Votan
%A Hugh Aldersey-Williams
%T Computer Eyes Turn to Food
%J High Technology
%D JAN 1986
%V 6
%N 1
%P 66-67
%K vision agriculture
%X discusses applications of computer vision to machine harvesting or quality
control in the food industry. University of Florida is developing a system
to pick citrus while Michigan State is working on a system to pick
strawberries. Arthur D. Little is developing a system to insure that
frozen mixed vegetables have the correct proportions.
%A J. Robert Lineback
%T MCC: The Research Co-Op's Surprising Fast Start
%J Electronics
%D DEC 16, 1985
%V 58
%N 50
%P 49-51
%K Proteus Lisp truth maintenance expert systems natural language
%X MCC has delivered its transfer of research from its labs to the
companies that sponsored it, which is ahead of schedule. These
transfer include Proteus, a Lisp based expert system using truth maintenance.
MCC is working on an interactive VLSI-CAD system to be written in Lisp.
The human interface department has delivered examples of experimental
software for syntax analysis of knowledge-based interfaces. MCC's AI
program is aimed at building a massive common-sense database consisting
of 10**11 bits.
%A Tobias Naegele
%T AT&T Builds Fuzzy-Inference Chip
%J Electronics
%D DEC 16, 1985
%V 58
%N 50
%P 26-27
%K parallel real-time robotics
%X AT&T has developed a chip that can perform 80,000 fuzzy inferences
per second. It contains 16 rules on the chip. It is intended
for applications for embedded systems for missiles and robots.
%A Robert T. Gallagher
%T AI to Help Mechanics at Renault to Do a Better Job
%J Electronics
%D DEC 16, 1985
%V 58
%N 50
%P 27
%K microcomputer expert system diagnostic
%X Renault has developed an expert system to be put in automobile garages
to assist in helping to diagnose such areas as automatic transmissions, on
the road behavior and electrical faults. The system can be easily
reconfigured to deal with different car models.
%T Dornier Proposes Four High-Tech Projects to Eureka
%J Electronics
%D DEC 16, 1985
%V 58
%N 50
%P 17
%K fire-fighting robotics
%X Dornier System Gmbh has proposed to Eureka a project to develop
fire-fighting robots with artificial intelligence
%A George C. Steinke
%A Martin D. Schussel
%T Engineering by the Book.. And On-Line
%J Mechanical Engineering
%D NOV 1985
%V 107
%N 11
%P 56-59
%K engineering Cognition Inc.
%X Cognition Inc. of Billerica, Massachussetts will soon offer an
expert system
cost guide as part of its Mechanical Advantage 1000 system. Mechanical
Advantage allows the user to enter the geometry of an object with
symbolic parameters as well as applicable engineering design equations.
Then the user can change the parameters, and have the geometry as
well as the results of the equations displayed.
An optimization system is also integrated into the system.
%A Paul Tate
%T Picking Up Speed
%J Datamation
%D NOV 15, 1985
%V 31
%N 22
%P 64+
%K European Computer Research Center
%X A consortium of Bull of France, Britain's ICL and Gemany's
Siemens is developing systems for handling large
knowledge bases since they believe that the main reason for using
large systems would be to hold large knowledge bases.
They have developed a Prolog compiler which generates C and will include
coroutining which will allow the programmer to apply constraints to
variables in the language. They are working on a system
to integrate logic programming and object-oriented programming.
They are trying to integrate PROLOG and databases and develop
AI-based front ends for packages such as spreadsheets.
%A A. Knaeuper
%A W. B. Rouse
%T A rule-Based Model of Human Problem-Solving Behavior in Dynamic
Environments
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 6
%D NOV/DEC 1985
%P 708-719
%X A rule-based model of a human plant controller has been developed at
Georgia Institute of Technology.
It has been compared it to human operators working on a simulated chemical
production plant and find that the rule based system achieved similar
performance on both stability and output as well as a 61 percent agreement
with the human's actions on a case by case basis.
In a related paper, they compared human operators with and without
training in the fundamentals of the system, i.e. with an explanation
of how the plant worked. It was found that there was no difference
in performance between the two groups, even in unexpected situations
where such knowledge would presumably be most helpful.
%A L. A. Zadeh
%T Syllogistic Reasoning in Fuzzy Logic and its Application to Usuality and
Reasoning with Dispositions
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 6
%D NOV/DEC 1985
%P 754-763
%A C. P. Neuman
%A V. D. Tourassis
%T Inverse Dynamics Applications of Discrete Robot Models
%J IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics
%V SMC-15
%N 6
%D NOV/DEC 1985
%P 798-803
%T TI Data Systems Reaches Goal of 100 VARs signed
%J Electronic News
%V 31
%N 1577
%D NOV 25, 1985
%P 52
%K Gold Hill microcomputers Texas Instruments lisp
%X TI has signed a distribution with Gold Hill Computers for its Common
Lisp package
%A Charles Babcock
%A John Gallant
%T IBM Unveils Tool to Restructure VM, MVS Cobol Code
%J ComputerWorld
%D NOV 25, 1985
%V 19
%N 47
%P 10
%K IBM software engineering COBOL
%X IBM introduced a Cobol restructuring program, COBOL/SF. The prices is
$125,000 or $12,5000 per month.
%A Eric Bender
%T Lotus Shops for Next Technology
%J ComputerWorld
%D DEC 16, 1985
%V 19
%N 50
%P 1+
%K microcomputer natual language GNP Development Corporation
%X GNP Development Corporation developed a Human Access Language Package
which allows a user to access 1-2-3 functions through simple English
commands. Lotus just purchased the firm.
%T Program Has Decision-Tree Feature
%J InfoWorld
%D DEC 18, 1985
%V 7
%N 50
%P 59
%K Texas Instruments Arborist microcomputer decision support
%X TI has introduced a version 2.0 of the Arborist
Package, an AI-based decision support system for the IBM and TI PC.
%J Electronic News
%D DEC 9, 1985
%V 31
%N 1579
%P 8
%K Symbolics Howard I. Cannon Bruce M. Gras
%X Symbolics Inc. has named Howard I. Cannon director of marketing,
replacing vice-president of marketing Bruce M. Gras who has
resigned.
%A Alain Colmerauer
%T Prolog in Ten Figures
%J Communications of the ACM
%D DEC 1985
%V 28
%N 12
%P 1287-1310
%X Yet Another Prolog Tutorial
%A Jacques Cohen
%T Describing Prolog By Its Interpretation and Compilation
%J Communications of the ACM
%D DEC 1985
%V 28
%N 12
%P 1311-1324
%X Yet Another Prolog Tutorial (this time emphasizing compilation
and interpretation of prolog).
%T How to Wreck A Nice Beach
%J Science News
%V 128
%D NOV 16, 1985
%P 313
%X speech recognition
%X Jared Bernstein and Gay Baldwin are systematically studying the differences
between spontaneous and prepared speech. They found that people have
surprisingly quirky and different ways of pronouncing words.
%A Ivars Peterson
%T Exceptions to the Rule
%J Science News
%V 128
%D NOV 16, 1985
%P 314
%K natural language
%X talks about research into whether there exist natural
languages that are not context-free
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂27-Dec-85 1910 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V3 #193
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Dec 85 19:09:58 PST
Date: Fri 27 Dec 1985 15:33-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V3 #193
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 28 Dec 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 193
Today's Topics:
Query - Common LISP and OPS5,
News - Job Ads on the Network,
AI Tools - Superset of Common Lisp,
Games - Computer Chess (Fredkin Final),
Seminar Series - AI in Design and Manufacturing (SU),
Course - Logic in AI and Databases (Rutgers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 85 09:16:50 -0200
From: hplabs!utah-cs!seismo!mcvax!hut.UUCP!mit@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
(Markku Tamminen)
Subject: Common LISP and OPS5
At the Helsinki University of Technology we have been using Franz LISP
but would now like to make a switch to Common LISP, however, without
undue costs.
We have a VAX 11/750 under BSD 4.2 and three Altos under System 5.
Further we will probably soon have an ATT 3B2, also under System 5.
We would like to have Common LISP on at least two or three of these
machines, so that it is important for us to find not-too-expensive variants.
Does anybody have a comprehensive list of Common LISPs available under Unix?
If not, and if the list is non-trivial, perhaps I could compose it from
replies to this query?
I have a further query about public domain versions of the OPS5 production
system language. Does anybody have a version in Common LISP? If not, is
such a need widely felt? Would it be possible to acquire ANY version of
OPS5 through the net? (We need it quickly for use in a course beginning in
January.)
Markku Tamminen
Helsinki University of Technology Laboratory of Information Processing Science
02150 ESPOO 15 FINLAND, Tel: 358-0-4512075 (460144)
seismo!mcvax!hut!mit
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 85 16:29 EST
From: Henry Lieberman <Henry@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Job ads on the network
High Technology Professionals for Peace, a Cambridge, Mass.
organization, is starting an electronic bulletin board for
ads for jobs [non-military, of course] in the computer field.
Both employers and job seekers will be able to access the
system confidentially. It's not up yet, but when I receive
details about how to log in, I will post them. Hopefully,
there will be ways to access them from most popular computer
networks. They already have an employment agency [using conventional
technologies] for matching non-military employers and prospective
employees, and I'd encourage anyone looking for a job to
write or call them. They also seek help with their project
of setting up the computer bulletin board service.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 85 02:04:00 -0100
From: enea!kuling!victor@seismo.CSS.GOV (Bjorn Victor)
Subject: Superset of Common Lisp
In case no one else already submitted this or better:
Subject: Re: Superset of Common LISP...
It's probably Zetalisp they're talking about.
Quoting from an article whose copy is missing origin and date,
regarding the release of the Texas Explorer:
"The Explorer unveiling comes shortly after TI's announcement in
August of a multi-million dollar contract to develop a custom VLSI
LISP processor chip for the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency
(DARPA) Strategic Computing Program. The LISP microprocessor, which
will be software compatible with Explorer, will perform functions
requiring several hundred integrated circuits in current computer
systems. The chip is being designed to provide up to ten times the
processing power of today's commercial symbolic processors at
substantially lower cost and physical size, which will make possible
many new commercial applications of symbolic processing."
--Bjorn Victor UUCP: {mcvax,seismo}!enea!kuling!victor
Computing Science Dept/UPMAIL ARPA: enea!kuling!victor@SEISMO.CSS.GOV
Uppsala University, PO Box 2059
S-750 02 UPPSALA, SWEDEN
------------------------------
Date: 21 December 1985 2252-EST
From: Hans Berliner@A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Computer Chess (Fredkin Final
[Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
In the final round of the Fredkin Masters Invitational Tourney,
Hitech beat Computer Killer Tom Martinak. Martinak had participated
in the 1982 and 1984 Fredkin events in which he played a total of 5
games against the best programs at that time. His result was 4.5 out
of 5 (therefore the name "computer killer"). Among his 5 points
were 2 points in two tries against Cray Blitz.
Final Standings:
NAME SCORE PLACE RATING at start
Rao 8-0 I 2400
Szmetan 6.5-1.5 II 2404
Hitech 5.5-2.5 III 2255
Leverett 5 - 3 IV 2366
Nobody else is going to get more than 3.5 points and 5th place is
still undecided at this writing. This is an outstanding performance
by Vivek Rao, who is the number one player in the country in the 16
and under category and number 7 in the 21 and under. He was very
dominant.
If I may be excused for editorializing, this is also an outstanding
performance for a computer. Hitech's rating is now about 2309, which
is 100 points higher than any computer has ever penetrated, and it
is still climbing.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 85 11:53:54 pst
From: Mark Cutkosky <cutkosky@su-whitney.arpa>
Subject: Seminar Series - AI in Design and Manufacturing (SU)
Subject: A Seminar on "A.I. in Design and Manufacturing"
Time: Every thursday at 12:00 noon during the winter quarter
Location: Terman? (room location to be announced)
For further information contact:
Mark Cutkosky, Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering (415) 497-8100
Susan Hansen, Administrative Assistant, SIMA (415) 497-9038
Jay M. Tenenbaum, Consulting Professor, CIS (415) 496-4704
Purpose: To explore the use of A.I. tools in problems involving the design
and manufacture of mechanical and electrical components.
There is a growing interest both in engineering and computer science in
applying A.I. methods to engineering problems. Every week, I learn of
another student who is working on an expert system or a qualitative
reasoning system for some new application. A goal of this seminar is to
bring us together so that we can learn what other faculty and students are
doing, share ideas, and perhaps share software and programming techniques.
Seminar Format:
Every other week a presentation will be given by a member of the A.I.
community. The intervening weeks will be devoted to informal discussions
of theory and practice and to student presentations of work-in-progress.
The first speaker will be Dr. Jeff Pan of Schlumberger Palo Alto Research,
speaking about "A.I. Support of Fabrication Processes with Applications to
Manufacturing Mechanical Devices" on Thurs, January 9.
Other presentations will include:
* Dr. Barbara Hayes-Roth, Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory:
"Blackboard Systems for Mechanical Design," Feb. 6.
* Dr. Robert Stults, Xerox Palo Alto Reserach Center: "Design Methodology,"
March 6.
A more complete schedule and room location will be announced prior to the
first meeting.
Mark R. Cutkosky
------------------------------
Date: 26 Dec 85 13:13:05 EST
From: IMIELINSKI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: Course - Logic in AI and Databases (Rutgers)
Seminar in Logic in AI and Databases
Tomasz Imielinski
Spring 1986
This time I will talk about Logic of Knowledge and Belief and it's
applications in Knowledge Representation, Incomplete and Limited Resources
Reasoning and Distributed Systems (Last year seminar was related to Theoretical
foundations of Logic Programming). If time allows I will also cover Nonmonotone
reasoning and reasoning in presence of inconsistency.
I will start from the introduction of modal logics and their semantics based
on Kripke Models. This will be followed by the discussion of the Hintikka's
approach to the logic of knowledge and belief (In particular the books
"Knowledge and belief" and "Models for Modalities"). I will be particularly
interested in predicate logic of knowledge and various difficulties and
paradoxes which arise when we move from the propositional case to the predicate
case. The relevant complexity results related to the decision procedures will
be also discussed.
Next, the applications in computer science, in particular in AI and distributed
systems will be discussed. I will concentrate here again on the predicate
logic of knowledge since it attracted much less attention in the literature.
Such issues as "awarness", "limited resource reasoning", and
"approximated reasoning" will be of particular interest here.
LITERATURE: Textbook in Modal logic (like Hughes and Cresswell "Introduction to
modal logic" or Chellas "Modal Logic"). Two books by J. Hintikka "Knowledge and
Belief" and "Models for Modalities". These books will be put on reserve in the
library. Besides various recent papers will be distributed in class possibly
including the papers from the Conference in Logic of Knowledge (March 1986).
PREREQUISITIES: Basic Background in logic and complexity
( 509 is enough) and AI (Intro to AI)
METHOD OF EVALUATION: Homeworks and Final "Take Home" Exam
TIME: I will announce the time and the
place of the first meeting on the bboard on january,27.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************