perm filename E87.IN[LET,JMC] blob
sn#846541 filedate 1987-10-01 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00448 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00051 00002 ∂01-Jul-87 0128 R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: an MD denounces education as a strategy against AIDS
C00056 00003 ∂01-Jul-87 0814 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU FAREWELL POTLUCK
C00059 00004 ∂01-Jul-87 0833 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Inverse Method
C00061 00005 ∂01-Jul-87 0954 VAL reply to message
C00062 00006 ∂01-Jul-87 1009 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil QLISP FUNDING
C00074 00007 ∂01-Jul-87 1028 RA Claudia Mazzetti
C00075 00008 ∂01-Jul-87 1037 glenda@argus.stanford.edu
C00076 00009 ∂01-Jul-87 1210 RA going out
C00077 00010 ∂01-Jul-87 1212 glenda@argus.stanford.edu re:
C00078 00011 ∂01-Jul-87 1252 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: Lunch
C00080 00012 ∂01-Jul-87 1444 glenda@argus.stanford.edu re:
C00082 00013 ∂01-Jul-87 1559 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C00085 00014 ∂01-Jul-87 1714 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU subgroup etc
C00087 00015 ∂02-Jul-87 0800 JMC
C00088 00016 ∂02-Jul-87 0855 RA conference call Inference
C00089 00017 ∂02-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00090 00018 ∂02-Jul-87 0915 JMC
C00091 00019 ∂02-Jul-87 0950 RA meeting with Gabriel
C00092 00020 ∂02-Jul-87 0952 RA Rebecca Lasher
C00093 00021 ∂02-Jul-87 1139 RA Hyat Regency bill
C00094 00022 ∂02-Jul-87 1253 RA Minski
C00095 00023 ∂02-Jul-87 1340 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C00096 00024 ∂02-Jul-87 1452 RA class
C00097 00025 ∂02-Jul-87 2318 ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
C00098 00026 ∂02-Jul-87 2328 ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
C00100 00027 ∂03-Jul-87 0024 K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: Messrs P and S
C00101 00028 ∂03-Jul-87 1218 CLT
C00102 00029 ∂03-Jul-87 1755 JK nafeh
C00103 00030 ∂03-Jul-87 1914 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Lowell's "directions"
C00105 00031 ∂03-Jul-87 2243 RPG Chat
C00107 00032 ∂04-Jul-87 2149 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu interesting book
C00118 00033 ∂04-Jul-87 2345 Woods.PA@Xerox.COM Re: The REAL Mr. P and Mr. S!
C00120 00034 ∂05-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00121 00035 ∂05-Jul-87 1104 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Re: Mr. S and Mr. P
C00123 00036 ∂05-Jul-87 1623 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU My MSCS Plan
C00129 00037 ∂05-Jul-87 1704 CLT Devika Subramanian
C00130 00038 ∂05-Jul-87 1814 RA coming in late tomorrow
C00131 00039 ∂05-Jul-87 1955 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Character sets
C00141 00040 ∂06-Jul-87 0657 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU JPL Issue on Logic & AI
C00143 00041 ∂06-Jul-87 0852 JJW
C00144 00042 ∂06-Jul-87 1107 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU REMINDER
C00147 00043 ∂06-Jul-87 1343 RA Re: telegram
C00148 00044 ∂06-Jul-87 1426 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>: Re: approval and funding for conference trip]
C00151 00045 ∂06-Jul-87 1441 RA leaving
C00152 00046 ∂06-Jul-87 1553 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method and KLAUS
C00154 00047 ∂06-Jul-87 1709 RA not here after 5:00
C00155 00048 ∂06-Jul-87 1715 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@ai Critique delay
C00159 00049 ∂06-Jul-87 1715 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU history of the department
C00161 00050 ∂06-Jul-87 1751 RWF re: history of the department
C00162 00051 ∂06-Jul-87 2006 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talking about AI
C00164 00052 ∂06-Jul-87 2037 @gort.cs.buffalo.edu:kumard@cs.buffalo.edu The Frame problem
C00167 00053 ∂06-Jul-87 2048 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU talk
C00168 00054 ∂06-Jul-87 2151 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
C00170 00055 ∂07-Jul-87 0139 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:SOLVBERG@NORUNIT.BITNET IFIP working conference in Canton July 4-8, 1988
C00174 00056 ∂07-Jul-87 0837 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU book on hold
C00175 00057 ∂07-Jul-87 0846 ALS checker champion
C00176 00058 ∂07-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00177 00059 ∂07-Jul-87 1211 RA lunch
C00178 00060 ∂07-Jul-87 1223 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU friday
C00179 00061 ∂07-Jul-87 1452 RA Ed Tenner
C00180 00062 ∂07-Jul-87 1454 RA leaving
C00181 00063 ∂08-Jul-87 0049 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:SOLVBERG@NORUNIT.BITNET IFIP working conference, visit to Beijing
C00182 00064 ∂08-Jul-87 0951 RA Hurd
C00183 00065 ∂08-Jul-87 1021 RA Sheila Starr
C00184 00066 ∂08-Jul-87 1106 RA Col. Everett
C00185 00067 ∂08-Jul-87 1206 SOTOS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
C00187 00068 ∂08-Jul-87 1234 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: America is a violent country?
C00189 00069 ∂08-Jul-87 1522 VAL
C00190 00070 ∂08-Jul-87 1523 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil REMINDER!!
C00191 00071 ∂08-Jul-87 1812 rms%lemon.Berkeley.EDU@jade.berkeley.edu Consulting fee
C00193 00072 ∂08-Jul-87 2227 PAO@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Ollie
C00194 00073 ∂09-Jul-87 0528 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV nmr-workshop
C00196 00074 ∂09-Jul-87 0818 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Time Problems
C00197 00075 ∂09-Jul-87 0903 COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Ollie
C00198 00076 ∂09-Jul-87 0933 RA Jeff Broughton, Livermore
C00199 00077 ∂09-Jul-87 1007 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: liberal reporters?
C00201 00078 ∂09-Jul-87 1012 CLT Qlisp darpa report
C00202 00079 ∂09-Jul-87 1246 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Time Problems
C00204 00080 ∂09-Jul-87 1334 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: lunch tomorrow
C00205 00081 ∂09-Jul-87 1348 COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Scribe, Tex and Latex usage
C00207 00082 ∂09-Jul-87 1400 RA Jerry, PA Glass
C00208 00083 ∂09-Jul-87 1454 RA leaving
C00209 00084 ∂09-Jul-87 1505 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU reminder
C00212 00085 ∂09-Jul-87 2000 JMC
C00213 00086 ∂09-Jul-87 2129 CLT qlet
C00214 00087 ∂10-Jul-87 0800 JMC
C00215 00088 ∂10-Jul-87 0855 CLT Address
C00216 00089 ∂10-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00217 00090 ∂10-Jul-87 1030 CLT Qlisp demo
C00218 00091 ∂10-Jul-87 1035 CLT qlisp
C00219 00092 ∂10-Jul-87 1132 RA lunch with Shoham
C00220 00093 ∂10-Jul-87 1451 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Mr. P & Mr. S
C00222 00094 ∂10-Jul-87 1455 RA leaving
C00223 00095 ∂10-Jul-87 1500 JMC
C00224 00096 ∂10-Jul-87 1500 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Modified P and S
C00234 00097 ∂10-Jul-87 1513 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Task 13, ARPA Umbrella
C00236 00098 ∂10-Jul-87 1802 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU Re: Liberalism of journalists
C00238 00099 ∂11-Jul-87 1203 norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@Berkeley.EDU AAAI support for workshops?
C00241 00100 ∂11-Jul-87 1731 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU martial law
C00242 00101 ∂11-Jul-87 1739 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU re: martial law
C00243 00102 ∂11-Jul-87 2351 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Preliminary inventory of free countries in the UN
C00245 00103 ∂12-Jul-87 0349 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Israel's qualifications as a free country
C00246 00104 ∂12-Jul-87 0516 HEWITT@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU quote for today
C00247 00105 ∂12-Jul-87 0806 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Gaps
C00248 00106 ∂12-Jul-87 1321 @Score.Stanford.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU proposal
C00254 00107 ∂13-Jul-87 0202 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab transcript of your lecture
C00256 00108 ∂13-Jul-87 1217 karen@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu textbooks
C00258 00109 ∂13-Jul-87 1507 JMC
C00259 00110 ∂13-Jul-87 1958 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Turkey
C00261 00111 ∂15-Jul-87 1136 PJH my netadress
C00262 00112 ∂15-Jul-87 1602 CLT msg from hst
C00263 00113 ∂15-Jul-87 1603 CLT calendar item
C00264 00114 ∂15-Jul-87 1718 AI.DUFFY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Natural kinds
C00266 00115 ∂15-Jul-87 1722 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU 2-DMA762
C00267 00116 ∂15-Jul-87 1733 JK
C00272 00117 ∂17-Jul-87 0755 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:bill@ipsa.arpa
C00275 00118 ∂17-Jul-87 0843 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:bill@ipsa.arpa
C00322 00119 ∂17-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00323 00120 ∂17-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00324 00121 ∂17-Jul-87 0938 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU AI Core Curric
C00331 00122 ∂17-Jul-87 1000 JMC
C00332 00123 ∂17-Jul-87 1125 CLT dinner
C00333 00124 ∂17-Jul-87 1224 CLT Qlisp demo reminder
C00335 00125 ∂18-Jul-87 1335 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU [Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>: Natural Kinds]
C00347 00126 ∂19-Jul-87 1052 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU thanks
C00348 00127 ∂19-Jul-87 1705 RA tomorrow
C00351 00128 ∂19-Jul-87 1934 Mailer failed mail returned
C00352 00129 ∂19-Jul-87 2138 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU NASA Money?
C00357 00130 ∂20-Jul-87 0955 CLT moving expenses
C00361 00131 ∂20-Jul-87 1000 JMC
C00362 00132 ∂20-Jul-87 1108 DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Market Research
C00366 00133 ∂20-Jul-87 1224 diana@brillig.umd.edu seminar
C00368 00134 ∂20-Jul-87 1228 CLT Market Research
C00371 00135 ∂20-Jul-87 2142 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU ai courses
C00379 00136 ∂21-Jul-87 0920 DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Market Research
C00384 00137 ∂21-Jul-87 1141 WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: ai courses
C00387 00138 ∂21-Jul-87 1303 LES
C00388 00139 ∂21-Jul-87 1309 CLT alex
C00389 00140 ∂21-Jul-87 1315 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Pigott Professorship
C00391 00141 ∂21-Jul-87 1636 ME
C00392 00142 ∂21-Jul-87 1811 DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Lyn & JMC on Nicaragua
C00394 00143 ∂21-Jul-87 2139 RPG Loop
C00395 00144 ∂22-Jul-87 0824 TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU Re: connectionist summer school
C00396 00145 ∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00397 00146 ∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00398 00147 ∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00399 00148 ∂22-Jul-87 1508 RA talk tonight
C00400 00149 ∂22-Jul-87 2043 CLT
C00401 00150 ∂22-Jul-87 2137 PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Some Responses on Nicaragua
C00415 00151 ∂22-Jul-87 2337 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Some Responses on Nicaragua
C00421 00152 ∂23-Jul-87 0844 DEK sail
C00422 00153 ∂23-Jul-87 1459 SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: ai courses
C00425 00154 ∂23-Jul-87 1621 JJW Alliant memory
C00427 00155 ∂23-Jul-87 1900 JMC
C00428 00156 ∂23-Jul-87 2148 harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU Wittgenstein on Family Resemblances
C00436 00157 ∂24-Jul-87 1441 VAL reply to message
C00437 00158 ∂24-Jul-87 1836 ESWOLF@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Readings on scientific explanation
C00439 00159 ∂24-Jul-87 2056 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU Nien Cheng's "Life and Death in Shanghai"
C00441 00160 ∂25-Jul-87 0036 GROSOF@Score.Stanford.EDU Delgrande AAAI paper
C00443 00161 ∂25-Jul-87 1813 CLT
C00444 00162 ∂25-Jul-87 1814 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method Project Schedule
C00447 00163 ∂26-Jul-87 1307 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of June computer charges.
C00450 00164 ∂26-Jul-87 1346 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: liberal bias in SU Humanities departments
C00452 00165 ∂26-Jul-87 1428 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU re: JPL Issue on Logic & AI
C00455 00166 ∂26-Jul-87 2110 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Your N-queens suggestion
C00458 00167 ∂27-Jul-87 0900 JMC
C00459 00168 ∂27-Jul-87 0948 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu A question both of you agree on (I think?)
C00463 00169 ∂27-Jul-87 1020 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
C00464 00170 ∂27-Jul-87 1202 VAL re: Inverse Method Project Schedule
C00466 00171 ∂27-Jul-87 1207 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU '87-July-tecrpts-mailinglist
C00471 00172 ∂27-Jul-87 1300 JMC
C00472 00173 ∂27-Jul-87 1459 CLT
C00473 00174 ∂27-Jul-87 1535 harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU Natural Kinds
C00527 00175 ∂28-Jul-87 0902 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU book on hold
C00528 00176 ∂28-Jul-87 1156 VAL
C00531 00177 ∂28-Jul-87 1435 MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM Course at Austin
C00534 00178 ∂28-Jul-87 1517 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
C00537 00179 ∂28-Jul-87 1742 LES Bike Locker Move 8/10
C00539 00180 ∂28-Jul-87 1816 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
C00541 00181 ∂28-Jul-87 2339 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:eyal@wisdom.bitnet Re: natural kinds
C00544 00182 ∂29-Jul-87 0956 MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM re: Course at Austin
C00545 00183 ∂29-Jul-87 1149 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU Japan trip
C00547 00184 ∂29-Jul-87 1152 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU example of common sense inference
C00549 00185 ∂29-Jul-87 1259 RA pictures
C00550 00186 ∂29-Jul-87 1540 VAL Sol's reply
C00554 00187 ∂30-Jul-87 1754 RA request
C00555 00188 ∂30-Jul-87 2011 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
C00559 00189 ∂30-Jul-87 2012 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
C00565 00190 ∂30-Jul-87 2017 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:stevens@anl-mcs.ARPA Journal of Automated Reasoning
C00571 00191 ∂31-Jul-87 1119 CLT japan collaboration
C00572 00192 ∂31-Jul-87 1327 VAL Moscow Congress
C00574 00193 ∂31-Jul-87 1541 LES EBOS funding
C00575 00194 ∂31-Jul-87 1632 SJG your paper, "Circumscription -- a Form of Non-monotonic Reasoning"
C00576 00195 ∂01-Aug-87 0729 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Beers
C00578 00196 ∂01-Aug-87 0936 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Beers
C00580 00197 ∂01-Aug-87 1648 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Lying Defined
C00585 00198 ∂01-Aug-87 1749 HENNING@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: JMC and major/minor issues
C00588 00199 ∂01-Aug-87 1855 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU An Opportunity (was Re: covert actions)
C00592 00200 ∂01-Aug-87 2039 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
C00594 00201 ∂01-Aug-87 2157 VAL Moscow
C00598 00202 ∂02-Aug-87 0322 DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
C00600 00203 ∂02-Aug-87 1049 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu San Francisco consul may be right
C00602 00204 ∂02-Aug-87 1144 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
C00605 00205 ∂02-Aug-87 1515 R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: international terrorism
C00607 00206 ∂03-Aug-87 0900 JMC
C00608 00207 ∂03-Aug-87 1103 JSW Alliant
C00609 00208 ∂03-Aug-87 1236 VAL
C00610 00209 ∂03-Aug-87 1303 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET:masahiko@nttlab Re: Tohoku lecture
C00612 00210 ∂03-Aug-87 1550 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU CS309 Titles
C00614 00211 ∂03-Aug-87 1601 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: manufacturing science
C00615 00212 ∂03-Aug-87 1615 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Hitler'S ends and means
C00620 00213 ∂03-Aug-87 1632 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU
C00621 00214 ∂03-Aug-87 1807 HART@SRI.Com Re: workshop policies
C00622 00215 ∂03-Aug-87 2207 stefik.pa@Xerox.COM Open Systems Workshop
C00625 00216 ∂04-Aug-87 0038 norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Re: AAAI will support it with $10K. Please make all further arrangements
C00627 00217 ∂04-Aug-87 0305 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
C00631 00218 ∂04-Aug-87 0816 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
C00632 00219 ∂04-Aug-87 0929 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
C00633 00220 ∂04-Aug-87 1019 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Area X qual
C00637 00221 ∂04-Aug-87 1035 VAL reply to message
C00638 00222 ∂04-Aug-87 1049 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X qual
C00640 00223 ∂04-Aug-87 1124 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: Area X qual
C00642 00224 ∂04-Aug-87 1225 RPG Meeting with Nils
C00643 00225 ∂04-Aug-87 1413 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Area X qual
C00645 00226 ∂04-Aug-87 1721 JMC
C00646 00227 ∂04-Aug-87 1748 LES Qlisp funds
C00647 00228 ∂04-Aug-87 1912 WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Area X qual
C00649 00229 ∂04-Aug-87 1917 CLT
C00650 00230 ∂04-Aug-87 2130 VAL lost luggage
C00651 00231 ∂04-Aug-87 2132 VAL wics
C00652 00232 ∂04-Aug-87 2235 broder@src.DEC.COM Re: Taste Tests & JMC's challenge
C00657 00233 ∂04-Aug-87 2331 ME stripe.sri.com
C00658 00234 ∂05-Aug-87 0859 RPG Lunch
C00659 00235 ∂05-Aug-87 1011 VAL reply to message
C00660 00236 ∂05-Aug-87 1235 VAL Maslov's book
C00661 00237 ∂05-Aug-87 1403 jc@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu AI discussion group at UT
C00663 00238 ∂05-Aug-87 1748 RA your sabatical
C00664 00239 ∂05-Aug-87 2000 JMC
C00665 00240 ∂06-Aug-87 0101 VAL
C00666 00241 ∂06-Aug-87 0859 VAL re: reply to message
C00667 00242 ∂06-Aug-87 0900 JMC
C00668 00243 ∂06-Aug-87 1322 SMC embassy and consulate numbers
C00669 00244 ∂06-Aug-87 1337 VAL wics
C00670 00245 ∂06-Aug-87 1403 VAL transparencies for Moscow
C00671 00246 ∂06-Aug-87 1648 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU ehud shapiro's e-mail address
C00673 00247 ∂06-Aug-87 2255 SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: visas
C00674 00248 ∂06-Aug-87 2300 SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: visas
C00675 00249 ∂07-Aug-87 1208 SMC hawk
C00676 00250 ∂07-Aug-87 1310 SMC pam widrin
C00677 00251 ∂07-Aug-87 1453 SMC shipping books
C00678 00252 ∂07-Aug-87 1455 SMC phone
C00679 00253 ∂07-Aug-87 1622 SMC pam widrin again
C00680 00254 ∂07-Aug-87 2028 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Some are lucky
C00682 00255 ∂10-Aug-87 0748 CLT rabinov
C00683 00256 ∂10-Aug-87 0758 CLT moving expenses
C00684 00257 ∂10-Aug-87 0959 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Rabinov charges
C00685 00258 ∂10-Aug-87 1038 WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X qual
C00688 00259 ∂10-Aug-87 1058 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu area X
C00690 00260 ∂10-Aug-87 1113 AIR Ordering
C00691 00261 ∂10-Aug-87 1146 CLT coissons
C00692 00262 ∂10-Aug-87 1213 jbn@glacier.stanford.edu Re: AI and science
C00694 00263 ∂10-Aug-87 1323 LES Pullen-Scherlis Visit
C00697 00264 ∂10-Aug-87 1427 SMC car rental
C00698 00265 ∂10-Aug-87 1459 SMC account numbers
C00699 00266 ∂10-Aug-87 1612 SMC book
C00700 00267 ∂10-Aug-87 1656 ME bike locker
C00701 00268 ∂10-Aug-87 2110 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Computer chess game
C00704 00269 ∂11-Aug-87 0034 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Computer chess game
C00707 00270 ∂11-Aug-87 0536 WENTWORTH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Computer chess game
C00710 00271 ∂11-Aug-87 0944 J.JACKK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: Computer chess game
C00712 00272 ∂11-Aug-87 1100 SMC Nat. Med.
C00713 00273 ∂11-Aug-87 1533 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU bert
C00716 00274 ∂11-Aug-87 2237 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: chess game
C00718 00275 ∂12-Aug-87 0828 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: great leaders of peace
C00719 00276 ∂12-Aug-87 0908 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: great leaders of peace
C00721 00277 ∂12-Aug-87 0919 ROSE@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Courtesy Appointments
C00723 00278 ∂12-Aug-87 1038 SMC NY Times letter
C00724 00279 ∂12-Aug-87 1229 SMC new york times letter
C00725 00280 ∂12-Aug-87 1246 GINSBERG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: chess game
C00727 00281 ∂12-Aug-87 1328 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU qlisp meeting
C00728 00282 ∂12-Aug-87 1618 SMC Caspian
C00730 00283 ∂13-Aug-87 0122 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: long distance phone companies
C00732 00284 ∂13-Aug-87 0828 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A book by Larry Wos
C00739 00285 ∂13-Aug-87 0948 CBARSALOU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: area X
C00741 00286 ∂13-Aug-87 1041 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK new report
C00746 00287 ∂13-Aug-87 1101 SMC renting the car
C00747 00288 ∂13-Aug-87 1232 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method project
C00750 00289 ∂13-Aug-87 1254 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Inverse Method project
C00751 00290 ∂13-Aug-87 1321 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU The Journal of Automated Deduction
C00757 00291 ∂13-Aug-87 1432 SJG meta-commentary
C00760 00292 ∂14-Aug-87 0031 YORAM@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Favors
C00764 00293 ∂16-Aug-87 0812 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET:masahiko@nttlab
C00766 00294 ∂16-Aug-87 1125 norman%ics@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu AI and science
C00769 00295 ∂18-Aug-87 1152 pullen@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting Invitation
C00776 00296 ∂19-Aug-87 1715 LES PI Meeting Invitation
C00784 00297 ∂19-Aug-87 1756 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of July computer charges.
C00786 00298 ∂20-Aug-87 0649 rc@icst-cmr.arpa PI Meeting Arrangements
C00796 00299 ∂21-Aug-87 0953 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU overdue tr
C00798 00300 ∂24-Aug-87 1519 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Area X
C00804 00301 ∂24-Aug-87 1706 HABERMANN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Re: PI Meeting Invitation
C00806 00302 ∂24-Aug-87 2318 DEK
C00809 00303 ∂25-Aug-87 0936 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
C00810 00304 ∂25-Aug-87 1608 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X
C00812 00305 ∂25-Aug-87 1744 rc@icst-cmr.arpa More PI meeting info
C00816 00306 ∂27-Aug-87 1115 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Grade in CS399
C00818 00307 ∂27-Aug-87 1209 JDP Parallel Polynomial Manipulation
C00819 00308 ∂27-Aug-87 1526 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF REPORT
C00821 00309 ∂30-Aug-87 1542 ME (on TTY62, at TV-62 1542)
C00822 00310 ∂30-Aug-87 1620 GGOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Passing Years
C00824 00311 ∂31-Aug-87 1021 SMC Texas #s
C00825 00312 ∂31-Aug-87 1021 VAL Ed Brink
C00826 00313 ∂31-Aug-87 1038 SMC house payment
C00827 00314 ∂31-Aug-87 1056 VAL Alex Gorbis
C00828 00315 ∂31-Aug-87 1236 SMC expenses
C00832 00316 ∂31-Aug-87 1529 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU QLISP status
C00835 00317 ∂01-Sep-87 0015 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
C00839 00318 ∂01-Sep-87 0128 ME Prancing Pony Bill (corrected)
C00841 00319 ∂01-Sep-87 0921 SMC score
C00842 00320 ∂01-Sep-87 0939 ME noedit chars
C00845 00321 ∂01-Sep-87 1219 VAL re: Grade in CS399
C00846 00322 ∂01-Sep-87 1301 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU PI meeting
C00847 00323 ∂01-Sep-87 1715 JSW Qlisp meeting
C00848 00324 ∂02-Sep-87 1044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Grade in CS399
C00850 00325 ∂02-Sep-87 1218 VAL Problem
C00853 00326 ∂02-Sep-87 1335 ME character macros
C00856 00327 ∂02-Sep-87 1502 ME ctrl-@
C00857 00328 ∂02-Sep-87 1544 VAL Summer School in Bulgaria
C00858 00329 ∂02-Sep-87 1627 ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET China
C00861 00330 ∂02-Sep-87 1637 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: prize
C00863 00331 ∂02-Sep-87 1657 ME sending nulls to SAIL
C00865 00332 ∂02-Sep-87 1713 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Program Revision Form
C00867 00333 ∂02-Sep-87 2029 ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET re: China
C00869 00334 ∂02-Sep-87 2220 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of August computer charges.
C00873 00335 ∂03-Sep-87 0515 pullen@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting Update
C00881 00336 ∂03-Sep-87 0835 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: prize
C00883 00337 ∂03-Sep-87 0857 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Program Revision Form
C00884 00338 ∂03-Sep-87 1518 SMC Bibel
C00885 00339 ∂03-Sep-87 1554 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Program Revision
C00887 00340 ∂03-Sep-87 1855 RWF fixed point theory
C00889 00341 ∂04-Sep-87 1308 SMC hp 28c
C00890 00342 ∂04-Sep-87 2233 kuo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu Happy Birthday
C00891 00343 ∂05-Sep-87 1201 JSW Special characters
C00894 00344 ∂05-Sep-87 2157 VAL reply to message
C00895 00345 ∂06-Sep-87 1615 JSW SAIL characters on Lisp machine
C00902 00346 ∂07-Sep-87 1237 RPG Plots
C00903 00347 ∂07-Sep-87 1415 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU AI Quals
C00908 00348 ∂07-Sep-87 1633 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
C00910 00349 ∂08-Sep-87 1644 RWF men and women
C00912 00350 ∂08-Sep-87 1802 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Bork nomination
C00915 00351 ∂09-Sep-87 0317 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Did You Get the Message?
C00924 00352 ∂09-Sep-87 1145 JSW Qlisp meeting reminder
C00925 00353 ∂09-Sep-87 1214 trwrb!trwspp!spp2!belz@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Re: Did You Get the Message?
C00928 00354 ∂09-Sep-87 1221 VAL visit to Austin
C00929 00355 ∂09-Sep-87 1259 LES Forwarded Message
C00939 00356 ∂09-Sep-87 1300 LES And this
C00944 00357 ∂09-Sep-87 1303 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU acknowledgement
C00946 00358 ∂10-Sep-87 0915 chomicki@aramis.rutgers.edu ELEPHANT
C00948 00359 ∂10-Sep-87 0953 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU LISP at Stanford
C00950 00360 ∂10-Sep-87 1021 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: LISP at Stanford
C00951 00361 ∂10-Sep-87 1052 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): Re: Your new book]
C00962 00362 ∂10-Sep-87 1331 RPG Phone
C00963 00363 ∂10-Sep-87 1455 LES More PI meeting info
C00967 00364 ∂10-Sep-87 1456 LES PI Meeting Arrangements
C00977 00365 ∂10-Sep-87 1500 LES DARPA Slide
C00979 00366 ∂10-Sep-87 1545 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil URGENT!! Report Needed...
C00986 00367 ∂10-Sep-87 1840 LES DARPA Charts
C00987 00368 ∂10-Sep-87 1923 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET conference
C00998 00369 ∂11-Sep-87 0503 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK new book on LCF
C01002 00370 ∂11-Sep-87 0812 @RELAY.CS.NET:kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Translating Your Lecture
C01007 00371 ∂11-Sep-87 1334 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Benefits
C01009 00372 ∂11-Sep-87 1556 ME break p
C01010 00373 ∂11-Sep-87 2336 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF Report
C01012 00374 ∂12-Sep-87 0058 @RELAY.CS.NET:kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Thank you
C01015 00375 ∂13-Sep-87 1552 LES Project Summary
C01022 00376 ∂13-Sep-87 1801 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>: HITECH passes Turing Test?]
C01025 00377 ∂13-Sep-87 1802 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): HITECH passes Turing Test?]
C01028 00378 ∂13-Sep-87 2025 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Visiting Texas
C01029 00379 ∂14-Sep-87 0228 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Iran - Mossadegh's Overthrow
C01037 00380 ∂14-Sep-87 0338 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Sampler - Kwitny on Iran
C01044 00381 ∂14-Sep-87 0832 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu re: NSF Report
C01046 00382 ∂14-Sep-87 1141 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Committees
C01052 00383 ∂14-Sep-87 1150 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Mossadegh, etc.
C01059 00384 ∂14-Sep-87 1304 AI.MCCARTHY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU assignment
C01060 00385 ∂14-Sep-87 1347 CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU AAS Annual Meeting
C01063 00386 ∂14-Sep-87 1508 LIN A Suggestion on Circumscription
C01066 00387 ∂14-Sep-87 2047 JMC
C01067 00388 ∂15-Sep-87 0719 CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU re: AAS Annual Meeting
C01069 00389 Thanks. Here is what to do.
C01072 00390 ∂17-Sep-87 1328 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU MSCS courses
C01074 00391 ∂17-Sep-87 1536 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: MSCS courses
C01076 00392 ∂18-Sep-87 0701 JMC
C01077 00393 ∂18-Sep-87 0841 VAL re: visit to Austin
C01078 00394 ∂18-Sep-87 1022 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Ershov
C01086 00395 ∂18-Sep-87 1154 VAL re: Senderov interview
C01087 00396 ∂18-Sep-87 1216 VAL reply to message
C01088 00397 ∂18-Sep-87 1745 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Human Rights List - TROFF Format - Part 1
C01121 00398 ∂18-Sep-87 1756 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 2 of 3
C01151 00399 ∂18-Sep-87 1804 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 3 of 3
C01193 00400 ∂18-Sep-87 1819 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 1 of 3
C01236 00401 ∂18-Sep-87 1847 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITTEN OUTPUT - PART 3 of 3
C01293 00402 ∂20-Sep-87 1645 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Lerner Phone Conversation
C01297 00403 ∂20-Sep-87 1647 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
C01337 00404 ∂20-Sep-87 1723 JSW R20.UTEXAS.EDU
C01338 00405 ∂20-Sep-87 1727 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET 1st IWoLES (continued)
C01340 00406 ∂20-Sep-87 1741 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET 1st IWoLES
C01347 00407 ∂20-Sep-87 1756 danny@Think.COM AAAI symposium
C01351 00408 ∂20-Sep-87 2045 BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: mailing list
C01352 00409 ∂21-Sep-87 1124 SMC searle essay
C01353 00410 ∂21-Sep-87 1332 SMC money
C01354 00411 ∂21-Sep-87 1542 SMC messages
C01355 00412 ∂21-Sep-87 2011 Mailer failed mail returned
C01357 00413 ∂22-Sep-87 1728 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
C01360 00414 ∂23-Sep-87 0700 JMC
C01361 00415 ∂23-Sep-87 0918 MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Greetings
C01364 00416 ∂23-Sep-87 1413 MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Greetings
C01366 00417 ∂23-Sep-87 1516 PHY
C01368 00418 ∂23-Sep-87 1902 LES Financial Planning
C01370 00419 ∂23-Sep-87 1915 RWF re: Flaherty on Bork
C01376 00420 ∂23-Sep-87 2325 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET re: 1st IWoLES
C01378 00421 ∂24-Sep-87 0401 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK Research Position
C01382 00422 ∂24-Sep-87 0915 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Why must it be Helms?
C01384 00423 ∂24-Sep-87 1200 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Benefits, etc.
C01388 00424 ∂24-Sep-87 1212 @RELAY.CS.NET:rjb@allegra.att.com Request for AAAI Co-sponsorship
C01394 00425 ∂24-Sep-87 1251 PHY
C01395 00426 ∂24-Sep-87 1625 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU What Languages?
C01396 00427 ∂24-Sep-87 1633 PHY dines bjorner
C01397 00428 ∂25-Sep-87 1028 Arnon.pa@Xerox.COM Re: origins of the term "Abstract Syntax"
C01404 00429 ∂25-Sep-87 1134 Mailer failed mail returned
C01405 00430 ∂25-Sep-87 2334 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Sowell's testimony
C01407 00431 ∂27-Sep-87 2137 gasser%pollux.usc.edu@oberon.USC.EDU Request for AAAI Workshop Support - DAI Workshop.
C01415 00432 ∂28-Sep-87 0900 JMC
C01416 00433 ∂28-Sep-87 1011 JSW RFC on computer mathematics
C01418 00434 ∂28-Sep-87 1240 PHY
C01419 00435 ∂28-Sep-87 1336 @Score.Stanford.EDU:KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU couple of things
C01422 00436 ∂28-Sep-87 1409 PHY
C01423 00437 ∂28-Sep-87 1514 PHY
C01424 00438 ∂28-Sep-87 1514 VAL reply to message
C01425 00439 ∂28-Sep-87 1732 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET conference
C01436 00440 ∂28-Sep-87 2305 VAL Senderov
C01443 00441 ∂29-Sep-87 0807 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
C01445 00442 ∂29-Sep-87 1051 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
C01447 00443 ∂29-Sep-87 1117 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
C01449 00444 ∂29-Sep-87 1644 VAL Ramification
C01452 00445 ∂29-Sep-87 1646 PHY
C01455 00446 ∂29-Sep-87 1845 HOBBS@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM Further Adventures of Computational Linguist Errant
C01457 00447 ∂29-Sep-87 2234 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET re: conference
C01458 00448 ∂30-Sep-87 1150 PHY
C01475 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Jul-87 0128 R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: an MD denounces education as a strategy against AIDS
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 01:27:59 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Jul 87 01:24:33-PDT
From: Roland van Gaalen <R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: an MD denounces education as a strategy against AIDS
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: LYN@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 30 Jun 87 23:29:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12314830539.193.R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
JMC IS QUITE WRONG, I think, in supposing that (for example) Stanford
students already know "the information allegedly being conveyed" by
AIDS education. While I concede that most literate people probably
know by now that the AIDS virus can be transmitted by various "bodily
fluids," I believe that people are entitled to more detailed
information about the amount of risk involved in various sexual
practices. Some are very dangerous (especially anal sex without
condoms), others appear to be relatively safe (oral sex, for example,
in the absence of open wounds), and yet others are completely safe.
(Disclaimer: I am not an expert.) The Reaganites, on the other hand,
would like people to jump to the (incorrect) conclusion that
"illicit" sex causes AIDS, and they feel that detailed AIDS
education, like all other sex education, endangers their so-called
traditional family values.
Judging from the experience with the workshops organized by the
Stanford AIDS Education Project, this kind of information is in heavy
demand (ESPECIALLY among educated people).
ASIDE FROM THAT, the condom campaign aims at making the use of
condoms the norm, so that people who are about to have sex need not
be embarrassed about insisting on their use, and that nobody should
take offense when asked to use one. Furthermore, people need to be
informed about the various kinds of condoms that are on the market,
and HOW TO USE THEM.
--Roland
-------
∂01-Jul-87 0814 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU FAREWELL POTLUCK
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 08:14:32 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Jul 87 08:09:36-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: FAREWELL POTLUCK
To: Gilbertson@Score.Stanford.EDU, BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU, Richardson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Manzi@Score.Stanford.EDU, Winkler@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Napier@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Barsalou@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Woodward@Score.Stanford.EDU, Jimenez@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Tajnai@Score.Stanford.EDU, Hiller@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Macmilk@Score.Stanford.EDU, dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Stager@Score.Stanford.EDU, Jutta@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU, Reges@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Tom@Score.Stanford.EDU, YM@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Alpert@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Damon@Score.Stanford.EDU, Ali@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Perlaki@Score.Stanford.EDU, McCarthy@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Talcott@Score.Stanford.EDU, Les@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: Haunga@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12314904277.13.HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lynn and I are organizing a FAREWELL POTLUCK LUNCH for
Rutie Adler and Kathy Berg. It will be held on Friday,
July 10th on the MJH Lower Level patio. It will
be a salad bar potluck. You can bring anything that
you think that will make a wonderful salad.
Lettuce, onions, tomatoes, olive, sprouts, etc., etc.!!!!
Please RSVP by Wednesday, July 8th and let us know what you will
be bringing to complement a salad!!!!!
If you'd like to contribute to the gifts, both Lynn (MJH040A)
and I will be collecting. My office is MJH240.
Hope you can all make it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you.
-------
-------
∂01-Jul-87 0833 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Inverse Method
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 08:32:56 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Jul 87 08:28:21-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Inverse Method
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 30 Jun 87 23:06:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12314907690.14.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Looks like we're getting under weigh. Mike Genesereth is interested; offered
the use of his Explorers and the MRS environment after I suggested it might
make a good addition to MRS if it proves out. I'm going to talk to him about
it.
Joe Weening also offered to timeshare the Symbolics in MJH360, which I guess is
yours, among him, me and Igor Rivin; but if I can get next to MRS it'll save a
lot of scaffolding.
..Ed
-------
∂01-Jul-87 0954 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Jun-87 08:54-PT.]
Have you sent the check to Dina Bolla yet? I want to give them mine today
personally rather than send it by mail, to speed the things up. If you want,
I can pass them yours too.
∂01-Jul-87 1009 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil QLISP FUNDING
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 10:09:44 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 1 Jul 87 11:27:07-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA20525; Wed, 1 Jul 87 11:27:11 EDT
Date: Wed 1 Jul 87 11:27:07-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: QLISP FUNDING
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, LES@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: wade@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <552151627.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
TO: Principal Investigators in the DARPA Software Design Program.
This is the first community-wide communication concerning technical,
management, and funding-related issues in the DARPA/ISTO Software
Design Research Program. The issues addressed here are primarily
administrative, but the intent is that this mailing list be generally
available to facilitate informal interaction within our community. I
will publish the mailing list in the next few weeks. Certain people
who are not currently supported are included in the list for
information and coordination purposes. Every group that is currently
funded or about to be funded should respond to this message. Thanks,
Bill Scherlis
================================================================
1. We are planning a PI meeting on 15-17 Sep 87 in conjunction with
the Computer Architecture Program. There will be a joint session with
Architecture PIs to discuss parallel software and separate sessions so
we can discuss internal Software Research matters. Details will
follow, but please mark your calendar now.
2. DARPA policy now requires that certain information about all
funded projects be provided EVERY YEAR for the purposes of justifying
yearly increments of funds. PROMPT ACTION ON YOUR PART IS REQUIRED
FOR FUNDING TO CONTINUE. We will use the information you provide to
generate internal documents that generate the next increment of funds.
Responses should be sent to Denise Wade (at WADE@VAX.DARPA.MIL) with a
copy to me (at SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL). If you don't get an
acknowledgement in 24 hours, please give us a call. We must have your
response in one week.
I need information concerning (1) Research accomplishments in the
current fiscal year (FY87: 1 Oct 86 -- 30 Sep 87) and (2) Research
objectives for the forthcoming fiscal year (FY88: 1 Oct 87 -- 30 Sep
88). I am also soliciting for our own internal ISTO purposes some
information concerning publications and component technologies.
If you have more than one arpa order or contract (or task option
invoked), you should respond separately for each.
An example response (for form, not content) is included below. Please
avoid jargon. Please be crisp, technical, and specific. Please be
succinct.
The following six items should be included in your response:
[1] Project title (make it meaningful), Arpa order number, contract
number, and description of project objectives (1-2 sentences).
[2] Objectives for FY88 (2 or 3 bullets of 1-2 sentences).
[3] Accomplishments from FY87 (2 or 3 bullets).
[4] Explanation of why this research should be continued.
[5] (For ISTO use only) Component technologies being produced.
Component technologies produced elsewhere that are being used or are
under consideration for use.
"Component technologies" is a generic phrase meant to include all
portable technologies, including, for example, software subsystems
(e.g., Mach, X windows, CLF components), language and subsystem
definitions (Gist, Refine, E-L, CLOS), abstract data type definitions
(higher order patterns, CLX, decorated abstract syntax trees), new
algorithms, and so on.
[6] A list of major publications in the past year arising from DARPA
sponsored research. Other important publications and milestones can
also be mentioned.
================
I thank Allan Sears for the following Rules of Thumb and for providing
the project example below:
- Try to use active verbs like "developed",
"implemented", etc., to introduce the sentences for
objectives and accomplishments.
- You may deviate as you think necessary for
your research program and your needs. For example,
If you just started the research then only one
accomplishment bullet may be appropriate.
- Make the accomplishments and objectives say
something. If it isn't good enough I will work
with you to make it better. But delays may mean
delays in your incremental funding.
Please acknowledge this message to Denise Wade (address above, phone
(202)694-5800) so we don't call and hound you.
================
GENERAL PROJECT EXAMPLE (not including
component technologies information)
PROJECT TITLE: (a short title to give semantic meaning of the
research)
"Automated Software Development"
ARPA ORDER NUMBER: xxxx
CONTRACT NUMBER: yyyyyyyyyyyy
PROJECT OBJECTIVE: (1-2 sentences)
The objective of this research is to develop automated software tools
to allow both general software development and specific software
generation for expert systems.
OBJECTIVES FOR FY 88: (1-2 sentences for each bullet)
- Integrate formal specifications into the Formalized System
Development (FSD) framework and provide full life-cycle automated
support for program generation and maintenance. Identify and
implement rules that govern software development in this environment.
- Create a top-level knowledge base for expert system generation that
provides a basic structure for further problem domain knowledge
construction. This will allow expert system developers to create new
expert systems by specializing existing knowledge, rather than
constructing everything from scratch each time.
- Demonstrate the effectiveness of the expert system building
framework by actually developing one or more significant expert
systems with the tools developed under this effort.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR FY87: (1-2 sentences for each bullet)
- Developed an initial testbed for specification-based software
development which incorporates an AI operating system, support
software for specification management and implementation, and a
generic user interface.
- Provided representations for several kinds of knowledge needed to
support different classes of explanation. Such knowledge bases
include domain-descriptive knowledge, problem-solving knowledge, and
terminology.
- Designed and implemented a program writer that partially generates
Lisp implementations of expert systems from high-level specifications
of the problem domain.
WHY THIS EFFORT SHOULD BE CONTINUED: (1-3 sentences max)
The need to improve software productivity is critical for DoD. This
work will produce important demonstrations and will produce and
distribute to the community useful tools and environments for software
development.
================================================================
-------
∂01-Jul-87 1028 RA Claudia Mazzetti
Please call Claudia 328 3123.
∂01-Jul-87 1037 glenda@argus.stanford.edu
Received: from ARGUS.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 10:37:23 PDT
Received: by argus.stanford.edu; Wed, 1 Jul 87 10:30:08 PDT
Date: 1 Jul 1987 1030-PDT (Wednesday)
From: Glenda Scarbrough <glenda@argus.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail.Stanford.EDU
Cc:
Subject:
Hi John, by any chance are you in charge of a machine by the name of
"Ibmrtpcl" Glenda
∂01-Jul-87 1210 RA going out
I am going out for lunch, will be back by 1:30.
∂01-Jul-87 1212 glenda@argus.stanford.edu re:
Received: from ARGUS.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 12:12:48 PDT
Received: by argus.stanford.edu; Wed, 1 Jul 87 12:05:30 PDT
Date: 1 Jul 1987 1205-PDT (Wednesday)
From: Glenda Scarbrough <glenda@argus.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: glenda@argus.stanford.edu
Subject: re:
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU> /
01 Jul 87 1124 PDT.
do you by any chance know its ethernet address? If you have a way of
finding out I'd really appreciate it. Glenda
∂01-Jul-87 1252 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: Lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 12:52:24 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Wed, 1 Jul 87 12:51:32 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 1 Jul 87 12:51:02 PDT
Date: 1 Jul 87 12:50 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: re: Lunch
Date: 1 July 1987, 12:49:50 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: re: Lunch
In-Reply-To: JMC AT SAIL.STANFORD.EDU -- 06/30/87 22:52
Looks good to me. Shall we say just after 12 noon at the
faculty club. I will make the reservation.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂01-Jul-87 1444 glenda@argus.stanford.edu re:
Received: from ARGUS.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 14:44:15 PDT
Received: by argus.stanford.edu; Wed, 1 Jul 87 14:36:59 PDT
Date: 1 Jul 1987 1436-PDT (Wednesday)
From: Glenda Scarbrough <glenda@argus.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: glenda@argus.stanford.edu
Subject: re:
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU> /
01 Jul 87 1124 PDT.
John, do you know or can you find out what the ethernet address for
"Ibmrtpcl" is and does it have a mail forwarding address and if so
what? Thanks for your help. Glenda
∂01-Jul-87 1559 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 July 1987
Previous Balance 8.34
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.08
Current Charges 0.30 (coffee, tea and hot chocolate)
4.00 (bicycle lockers)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 12.72
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 4/30/87.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂01-Jul-87 1714 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU subgroup etc
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jul 87 17:14:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 87 17:12:12 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: subgroup etc
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12315003052.89.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Joe Halpern will send off the IBM materials on their granting procedures
for conferences. I've also requested info from the State Bar Associaton
in SF about their subgroup organization procedures (they apparently are
quite similar in function and activity to our's). If the bunch of
attorneys can't organize themselves, then I don't know who can!
CCM
-------
∂02-Jul-87 0800 JMC
marvin
∂02-Jul-87 0855 RA conference call Inference
Thelma from Inference called to ask whether you'd be available for a conference
call at 10:30 this morning. Her number is (213) 417 7997, if you want me I can
call her, just let me know.
∂02-Jul-87 0900 JMC
Alan Snyder 857-8764
∂02-Jul-87 0915 JMC
Jacobson re Hurd
∂02-Jul-87 0950 RA meeting with Gabriel
Jan from Lucid called that Dick cannot make it Friday. There isn't a great
urgency, but can you make it Saturday at noon. Let me know, or call Jan at
her home (408) 749 0692.
∂02-Jul-87 0952 RA Rebecca Lasher
Lasher from Math and CS library would like you to call her, 3-0864.
∂02-Jul-87 1139 RA Hyat Regency bill
I called the hotel and they don't want to give me the amount or send
a copy of the bill to me, they insist on your calling them. Their
number is (212) 883 1234, you should talk to Romy in the accounting
department, her extension is 1134.
∂02-Jul-87 1253 RA Minski
Minski returned your call (617) 734 3363.
∂02-Jul-87 1340 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jul 87 13:40:32 PDT
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1987 16:39 EDT
Message-ID: <MINSKY.12315226511.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-reply-to: Msg of 2 Jul 1987 16:13-EDT from MINSKY
It doesn't always work, though. Leigh Bureau tried it on NCR the other
week and they got Randy Davis instead. Leigh refuses to bargain!
∂02-Jul-87 1452 RA class
I will be leaving for my class shortly.
∂02-Jul-87 2318 ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jul 87 23:18:37 PDT
Date: Thu 2 Jul 87 23:13:53-PDT
From: Tomas G. Rokicki <ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 2 Jul 87 21:02:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12315331038.9.ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Please tell it, at least to me. Thanks! -tom
-------
∂02-Jul-87 2328 ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jul 87 23:28:09 PDT
Date: Thu 2 Jul 87 23:23:26-PDT
From: Tomas G. Rokicki <ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 2 Jul 87 23:24:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12315332777.9.ROKICKI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Of course, I'm sorry. I had forgotten that S.'s claiming that of course
P. didn't know gave P. additional information; I was looking at that
statement only as a constraint on the solution space and not including
it in the knowledge calculations. I beg your pardon. -tom
-------
∂03-Jul-87 0024 K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: Messrs P and S
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jul 87 00:24:06 PDT
Date: Fri 3 Jul 87 00:20:42-PDT
From: Ronald Chrisley <K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Messrs P and S
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 2 Jul 87 18:38:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12315343204.204.K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
I agree. Someone had asked me for the Smith reference, so I let everyone have
it, whether it was accurate or not.
Ron
-------
∂03-Jul-87 1218 CLT
tuesday is july 7
∂03-Jul-87 1755 JK nafeh
Called him up yesterday; will see him next week. Looks like there might
be a match.
∂03-Jul-87 1914 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Lowell's "directions"
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jul 87 19:14:38 PDT
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1987 19:09 PDT
Message-ID: <RDZ.12315548737.BABYL@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jjw@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Cc: RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Lowell's "directions"
Take Vasco road from 580 towards the Lab. Continue on past the lab
until Vasco ends in Tesla; right on Tesla for 3/4 mile. Left on Mines
road (you're now heading south). 3 miles to a fork in the road, take
the right fork for 2-2.5 miles. There is an entrance to Del Valle
park with some small entry fee (like $2). Go left in about 100 feet,
for about half a mile past (over?) the bridge to a big (200 car)
parking lot. There is a stand of oak trees at the end of this, which
is where the fun is.
Joe has a map of the area; perhaps tomorrow we can get together and
read this before leaving. The basic idea is to get to the the south
shore of Del Valle.
Ramin
∂03-Jul-87 2243 RPG Chat
I was not able to call you today. We should talk early next week.
-rpg-
∂04-Jul-87 2149 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu interesting book
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jul 87 21:49:18 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA11796; Sun, 5 Jul 87 00:48:57 EDT
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA06712; Sun, 5 Jul 87 00:55:15 EDT
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 87 00:55:15 EDT
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8707050455.AA06712@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: interesting book
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
John,
I have been reading the recent book `Minimal Rationality,'
by Chris Cherniak (MIT Press, 1986). It seems to make rather cogent
arguments that may bear on the question you asked the audience at
the Kansas wokrshop, as to why people fail to draw certain useful
logical conclusions and whether there is some principle there useful
for AI. Cherniak suggests that this may be inherent in the facts of
real-world limits on reasoning, and gives a pretty good defense of
his views. I think you might enjoy the book.
Cherniak is a philosopher (formerly at Tufts, now at
Maryland) who also has a pretty good background in AI and
biopsychology, which makes him very interesting to talk to (and to
read).
-Don
∂04-Jul-87 2345 Woods.PA@Xerox.COM Re: The REAL Mr. P and Mr. S!
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jul 87 23:45:44 PDT
Received: from Burger.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 JUL 87 17:05:52 PDT
Date: 3 Jul 87 11:13:20 PDT (Friday)
Subject: Re: The REAL Mr. P and Mr. S!
In-reply-to: JMC's message of 01 Jul 87 22:56 PDT
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
cc: DON@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
From: Don Woods <Woods.pa@Xerox.COM>
Message-ID: <870703-170552-108@Xerox>
I don't think I saw it on the PARC bboard. I was still at Stanford at
the time (early '78). Judging from Pratt's comment, the problem had
been around at least since October '77. I suspect I saw a copy that you
were spreading around SAIL.
It appears that Pratt is closer to the source; you might try him. Also,
his message about the significance of the 1-100 restriction made mention
of a file "AI:PRATT;CGOLMA". It's possible that "CGOLMA" has some
significance that escapes me at the moment.
-- Don.
∂05-Jul-87 0900 JMC
Ask Hurd about Henry Singleton of Teledyne.
∂05-Jul-87 1104 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Re: Mr. S and Mr. P
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jul 87 11:04:17 PDT
Received: from sun.Sun.COM by Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-3.2)
id AA11804; Sun, 5 Jul 87 11:00:48 PDT
Received: from coraki.UUCP by sun.Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-4.0)
id AA20831; Sun, 5 Jul 87 11:04:27 PDT
Received: by coraki.uucp (3.2/SMI-1.2)
id AA08386; Sun, 5 Jul 87 09:00:53 PDT
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 87 09:00:53 PDT
From: coraki!pratt@Sun.COM (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8707051600.AA08386@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: DON@sail.stanford.arpa
Subject: Re: Mr. S and Mr. P
In-Reply-To: message of 05 Jul 87 0024 PDT.
<8707050721.AA10737@Sun.COM>
It was going the rounds at the time. I heard it first from Drew
McDermott (at Drew's graduation party), and a bit later from Sam
Winograd. It would be nice to know who made it up -- it is
an outstanding puzzle.
-v
∂05-Jul-87 1623 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU My MSCS Plan
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jul 87 16:23:08 PDT
Date: Sun 5 Jul 87 16:18:15-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: My MSCS Plan
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316041807.18.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Just finished going over it. Here it is, FYI. I've acknowledged the fact that
143A will replace 243 as a requirement this fall.
Ed Brink's MSCS Plan as of 7/5/87
Units: (3) indicates 3 units either not matriculated or not countable.
"MSCS" indicates requirements for that degree; "225pr" is a prereq for
CS225; "b opt" is an option for part b. Extra courses which still count
in the 42 units are shown as, e.g., "(b opt)".
Quarters: "M" is summer; year is calendar year in which quarter starts.
OFRD UN COURSE NAME MSCS QTR TIME/GRADE
(3) CS104 Pascal 85S (A)
(3) CS123 Intro AI 85S (A-)
3 CS223 Fund. of AI core 85M A-
3 CS309A PROLOG/Nat Lang 85A B
(3) CS22 LISP 225pr 85W (A+)
W 3 CS323 Advanced AI a 86S B
AWSM (1) CS500 Seminar 3 86M (P)
AS 3 CS242 Survey Languages core 86A B
A 3 CS257A Logical Basis Pgmg a 86A B+
AS 3 CS261 Data Struct, NP core 86A B
AWSM 1 CS500 Seminar 3 86A P
W 3 CS257B Deductive Systems a 86W B-
86W 3 CS276 Nat Lang Semant b opt 86W A-
86W 3 CS326 Epistemol Probs AI b opt 86W A-
W 3 CS356 Reasong re Knowldg 86W A-
S 3 CS225A AI Pgm Methdgy b opt 87S A
AWS 3 CS328C Cognition b opt 87S I
S 1 CS520 Survey AI Resch 3 87S P
(1) CS005 TeX and LaTeX 87S P
2 CS423 Readings in AI (3) 87S P
1 CS522 Heuristic Pgmg Sem 3 87S P
1 CS525 Causation Sem (3) 87S P
A 3 CS237A Numerical Analysis core 87M MW 10:00-11:50
3 CS399 Special Project 87M (as req)
AW 3 CS240A OS Design core 87A TT 9:30-10:45
W 4 CS143A Compilers core 87W
W 3 CS240B Adv OS Design core 87W TT 2:45-4:00
AS 3 CS212 Instr Set Design core 88S 1:15-2:30
______
49 + 9 + (11) Courses below probably will not be taken:
(3) CS211 Logic Design Syracuse EE362
W (3) CS254 Automata, Lgs & Cmp a Syr SIS 203 (approved)
A 3 CS306 Recursive & Provg (b opt) 87A TT 1:15-2:30
87W 3-4 CS275 Nat Lang Syntax (b opt) 87W ?
AWS 3 CS327ABC Robotics (b opt) Rej
CS329C Topics in AI (b opt) ?
I don't really expect you to do anything with this unless there's something
egregiously wrong with it, which I strongly doubt.
I plan to get together with Mike Genesereth this week and get started on the
LISP code. I'll start even if he isn't available.
..Ed
-------
∂05-Jul-87 1704 CLT Devika Subramanian
Are you supporting her, if so with what?
∂05-Jul-87 1814 RA coming in late tomorrow
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I have a long dentist appointment at 8:15 tomorow. I will be in by 10:00.
Rutie
-----
∂05-Jul-87 1955 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Character sets
Received: from GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jul 87 19:55:19 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Sun, 5 Jul 87 19:54:05 pdt
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 87 19:54:05 pdt
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: air@sail, les@sail, jmc@sail
Cc: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Character sets
Here's something I ran across in Usenet news:
Article 72 of comp.std.internat:
Path: labrea!decwrl!hplabs!sri-unix!rutgers!im4u!ut-sally!seismo!mcvax!enea!sommar
From: sommar@enea.UUCP (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
Subject: ISO-Latin/1
Message-ID: <2064@enea.UUCP>
Date: 4 Jul 87 20:16:43 GMT
Reply-To: sommar@enea.UUCP(Erland Sommarskog)
Followup-To: comp.std.internat
Organization: ENEA DATA Svenska AB, Sweden
Lines: 131
Below follows a draft to ISO-Latin/1 that was posted to this group
a year and a half ago. Does anyone know if this draft has become
a standard or has it been modified?
For their VT200 series DEC uses something they call "DEC multi-
national character set". It is a somewhat incomplete version of
the ISO drat with some differences. Does these differences reflect
changes from the draft or are they just DEC's own invention?
Please send your responses by mail to sommar@enea.se.
======================================================================
The byte value is in the document represented by a notation xx/yy, where
xx is the upper nibble (four bits), and yy is the lower nibble (in decimal!).
The lower part of the table, i.e. positions 02/00 to 07/14 is exactly the
same as ASCII.
The upper part of the table contains the characters we can't live without
in large parts of the world.
Since I do not know how to send pictures in a standardised way (is macpaint
documents OK?), I here include a table from ISO No.1:
10/00 NO-BREAK SPACE
10/01 INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK
10/02 CENT SIGN
10/03 POUND SIGN
10/04 CURRENCY SIGN
10/05 YEN SIGN
10/06 BROKEN BAR
10/07 PARAGRAPH SIGN, SECTION SIGN
10/08 DIAERESIS
10/09 COPYRIGHT SIGN
10/10 FEMININE ORDINAL INDICATOR
10/11 LEFT ANGLE QUOTATION MARK
10/12 NOT SIGN
10/13 SOFT HYPHEN
10/14 REGISTERED TRADE MARK SIGN
10/15 MACRON
11/00 DEGREE SIGN
11/01 PLUS-MINUS SIGN
11/02 SUPERSCRIPT TWO
11/03 SUPERSCRIPT THREE
11/04 ACUTE ACCENT
11/05 SMALL GREEK LETTER MU, MICRO SIGN
11/06 PILCROW SIGN
11/07 MIDDLE DOT
11/08 CEDILLA
11/09 SUPERSCRIPT ONE
11/10 MASCULINE ORDINAL INDICATOR
11/11 RIGHT ANGLE QUOTATION MARK
11/12 VULGAR FRACTION ONE QUARTER
11/13 VULGAR FRACTION ONE HALF
11/14 VULGAR FRACTION THREE QUARTERS
11/15 INVERTED QUESTION MARK
12/00 CAPITAL LETTER A WITH GRAVE ACCENT
12/01 CAPITAL LETTER A WITH ACUTE ACCENT
12/02 CAPITAL LETTER A WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
12/03 CAPITAL LETTER A WITH TILDE
12/04 CAPITAL LETTER A DIAERESIS
12/05 CAPITAL LETTER A WITH RING ABOVE
12/06 CAPITAL DIPHTHONG A WITH E
12/07 CAPITAL LETTER C WITH CEDILLA
12/08 CAPITAL LETTER E WITH GRAVE ACCENT
12/09 CAPITAL LETTER E WITH ACUTE ACCENT
12/10 CAPITAL LETTER E WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
12/11 CAPITAL LETTER E WITH DIAERESIS
12/12 CAPITAL LETTER I WITH GRAVE ACCENT
12/13 CAPITAL LETTER I WITH ACUTE ACCENT
12/14 CAPITAL LETTER I WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
12/15 CAPITAL LETTER I WITH DIAERESIS
13/00 CAPITAL ICELANDIC LETTER ETH
13/01 CAPITAL LETTER N WITH TILDE
13/02 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH GRAVE ACCENT
13/03 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH ACUTE ACCENT
13/04 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
13/05 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH TILDE
13/06 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH DIAERESIS
13/07 (This position shall not be used)
13/08 CAPITAL LETTER O WITH OBLIQUE STROKE
13/09 CAPITAL LETTER U WITH GRAVE ACCENT
13/10 CAPITAL LETTER U WITH ACUTE ACCENT
13/11 CAPITAL LETTER U WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
13/12 CAPITAL LETTER U WITH DIAERESIS
13/13 CAPITAL LETTER Y WITH ACUTE ACCENT
13/14 CAPITAL ICELANDIC LETTER THORN
13/15 SMALL GERMAN LETTER SHARP s
14/00 SMALL LETTER a WITH GRAVE ACCENT
14/01 SMALL LETTER a WITH ACUTE ACCENT
14/02 SMALL LETTER a WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
14/03 SMALL LETTER a WITH TILDE
14/04 SMALL LETTER a WITH DIAERESIS
14/05 SMALL LETTER a WITH RING ABOVE
14/06 SMALL DIPHTHONG a WITH e
14/07 SMALL LETTER c WITH CEDILLA
14/08 SMALL LETTER e WITH GRAVE ACCENT
14/09 SMALL LETTER e WITH ACUTE ACCENT
14/10 SMALL LETTER e WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
14/11 SMALL LETTER e WITH DIAERESIS
14/12 SMALL LETTER i WITH GRAVE ACCENT
14/13 SMALL LETTER i WITH ACUTE ACCENT
14/14 SMALL LETTER i WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
14/15 SMALL LETTER i WITH DIAERESIS
15/00 SMALL ICELANDIC LETTER ETH
15/01 SMALL LETTER n WITH TILDE
15/02 SMALL LETTER o WITH GRAVE ACCENT
15/03 SMALL LETTER o WITH ACUTE ACCENT
15/04 SMALL LETTER o WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
15/05 SMALL LETTER o WITH TILDE
15/06 SMALL LETTER o WITH DIAERESIS
15/07 (This position shall not be used)
15/08 SMALL LETTER o WITH OBLIQUE STROKE
15/09 SMALL LETTER u WITH GRAVE ACCENT
15/10 SMALL LETTER u WITH ACUTE ACCENT
15/11 SMALL LETTER u WITH CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
15/12 SMALL LETTER u WITH DIAERESIS
15/13 SMALL LETTER y WITH ACUTE ACCENT
15/14 SMALL ICELANDIC LETTER THORN
15/15 SMALL LETTER y WITH DIAERESIS
End of table
So, go ahead and start implementing the standard on Unix. I
desperately need it!
-- Dan Sahlin ..!mcvax!enea!ttds!dan
======================================================================
--
Erland Sommarskog
ENEA Data, Stockholm
sommar@enea.UUCP
∂06-Jul-87 0657 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU JPL Issue on Logic & AI
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 06:57:24 PDT
Received: ID <THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Mon 6 Jul 87 09:56:57-EDT
Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 09:56:56-EDT
From: Rich.Thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: JPL Issue on Logic & AI
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Message-ID: <12316201766.24.THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
I'll be at Stanford and then at the AAAI meeting, and if I can
find you at either place would like to talk about the special issue I
was hoping to get out of the Journal of Philosophical Logic on logic and
AI. When we last spoke you were willing to contribute a position paper.
I should have been after you sooner, since it's past the time
I had spoken of. This project got buried because I was swamped with other
things. Nevertheless I wouldn't like to see it lapse, because
I think it would be such a good thing for philosophical logic.
--Rich Thomason
-------
∂06-Jul-87 0852 JJW
∂02-Jul-87 1151 JMC
I have a message to call Tom Burns or to have an associate call him
about a mini-supercomputer at 617 872-8200. Please find out what he
wants and whether it has relevance. Most likely he's just a salesman.
JJW - He's from International Data Corp., who are doing a market survey
of Alliant and Convex users for some new company. Burns wasn't there
when I called back this morning, but I left him my name and number in
case he wants to call back and ask questions.
∂06-Jul-87 1107 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU REMINDER
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 11:07:20 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 11:01:52-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: REMINDER
To: Gilbertson@Score.Stanford.EDU, BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU, Richardson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Gotelli@Score.Stanford.EDU, Winkler@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Napier@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Barsalou@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Woodward@Score.Stanford.EDU, Jimenez@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Tajnai@Score.Stanford.EDU, Hiller@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Macmilk@Score.Stanford.EDU, dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Stager@Score.Stanford.EDU, Mccormick@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU, Reges@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Secretary@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, Tom@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Kolk@Navajo.Stanford.EDU, alpert@Score.Stanford.EDU,
koronakos@Score.Stanford.EDU, ali@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Perlaki@Score.Stanford.EDU, Mccarthy@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Talcott@Score.Stanford.EDU, Les@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316246355.13.HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Just to remind you all that Wednesday, July 8th will be the last
day for collecting contributions for Rutie and Kathy's gifts.
Also, please let Lynn Gotelli and I know of what you are
going to bring. Not very many people have responded, yet.
Thanks.
-------
∂06-Jul-87 1343 RA Re: telegram
[Reply to message recvd: 06 Jul 87 11:03 Pacific Time]
There was no return address on the telegram. I sent it to the address in
your last letter to him.
∂06-Jul-87 1426 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>: Re: approval and funding for conference trip]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 14:26:45 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 14:21:35-PDT
From: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>: Re: approval and funding for conference trip]
To: clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316282714.47.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is Scherlis' reply to my note to him asking about funding and
approval for the Moscow trip. I'll draft a reply. Let me know if
you feel it isn't worth pursuing.
---------------
Return-Path: <scherlis@vax.darpa.mil>
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jul 87 14:13:17-PDT
Posted-Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 17:17:38-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA04648; Mon, 6 Jul 87 17:17:46 EDT
Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 17:17:38-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Re: approval and funding for conference trip
To: SHANKAR@score.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <552604658.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
In-Reply-To: <12312850828.34.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Shankar --
It will take considerable work to justify a trip to Moscow.
Could you provide me with additional information concerning the paper,
the conference, and the reason why this trip should be funded. In
particular, we need to know what will be the direct benefit to the project
of the proposed trip.
Bill
-------
-------
∂06-Jul-87 1441 RA leaving
I will leave at 3:00 for my class.
∂06-Jul-87 1553 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method and KLAUS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 15:53:17 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Jul 87 15:48:15-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Inverse Method and KLAUS
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: VAL@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316298491.24.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Mark Stickel at SRI offers KLAUS as a slightly more appropriate vehicle than
MRS. Do you know it well enough to compare it with MRS? Mark doesn't know MRS
well enough. I tend to go with what I already know, i.e., MRS. Apparently
KLAUS is documented no better than MRS, i.e. essentially not.
..Ed
-------
∂06-Jul-87 1709 RA not here after 5:00
I will not stay after 5:00 because of a bad toothache (that's what you get
when you go to the dentist)
∂06-Jul-87 1715 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@ai Critique delay
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 17:15:12 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa13188; 6 Jul 87 19:37 EDT
Received: from utterly.ai.toronto.edu by ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA21927; Mon, 6 Jul 87 16:49:03 EDT
Received: from ai by utterly.ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA26244; Mon, 6 Jul 87 16:49:30 EDT
Message-Id: <8707062049.AA26244@utterly.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: 06 Jul 87 16:49:21 EDT (Mon)
From: Hector Levesque <hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
To: james@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU, bobrow@XEROX.COM, stefik@XEROX.COM,
kabowen@amax.npac.syr.edu, rjb%allegra.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
ec%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, dekleer.pa@XEROX.COM,
jon.doyle@C.CS.CMU.EDU, forbus@P.CS.UIUC.EDU, phayes@KL.SRI.COM,
hayes@SPAR-20.ARPA, hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, hinton@C.CS.CMU.EDU,
hobbs@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM, israel@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, bmoore@STRIPE.SRI.COM,
rcm%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.CS.UCL.AC.UK,
nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, pentland@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
watdaisy!dlpoole%watmath.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, stan@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
stan%humus.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu,
alberta!lksc%ubc-vision.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET, briansmith@XEROX.COM,
stickel@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM, tyson@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
waldinger@KL.SRI.COM, tw@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, wwoods@BBN.COM,
woods@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
Cc: mcdermott-drew@YALE.ARPA
Subject: Critique delay
The publisher of Computational Intelligence tells me that because of troubles
with their printers, publication of the McDermott critique is delayed. This
means, darn it all, that we will not have an issue ready for IJCAI after all.
Hector
To: Bobrow, Brachman, deKleer, Hayes, Hewitt, Hobbs, Israel, Nilsson,
McDermott, Pentland, Schubert, Smith, Woods
I'm not yet sure when I'll be able to send out galleys (first week of
August?), but I'll keep you posted. Please tell when during August
not including IJCAI you will not be available for proofreading.
∂06-Jul-87 1715 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU history of the department
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 17:15:19 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 87 17:13:27 PDT
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: history of the department
To: golub%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
floyd%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, dek@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: nilsson%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12316314000.68.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Friends,
Josh Lederberg is doing a "history of science" article concerning the DENDRAL
Project and wants to include therein some history of the Stanford Computer
Science Department. Has anyone written up a history of computers and
computer science at Stanford? I mean, starting (say) with Herriott and the
small Burroughs machine in Encina through the growth period of B5000 and
7090, and the growth of faculty (Forsythe, McCarthy, Golub) leading eventually
to the formation of the CSD? Lederberg asked if such a document exists.
Does anyone have anything they wrote for themselves that summarizes this history?
Ed
-------
∂06-Jul-87 1751 RWF re: history of the department
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
golub%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
floyd%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
DEK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: nilsson%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from JMC sent 06 Jul 87 1744 PDT.]
Check Herriot's article on the IBM 650 in the special issue of Annals of the History
of Computing, 8,1 pg. 59.
∂06-Jul-87 2006 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talking about AI
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 20:05:57 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1987 20:00 PDT
Message-ID: <RDZ.12316344488.BABYL@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Talking about AI
I enjoyed the talk we had about AI on the way to Lowell's party; we
should manage to finish that conversation sometime. I really would
rather work on AI issues than, say, search problems. There's no
question that AI is the most inherently interesting problem around.
But I have had great difficulty convincing myself that mainstream AI
is really attacking the right questions.
Ramin
∂06-Jul-87 2037 @gort.cs.buffalo.edu:kumard@cs.buffalo.edu The Frame problem
Received: from ARGUS.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 20:37:25 PDT
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by argus.stanford.edu with TCP; Mon, 6 Jul 87 20:37:06 PDT
Received: from gort.cs.buffalo.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa14863;
6 Jul 87 23:34 EDT
Return-Path: <kumard@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Received: by gort.cs.Buffalo.EDU (5.51/4.7)
id AA02090; Mon, 6 Jul 87 23:31:00 EDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 87 23:31:00 EDT
From: Deepak Kumar <kumard%cs.buffalo.edu@relay.cs.net>
Message-Id: <8707070331.AA02090@gort.cs.Buffalo.EDU>
To: jmc%su-ai.stanford.edu@relay.cs.net
Subject: The Frame problem
Dear Prof. McCarthy,
I recently acquired a copy of the Proceedings of the Workshop
on The Frame Problem in AI and was disappointed to see that they
failed to print your paper (It only has an abstract of your talk).
I am currently in the process of preparing for my Primary Area
Exam where I have decided to give a presentation on the Current
Status of the Frame Problem.
I would appreciate it very much if you could send me a copy
of that paper/talk. My address:
Deepak Kumar
Department of Computer Science
226 Bell Hall
SUNY @ Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260.
e-mail: kumard@cs.buffalo.edu
Thank you.
Deepak.
P.S. I am a student volunteer at AAAI87 working at the
Pre-registration (u-z) as an alternative to US Mail.
∂06-Jul-87 2048 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU talk
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 20:48:30 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1987 20:43 PDT
Message-ID: <RDZ.12316352236.BABYL@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: talk
In-reply-to: Msg of 6 Jul 1987 20:36-PDT from John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
OK, I'll give you a call a little after 9:30.
Ramin
∂06-Jul-87 2151 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jul 87 21:51:17 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 87 21:49:32 PDT
From: Andrew Sweer <SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Mr. P. and Mr. S.
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu, 2 Jul 87 21:02:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12316364259.34.SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Hello,
Your last message on this subject said:
Excluding 1 and 100 and letting Mr. S say "I knew you didn't know" leaves
exactly one solution. Should I tell it?
I'm not asking you to tell it, but I'm having a problem in that I found
3 solutions, and I can't eliminate 2 of them to get to 1. The 3 I found are
2 and 6, 72 and 92, and 72 and 98. In each case the sum can be broken into
2 primes, which would not allow Mr. S to say "I knew you didn't know".
Am I missing something?
Andy
-------
∂07-Jul-87 0139 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:SOLVBERG@NORUNIT.BITNET IFIP working conference in Canton July 4-8, 1988
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jul 87 01:39:35 PDT
Received: from NORUNIT.BITNET by wiscvm.wisc.edu ; Tue, 07 Jul 87 03:37:50 CDT
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 87 09:52:56 ECT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.EDU
From: SOLVBERG%NORUNIT.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu
Subject: IFIP working conference in Canton July 4-8, 1988
Dear prof. McCarthy,
John Sowa has informed me of that you have accepted our
invitation to speak at the upcoming IFIP working conference in
Canton. We intend to arrange a high quality scientific event to the
benefit of both out Chinese colleagues and ourselves. Your presence
will contribute substantially to this end. Thank you very much !
The program Committee chairmen, prof.s Meersman and Kung, will
be writing to you very shortly about the arrangement.
I am contacting you now because of arranging your visit to
Beijing. I have been in contact with prof. Tang at the Academia
Sinica's Institute of Software. He will have several visitors in
connection with the conference. He prefers to have visitors one at a
time. He suggests that you visit him the week before the conference.
John Sowa is scheduled to go to Beijing after the conference. The
two of you might work it out among yourselves, if any of you would
like to switch places in prof. Tang's visitor's queue. I shall also
inform you of that there will be arranged a post conference tour to
Kweilin, which is reported to have the most Chinese of Chinese
sceneries.
Please inform me of if the general outline of this arrangement is
ok. I suggest that you get in contact with Sowa and Tang directly,
to work out the finer details of you visit.
Yours sincerely
Arne Solvberg
(General chairman of the Canton-conference)
Copy to: Sowa, Tang
∂07-Jul-87 0837 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU book on hold
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jul 87 08:36:58 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Jul 87 08:21:06-PDT
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: book on hold
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316479234.22.LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Machine learning: a guide to current research q325.m318 1986
is being held for you at the Math/CS Library through 7/l4/87.
-------
∂07-Jul-87 0846 ALS checker champion
Checker champion.
The last I heard it was Dr. Marian Tinsley (sp?) although I have not
followed this up for several years, so it could well be someone else by
now.
∂07-Jul-87 0900 JMC
mirror and lease
∂07-Jul-87 1211 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch; will be back by 1:15.
∂07-Jul-87 1223 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU friday
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jul 87 12:23:34 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Jul 87 12:03:33-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: friday
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12316519728.27.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Would you like to lunch together on Friday? My friend Tom Dean might be
in town then, in which case I'll ask him to come along too.
Yoav
-------
∂07-Jul-87 1452 RA Ed Tenner
Tenner from Princeton University Press is visiting SU and would like to
see you re a book you are writing. He will call later, and can be
reached at Hyyat Ricky's 493 8000, room 2509.
∂07-Jul-87 1454 RA leaving
I am leaving for class now.
∂08-Jul-87 0049 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:SOLVBERG@NORUNIT.BITNET IFIP working conference, visit to Beijing
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 00:48:58 PDT
Received: from NORUNIT.BITNET by wiscvm.wisc.edu ; Wed, 08 Jul 87 02:47:09 CDT
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 87 08:51:37 ECT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.EDU
From: SOLVBERG%NORUNIT.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu
Subject: IFIP working conference, visit to Beijing
I will relay your constraint to prof. Tang.
Arne.
∂08-Jul-87 0951 RA Hurd
Hurd called he wanted me to let you know that he is still looking for
Dr. Jacobson.
∂08-Jul-87 1021 RA Sheila Starr
Starr called re panel. Her tel. 326 2222
∂08-Jul-87 1106 RA Col. Everett
Everett, Exec. Dir. of Scientific and Engin. coalition for SDI called
to tell you about a meeting which will be held in the Naval Postgraduate
Academy in Monterey, CA, August 4-6. There will be an open discussion
about exploiting technologies for space. It is organized by the Amer. Aeronautics
and Astronautics. If you are interested in participating as a speaker or
participant call Ms. Mireille Gerard (212) 408 9771.
∂08-Jul-87 1206 SOTOS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 12:06:44 PDT
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 87 12:04:15 PDT
From: John Sotos <SOTOS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed, 8 Jul 87 11:59:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12316781999.67.SOTOS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Thank you!
John Sotos
-------
∂08-Jul-87 1234 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: America is a violent country?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 12:34:38 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Jul 87 12:29:25-PDT
From: Anil R. Gangolli <GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: America is a violent country?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 8 Jul 87 02:52:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12316786582.10.GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Journalists have not ignored the problem of violent crime amongst
the young black urban male population. Both TIME and Newsweek have
run cover stories on the subject sometime in the last year or so. I
remember reading much of TIME's article.
--anil.
-------
∂08-Jul-87 1522 VAL
Alex is back, we're in my office.
∂08-Jul-87 1523 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil REMINDER!!
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 15:23:03 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 8 Jul 87 18:21:45-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA09440; Wed, 8 Jul 87 18:21:57 EDT
Date: Wed 8 Jul 87 18:21:45-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: REMINDER!!
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, les@sail.stanford.edu, zm@sail.stanford.edu,
clt@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <552781305.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Incremental Funding data is needed ASAP!!
-------
∂08-Jul-87 1812 rms%lemon.Berkeley.EDU@jade.berkeley.edu Consulting fee
Received: from JADE.Berkeley.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 18:12:17 PDT
Received: from tart8.berkeley.edu
by jade.berkeley.edu (5.54 (CFC 4.22.3)/1.16.15)
id AA20781; Wed, 8 Jul 87 18:11:54 PDT
Received: by tart8.berkeley.edu (3.2/SMI-3.0DEV3.7)
id AA04258; Wed, 8 Jul 87 18:11:56 PDT
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 87 18:11:56 PDT
From: rms%lemon.Berkeley.EDU@jade.berkeley.edu
Message-Id: <8707090111.AA04258@tart8.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Consulting fee
Reply-To: rms@prep.ai.mit.edu
I sent you an invoice for the $500 about a month ago.
I have not yet received the money. Has it been sent yet?
I will be in Berkeley for the duration of the summer.
My phone number here is 540-0725. My address here is
2408 Atherton St
Berkeley CA 94704.
(I gave another address in care of someone at UCB on the invoice.
That address is ok too.)
∂08-Jul-87 2227 PAO@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Ollie
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jul 87 22:27:47 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Jul 87 22:32:55-PDT
From: Yi-Ching Pao <PAO@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Ollie
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 8 Jul 87 20:32:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12316896445.20.PAO@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
John
Good judgment !
Yi-Ching
-------
∂09-Jul-87 0528 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV nmr-workshop
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 05:28:46 PDT
Received: from unido.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA00988; Thu, 9 Jul 87 08:28:30 EDT
Received: by unido.uucp with uucp;
Wed, 8 Jul 87 10:01:18 +0100
From: "Michael Reinfrank" <unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 87 10:00:22 -0100
Message-Id: <8707080900.AA04933@ztivax.uucp>
Received: by ztivax.uucp; Wed, 8 Jul 87 10:00:22 -0100
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: nmr-workshop
Cc: unido!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV
Dear John:
There's two news about the NMR-Workshop in June '88:
- I've got substantial additional funding from the EEC (approx. 15 K)
- The organizing committee now is complete (Matt Ginsberg, Johan de Kleer,
Erik Sandewall, and I)
See you at IJCAI.
Best regards,
Michael Reinfrank
∂09-Jul-87 0818 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Time Problems
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 08:18:48 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 08:16:01-PDT
From: Richmond Thomason <THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Time Problems
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12317002597.12.THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
John,
The meetings here (one of which --arghh-- I am supposed to run)
aren't leaving any time gaps. If I can't get loose to look for you here,
I'll try to get hold of you at AAAI.
--Rich
-------
∂09-Jul-87 0903 COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Ollie
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 09:03:54 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 09:01:08-PDT
From: Rich Cower <COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Ollie
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 8 Jul 87 18:27:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317010808.31.COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
I hope that is what happens, North is incredibly effective on TV.
rich
-------
∂09-Jul-87 0933 RA Jeff Broughton, Livermore
Chris Ghinazzi from Broughton office called to set another meeting date (instead
of tomorrow). She would like you to call her: 422 7892.
∂09-Jul-87 1007 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: liberal reporters?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 10:07:25 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 10:02:11-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: liberal reporters?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: isaacs@Psych.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 9 Jul 87 00:21:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317021924.14.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Surely the belief that the US is responsible for the poverty of
underdeveloped countries is indicative of a conservative attitude, no?
If the New Deal liberal Democrats didn't keep farm prices artificially
high with their subsidies, the poverty-stricken countries would be
able to afford all the excess grain that we grow.
joe
-------
∂09-Jul-87 1012 CLT Qlisp darpa report
If you could send me 3 sentences on the topic
[4] Why the work should be continued:
it would be an enormous help
∂09-Jul-87 1246 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Time Problems
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 12:46:13 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 12:43:32-PDT
From: Richmond Thomason <THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Time Problems
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 9 Jul 87 10:46:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317051296.31.THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Tomorrow - Sunday is when the meeting I'm supposed to be in charge
of will be running, but I'll see if I can find a gap somewhere. Could
you let me have some phone nos? I'll call if there's an opportunity.
--Rich
-------
∂09-Jul-87 1334 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: lunch tomorrow
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 13:34:16 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 13:29:44-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: lunch tomorrow
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 9 Jul 87 10:29:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317059705.18.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Sure. Faculty club? Any time which will get me back to my office by 1:25
is fine.
Yoav
-------
∂09-Jul-87 1348 COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Scribe, Tex and Latex usage
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 13:48:43 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 13:30:54-PDT
From: Rich Cower <COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Scribe, Tex and Latex usage
To: "Class 2": ;
cc: cower@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12317059919.19.COWER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
We've put in place the code to stop class 2 users from using Scribe,
Tex and LaTex when the system load is greater than 3. System load
data indicated that almost anytime outside the prime daytime window
you should be able to run these programs.
Comments, questions, etc. to me.
thanks...Rich
-------
∂09-Jul-87 1400 RA Jerry, PA Glass
Jerry called to let you know that the price for the glass is $133. His tel.
321 5510.
∂09-Jul-87 1454 RA leaving
I am leaving for my class now.
∂09-Jul-87 1505 HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU reminder
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jul 87 15:05:04 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Jul 87 14:57:34-PDT
From: Ana Haunga <HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: reminder
To: Gilbertson@Score.Stanford.EDU, BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU, Richardson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Winkler@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Napier@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Barsalou@Score.Stanford.EDU, Woodward@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Jimenez@Score.Stanford.EDU, Tajnai@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Hiller@Score.Stanford.EDU, Macmilk@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU, Stager@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Jutta@Score.Stanford.EDU, Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Reges@Score.Stanford.EDU, Tom@Score.Stanford.EDU, Kolk@Navajo.Stanford.EDU,
Alpert@Score.Stanford.EDU, Daemon@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Ali@Score.Stanford.EDU, Perlaki@Score.Stanford.EDU,
McCarthy@Score.Stanford.EDU, Talcott@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Les@Score.Stanford.EDU, Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Nevena@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, Ariadne@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Gotelli@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12317075697.14.HAUNGA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
PARTY! PARTY! Don't forget our potluck tomorrow at noon time at
the facilities patio. see you all there!!!
-------
∂09-Jul-87 2000 JMC
perlis
∂09-Jul-87 2129 CLT qlet
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
The Lucid contingent proposes 2pm Tuesday July 21st for a Qlisp meeting at
Stanford to demonstrate (qlet t ...)
Any conflicts?
∂10-Jul-87 0800 JMC
Ask Lowell about RAMs.
∂10-Jul-87 0855 CLT Address
507 Honeycomb Ridge
Austin, TX 78746
∂10-Jul-87 0900 JMC
snyder
∂10-Jul-87 1030 CLT Qlisp demo
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: 2pm
Date: Tuesday July 21st
Place: Stanford (precise place tba)
Topic: Demonstration of (qlet t ...)
Ron will talk about how to run Qlisp on the Alliant,
Dick will demo some simple functions (fibonacci, etc).
∂10-Jul-87 1035 CLT qlisp
The incremental funding data is in qinc.e87[1,clt]
if you want to look at it. I will send it by noon.
∂10-Jul-87 1132 RA lunch with Shoham
He will come by your office around noon.
∂10-Jul-87 1451 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Mr. P & Mr. S
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jul 87 14:51:52 PDT
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 87 14:49:57 PDT
From: Andrew Sweer <SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Mr. P & Mr. S
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: Sweer@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, Charnley.PA%XEROX.COM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12317336453.36.SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Excluding 1 and 100 and letting Mr. S say "I knew you didn't know"
leaves exactly one solution. Should I tell it?
Hello again,
I tried answering this problem in an earlier message, but was off
base, as you noted. Meantime, I passed the problem on to a friend who came up
with a solution which I will remail to you following this message.
Andy
-------
∂10-Jul-87 1455 RA leaving
I am leaving for my class; is there is anything you'd like me to do while you
are gone?
∂10-Jul-87 1500 JMC
snyder
∂10-Jul-87 1500 SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Modified P and S
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jul 87 14:53:00 PDT
Return-Path: <Charnley.pa@Xerox.COM>
Received: from Xerox.COM by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue, 7 Jul 87 17:10:44 PDT
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 07 JUL 87 16:03:05 PDT
Date: 7 Jul 87 16:02:20 PDT (Tuesday)
From: Charnley.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Modified P and S
To: Sweer@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
cc: Charnley.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <870707-160305-1353@Xerox>
ReSent-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 87 14:51:13 PDT
ReSent-From: Andrew Sweer <SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
ReSent-Message-ID: <12317336685.36.SWEER@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Andy,
Well, I have found a unique solution to the modified P and S problem.
As a disclaimer, no computers were used for the derivation or proof
{most I figured out at Zot's at noon today.} The actual solution is at
the end of a long boring proof, so look for a while to get the flavor,
and skip the ending if you want to figure it out yourself.
don
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
2 numbers {call them X and Y} are chosen.
the two numbers are each greater than 1 and less than 100.
S is given their sum: (X + Y)
P is given their product: (X * Y)
P and S are perfect reasoners.
P and S make the following statements:
P.1: I don't know what the two numbers are.
S.1a: I knew you would say that.
S.1b: I don't know what the two numbers are.
P.2: I do know what the two numbers are.
S.2: I do know what the two numbers are.
Please excuse the briefness of some of the arguments, some are supposed
to be relatively obvious, and not stated in a rigorous fashion.
To facilitate things a little, I will use four lemmas.
L1: The sum is less than 55.
Suppose the sum is SUM and SUM > 54.
(54 < SUM < 152)
then if the numbers are 53 and (SUM - 53)
then, P could not have made statement P.1
(99 < SUM < 197)
or if the numbers are 97 and (SUM - 97)
then, P could not have made statement P.1
(SUM = 197)
or if the numbers are 98 and 99
then, P could not have made statement P.1
(SUM = 198)
or if the numbers are 99 and 99
then, P could not have made statement P.1
the above includes all sums greater than 54, so all such sums could
not be part of a solution.
!end proof of L1.
L2: The sum is odd.
Any even sum within our range, is the sum of two primes. Thus, the
statement S.1a could not be made for any even sum.
!end proof of L2.
L3: For P a prime, the sum is not of the form 3 * P, for P > 10.
The sum 3 * P, allows a pair, (X = P, Y = 2 * P), to have a unique
product {2 * P * P}, and would disallow S.1a.
!end proof of L3.
L4: For P a prime, the sum is not of the form P + 2. Because (X =
P, Y = 2) would have a unique product.
!end proof of L4.
Theorem 1:
The sum must be one of the following:
11, 17, 23, 27, 29, 35, 37, 41, 47, 53
all other numbers were ruled out by L1 - L4, or small number
considerations, not demonstrated here for brevity.
Theorem 2:
Any of the sums given in theorem 1 is valid with regard to
statements P.1, S.1a and S.1b.
All sums given in Theorem 1, must be the sum of an even number {2 *
E} and an odd number {O}. E and O are not equal, because that would
violate L3. E is not 1, because that would violate L4. So, the number
pair [(2 * O), E] is a possibility to P. Thus for all pairs which sum
to the numbers given in theorem 1, their products have at least two ways
to be factored. -- [2*E,O] and [E,2*O].
Summarizing to this point, from P.1, S.1a, and S.1b, we can deduce that
the sum is one mentioned in Theorem 1.
For the S.2 statement to be true, it must be the case that for the given
sum, only one number pair has a product, exactly one of whose
{product's} possible factorings have only one sum listed in theorem 1.
For if more than one pair had a product . . . then, S.2 could not be
true.
So, grungy details follow:
Suppose the SUM is 53.
[16, 37;53] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[6, 47;53] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
53 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 47.
[16, 31;47] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[4, 43;47] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
47 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 41.
[4, 37;41] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[8, 33;41] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
41 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 37.
[8, 29;37] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[6, 31;37] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
37 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 35.
[16, 19;35] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[4, 31;35] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
35 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 29.
[16, 13;29] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[2, 27;29] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
29 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 27.
[16, 11;27] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[8, 19;27] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
27 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 23.
[16, 7;23] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[4, 19;23] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
23 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 11.
[8, 3;11] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
[4, 7;11] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
11 doesnt satisfy S.2.
Suppose the SUM is 17.
[4, 13;17] -- satisfies P.1, S.1a, S.1b. P.2
and
[2, 15;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [5, 6;11]
[6, 11;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [2, 33;35]
[8, 9;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [3, 24;27]
[10, 7;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [2, 35;37]
[12, 5;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [3, 20;23]
[14, 3;17] -- fails P.2 because could be [2, 21;23]
thus 4 and 13 are a unique solution to the problem as stated.
don
∂10-Jul-87 1513 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Task 13, ARPA Umbrella
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jul 87 15:13:52 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Jul 87 15:09:05-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Task 13, ARPA Umbrella
To: CLT@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, LES@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: Bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU, BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12317339936.27.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We have your new Task 13 funds:
Account No. 2-DMA786
Fund No. 187X075
Funding Period 6/26/87 - 6/26/88
Funding in the amount of $85,000 has been received for the period ending
9/30/87. The total amount of the task is $241,000.
Betty
-------
∂10-Jul-87 1802 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU Re: Liberalism of journalists
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jul 87 18:01:07 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Jul 87 17:57:22-PDT
From: ERIK MCDERMOTT <M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Liberalism of journalists
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 10 Jul 87 17:14:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317370570.105.M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
It would be interesting to compare the percentage of liberal "elite" journalists
with the percentage of liberal journalists-in-training-- ie to get some idea
of the evolution or lack thereof of journalist's political views. Does the
Public Opinion article address this?
-------
∂11-Jul-87 1203 norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@Berkeley.EDU AAAI support for workshops?
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jul 87 12:02:55 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.58/1.26)
id AA00106; Sat, 11 Jul 87 12:03:43 PDT
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 87 12:03:43 PDT
From: norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Peter Norvig)
Message-Id: <8707111903.AA00106@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: AAAI support for workshops?
Cc: +unix-ws@cogsci.berkeley.edu
I remember reading somewhere that AAAI was interested in sponsoring
or co-sponsoring relevant workshops/conferences, and that you were
involved with this program. I, along with Bob Wilensky and Wolfgang
Wahlster, am organizing a workshop for researchers doing work on
automated UNIX Consultation systems. While this may seem a limited
area, it turns out there are about twenty groups working in this
domain. Thus, we feel there is a significant chance for sharing
of tools and experience, particularly in the area of knowledge
representation techniques.
We have gotten enthusiastic response from invited participants,
and have received some funding from the International Computer
Science Institute in Berkeley, but are seeking more funds.
Could you tell me how to formally apply for support?
Thank you,
- Peter Norvig
∂11-Jul-87 1731 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU martial law
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jul 87 17:31:13 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Jul 87 17:27:22-PDT
From: ERIK MCDERMOTT <M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: martial law
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12317627254.110.M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Sure, martial law might be appropriate if the US were under attack. What
is totally inappropriate about the plan that North apparently worked on
is that it involved turning the nation's guns against the american people
in cases of mass unrest.
-------
∂11-Jul-87 1739 M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU re: martial law
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jul 87 17:39:15 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Jul 87 17:35:28-PDT
From: ERIK MCDERMOTT <M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: martial law
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Jul 87 17:34:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317628727.110.M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
I'll try to find some details/quotes/refs.
-------
∂11-Jul-87 2351 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Preliminary inventory of free countries in the UN
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jul 87 23:51:32 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Jul 87 23:56:39-PDT
From: Lyn Bowman <LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Preliminary inventory of free countries in the UN
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Jul 87 21:47:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317698122.11.LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Your nomination of Israel, Turkey, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea
has been noted.
I rule your nomination of South Korea to be unqualified, since its
government at present is not elective.
I think the others are deficient with respect to civil liberties, but
I'll forward them for consideration by the bboard community.
-------
∂12-Jul-87 0349 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Israel's qualifications as a free country
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jul 87 03:49:33 PDT
Date: Sun 12 Jul 87 03:54:33-PDT
From: Lyn Bowman <LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Israel's qualifications as a free country
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 12 Jul 87 01:15:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12317741429.11.LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Untidy, but close enough for a country in a war zone. After all, we
forgive Ollie his security system, don't we.
-------
∂12-Jul-87 0516 HEWITT@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU quote for today
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jul 87 05:16:28 PDT
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1987 08:16 EDT
Message-ID: <HEWITT.12317756338.BABYL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: HEWITT@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: quote for today
In-reply-to: Msg of 10 Jul 1987 14:54-EDT from John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
John,
That's pretty good. What other artifacts do you suppose also fall in
the same category?
Cheers,
Carl
∂12-Jul-87 0806 THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Gaps
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jul 87 08:06:00 PDT
Date: Sun 12 Jul 87 08:05:34-PDT
From: Richmond Thomason <THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gaps
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12317787126.12.THOMASON@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
There was only one short one during this meeting, and I couldn't get you
then. I'll see if I can fight through crowds to you at AAAI, and failing
that will resort to the phone.
--Rich
-------
∂12-Jul-87 1321 @Score.Stanford.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU proposal
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jul 87 13:21:48 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Sun 12 Jul 87 13:16:29-PDT
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1987 16:05 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12317841719.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: shankar@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
cc: JMC@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: proposal
I just read the proposal you sent me concerning "Mechanical
Theorem Proving, Program Verification and Evironments for Interactive
Proof Checking. Overall, I like the proposal a lot. My main comment
concerns the goal of self-verification: "To implement a reflection
mechanism which allows us to formalize the proof checker ...
in the logic itself and to employ the metatheorems thus proved
to extend the proof checker with derived inference rules." You
propose writing a 1500 line kernel system which will verify itself
via the reflection principle and then be used to verify extensions.
I think that self-verification is a bad idea for the following reasons:
1) Given a goal of self-verification one may be tempted to
write an impovershed kernel system --- 1500 lines of code is
probably too small to provide a powerful reasoning environment.
One should feel free to write a larger, more powerful kernel
without worrying about self-verification.
2) Self-verification is not a good benchmark problem. To make
meaningful progress in automated reasoning I think we need meaningful
ways of measning the performance of verification systems. I think
foundational verification of well known theorems provides the best
test at this time. Ramsey's theorem and Landau's Grundlagen are a
good start. Well known theorems provide a more objective way of meansuring
a systems's performance than does self-verification.
3) There is already too much hype about "meta". The important point
is that one can formlize computation and verify programs. (One could
use the system, which is written in LISP, to verify C programs.)
Furthermore, by running verified programs the system can "prove" simple
facts such as 346+237=583 or "all 1200 basic planar graphs are
four-colorable". I think the use of verified programs should be
treated as just that --- the use of verified programs; this does not
necessarily have anything to do with "reflection" or "metamathematics"
or self verification.
The machine verification community needs some good PR; we need to
do something that other people in computer science can understand
and find significant. The machine verification of well known results
constitute accomplishments of this kind. I think the proposal
needs mode concrete goals of this type, e.g. the foundational
verification of the compactness theorem for general first order logic
along with the verification of straightforward applications such
as the existence of non-standard models of the first order theory
of arithmetic. Bledsoe's list of challenge problems would be a
good place to get problems that the community as a whole (and
people outside the community) would find interesting.
Of the eleven goals listed on pages 13 and 14, the only concrete
goal is self-verification. I recomend giving new concrete goals
and directing the research toward accomplishing them. I think the
community as a whole should strive for systems that can foundationally
verify really deep theorems such as the independence of the continuum
hypothesis.
David McAllester
∂13-Jul-87 0202 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab transcript of your lecture
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jul 87 02:02:27 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Mon, 13 Jul 87 01:59:45 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Mon 13 Jul 87 12:03:36
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Mon, 13 Jul 87 12:04:41 jst
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 87 12:04:41 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8707130304.AA04390@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
Subject: transcript of your lecture
How is the transcritp of your lecture at Tohoku University going? Mr.
Wakamatsu of Iwanami is wishing to have the transcript appear in the
November issue of Kagaku, and, he says, for that it would be nice
if you could finish it by the end of July and send it back to me.
I am sure that you are very busy, but the publisher will be happy if you
could spare some time for it.
** masahiko **
∂13-Jul-87 1217 karen@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu textbooks
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jul 87 12:17:50 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA07476; Mon, 13 Jul 87 14:17:41 CDT
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 87 14:17:34 CDT
From: karen@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Karen Shaffer)
Posted-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 87 14:17:34 CDT
Message-Id: <8707131917.AA20646@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA20646; Mon, 13 Jul 87 14:17:34 CDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: textbooks
Hi, I'm Karen, the CS dept textbook person.
Our records indicate that you will be teaching CS 395T this fall semester.
I need to know what text you shall be using in that class. I need the
author, title, publisher & isbn.
Thank you for your time in this matter.
Karen
∂13-Jul-87 1507 JMC
10.0.0.11 for phon
∂13-Jul-87 1958 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Turkey
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jul 87 19:58:42 PDT
Date: Mon 13 Jul 87 20:03:48-PDT
From: Lyn Bowman <LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Turkey
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: ali@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12318180019.9.LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
I have received the following challenge to Turkey as a free country.
Do you have any contrary comments to offer?
Turkey has an abysmal record of civil rights violation, banning of parties
and politicians, essentially military-run governments, executions and prison
sentences for political and trade-union activity, cooked elections, and
oppression of the Kurdish minority.
-------
∂15-Jul-87 1136 PJH my netadress
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: hayes@SPAR-20.ARPA
John, please mail to me at HAYES@SPAR-20.arpa. Thanks.
(Thats if there is anything to mail, of course.)
We dont seem to have met fopr a long time, and I wont be at
AAAI. Will you be at IJCAI? Or perhaps the saner thing is to meet here,
after all. I can fit to your schedule fairly
easily. How about a lunch sometime in the next few weeks?
PAt
∂15-Jul-87 1602 CLT msg from hst
via J. Laubsch.
You were supposed to write some sort of recommendtion
for Herbert. He says if you need data, Anthony Hearn has it.
∂15-Jul-87 1603 CLT calendar item
fri 2000 joffery ballet @ sf opera house with alice and zeno
dinner at the Indian place at 6:45
∂15-Jul-87 1718 AI.DUFFY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Natural kinds
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jul 87 17:18:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1987 19:17 CDT
From: AI.DUFFY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Natural kinds
In-reply-to: Msg of 10 Jul 1987 12:19-CDT from John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: Friday, 10 July 1987 12:19-CDT
From: John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
To: AIList at MIT-MC
The system should presume (defeasibly) that there is more to the concept
than it has learned and that some of what it has learned may be wrong.
It should also presume (although will usually be built into the design
rather than be linguistically represented) that the new concept is
a useful way to distinguish features of the world, although some new
concepts will turn out to be mere social conventions.
Exactly. You seem to have changed your views since the realism debate
on Phil-Sci some years ago.
∂15-Jul-87 1722 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU 2-DMA762
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jul 87 17:22:00 PDT
Date: Wed 15 Jul 87 17:16:36-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: 2-DMA762
To: les@Sail.Stanford.EDU, clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
ra@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12318673869.20.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The account no. 2-DMA762 is still being used for postage metering. This
account closed effective 1/31/87, so this account number is no longer
valid and should not be used.
-Sharon Bergman
-------
∂15-Jul-87 1733 JK
To: dam%oz.ai.mit.edu@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, shankar@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
David ---
Thanks for your comments on the proposal. I think the issue
of justifying mechanical theorem-proving activities in the eyes of
the Computer Science or Mathematics community is an important one;
here's a few of my own thoughts:
(1) It is not sufficient to merely prove mathematical facts.
First, this is not likely to impress a working mathematician.
Second, the issue is not really about mere ability to perform such
functions (almost any theorem prover in the business could do that,
albeit painfully) --- the question is about ease and naturality.
Moreover, if we want mathematicians to be our "customers", we need to
demonstrate clear advantages over the current pencil-and-paper practices.
What would this mean; i.e. what kind of a set of features
(a) we could realistically implement
(b) would be attractive?
I think this is a worthy question to consider; some "market research"
is in order. Obviously we should not try to compete in terms of
creativity or discovery of new facts.
(2) There may be other ways than proving well known mathematical
facts to entice new customers. The old adage of the least amount of effort
for the greatest amount of leverage should apply. One of the ideas
discussed in the proposal is proof unwinding. It is hard to do with
pencil and paper, yet mechanizable. In essence, it is an advanced
book-keeping function which is best accomplished by mechanical means.
There must be other, perhaps similar, ideas.
(3) I agree with the necessity of concrete benchmarks. However,
in light of my comments above, we should tighten the criteria for
success. Perhaps we can agree on some set of conditions on the
length, readibility and naturality of proofs. Suggestions?
Best Regards,
Jussi
∂17-Jul-87 0755 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:bill@ipsa.arpa
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jul 87 07:55:21 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 17 Jul 87 07:49:58-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 17 Jul 87 10:51:02-EDT
Received: from ipsa.arpa (TCP 30003153404) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 17 Jul 87 10:51:24 EDT
Received: by ipsa.arpa; (4.12/4.7)
id AA09516; Thu, 16 Jul 87 16:59:50 edt
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 87 16:59:50 edt
From: bill@ipsa.arpa (Bill Pase)
Message-Id: <8707162059.AA09516@ipsa.arpa>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
There was some interest upon the formation of the theorem-provers mail
group with the kinds of problems which systems have been used to solve.
Since the group has been dormant for the last little while we thought
it's time to send out a bit of mail!
The following message reports on a theorem prover being developed at I.P.
Sharp. It provides a brief overview and a list of the example problems
we have attacked. Since nothing has been published about our system yet,
very few people know of its existence. Now there will be more.
Bill Pase + Sentot Kromodimoeljo
∂17-Jul-87 0843 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:bill@ipsa.arpa
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jul 87 08:43:34 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 17 Jul 87 08:37:23-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 17 Jul 87 10:53:12-EDT
Received: from ipsa.arpa (TCP 30003153404) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 17 Jul 87 10:53:16 EDT
Received: by ipsa.arpa; (4.12/4.7)
id AA09526; Thu, 16 Jul 87 17:00:09 edt
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 87 17:00:09 edt
From: bill@ipsa.arpa (Bill Pase)
Message-Id: <8707162100.AA09526@ipsa.arpa>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
EVES Project Working Paper 113D Bill Pase
Sentot Kromodimoeljo
WP-87-5400-113D 23 June 1987
Status of the Prover "NEVER"
This report describes the state of a prototype prover called
NEVER (Not the EVES Rewriter), which is intended for use with the
Environment for Verifying and Evaluating Software (EVES). Currently,
the prover consists of eight major components: a simplifier, a
rewriter, a forward rule mechanism, an invoker, a reducer, user
commands, the required support for input/output and database
management, and an m-Verdi interface. The system currently resides on
a Symbolics computer system under ZetaLisp.
Since we last reported on our progress (September 1986), we have
added two major capabilities to the theorem prover: a mechanism for
generalized forward rules; and an interface for the m-Verdi language.
In addition, a number of improvements were made to the theorem prover,
and the body of examples have been substantially increased (many of
the new examples were written to test the m-Verdi interface).
1 BACKGROUND
As part of the EVES development which has been undertaken at I.P
Sharp for the past several years, we have identified the requirement
for a theorem proving system. This theorem prover is needed for both
proving verification conditions, as part of showing program
correctness, and validating specifications.
Originally, we intended to adapt an existing theorem prover for
use within our system. The earliest choice was the prover used by the
Stanford Pascal Verification system. We found, however, that this
system did not represent the state of the art in automated theorem
provers. It also came to our attention, even at that early stage,
that the adaptation of an existing theorem prover was a major
undertaking. As a result, we ruled out using the Stanford prover.
Following this, we investigated the possibility of adapting the
Boyer-Moore and, later, the Affirm theorem provers. In both cases,
the developers indicated that using their code would present
difficulties, mostly due to the effort required to change their system
into one which would handle our different logic. Consequently, both
of these systems were also ruled out. However, by that time we had
learned a good deal about how each of these systems functions. During
discussions with W. Bledsoe, B. Boyer, J Moore and others who have
developed theorem provers, we were consistently told that we would be
better off developing our own prover by adapting their techniques, but
not the actual code.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 2
Having decided to develop our own theorem prover, we chose to
build upon the Logic Machine Architecture (LMA). We then discovered
that only the lowest levels of LMA would actually be useful to us.
Furthermore, these low level capabilities are essentially provided by
the Lisp language which has a richer set of development tools. Given
these facts, we decided to implement a prototype theorem prover in
Lisp on a Symbolics computer. This effort has been ongoing since the
end of 1983 and has been quite successful. For example, the latest
version of our prototype provides greater capabilities than the
Stanford theorem prover which we had originally intended to adapt.
Thus far, the development has progressed satisfactorily. The
following sections describe the current status of the prover
development and the future directions for both development and
research.
2 SIMPLIFICATION
The simplifier is a tautology checker and simplifier for Boolean
expressions, which may include uninterpreted function symbols, where
all of the logical connectives are represented in "if" form. Its
design follows closely the simplifier of Affirm.
The simplifier has been augmented in three ways.
1. The addition of an equality decision procedure based on the
congruence closure algorithm of Nelson and Oppen. This
permits it to prove, or simplify, formulas incorporating
equality by maintaining the facts derived from the traversal
of the formula in the "e-graph" data structure.
2. The addition of a "tableau" for dealing with integers based
on standard techniques from linear programming. As well as
finding solutions, the integer additions permit the
simplifier to do extra reductions on the formula, such as
constant folding.
3. The extension of the simplifier to deal with quantifiers.
The simplifier does this by minimizing the scope of all the
quantifiers and then locally skolemizing the subexpressions
as required internally, not at the user level. The
simplifier is then able to perform both simple instantiations
as well as those which require backchaining on a quantified
hypothesis.
3 REWRITING
The rewriter is a conditional rewriter incorporating backward
chaining and is closely based on the work of Boyer and Moore. Rewrite
rules, as saved in the database, are applied exhaustively to the
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 3
formula in an "innermost-leftmost" fashion using an optimization
(accredited to Gallier and Book), which gives the rewriter better
performance than a straight innermost system or even in some cases an
"outermost" rewriting system.
The rewriter permits the application of rules which permute their
arguments without the prover going into a loop as well as the
application of rules which require some additional variable
instantiations in the conditions of a rule.
Given rules which have a condition, the rewriter calls the
reducer to attempt to prove the condition prior to performing the
rewriting. While doing so, the reducer "short circuits" so that it
stops working on the formula when it is either reduced to "true" or
shown that it cannot be so reduced. Since it is possible that this
subgoaling could be infinite, we allow a depth limit to be set by the
user of the system. Additionally, the rewriter performs a simple
runtime loop check prior to subgoaling.
Since many other types of loops can occur during the rewriting
process, we do a number of static checks as part of the process of
accepting a rewrite rule into the system in an attempt to detect some
of the simpler cases whereby a rule may cause looping.
As an extension to syntactic pattern matching, we now also allow
the rewriter to use a limited form of "semantic" pattern matching
wherein a rule pattern need not be an exact syntactic match to a
formula; substitutions may exist which permit a semantic match with
respect to the current set of facts known to the prover.
Rewrite rules may contain arbitrary quantifiers both within their
condition and their value part. We have also generalized the allowed
rewrite rule patterns to include constants, enabling constants with
values to be implemented as rewrite rules.
4 FORWARD CHAINING
The third component of the theorem prover is the generalized
forward chaining mechanism. Lemmas that are marked as forward rules
are added automatically into the context of a proof whenever possible.
This is done by means of trigger patterns.
Whenever a subexpression of the formula being traversed matches a
trigger pattern of some forward rule, the rule is added to the context
as an assumption.
As with rewrite rules, forward rules may be conditional. When
such a forward rule is triggered, the forward rule mechanism calls the
reducer to attempt to prove the condition as a subgoal. If
successful, only the conclusion of the forward rule is added as an
assumption into the current context.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 4
5 INVOCATION
The fourth component of the prover is the invoker, which
automatically invokes the definitions of functions when this would
help the proof attempt. For a non-recursive function, the invoker
simply expands the function's body, while for recursive functions it
does the expansion and then calls the reducer on the expansion. If
the result is "better" than the initial expansion, the reduced
expansion is kept instead. For functions which simply calculate a
value, the net effect is to replace the subexpression by its value.
The invoker is modelled after the techniques of Boyer and Moore.
We have extended it to allow preconditions which are handled like the
condition part of rewrite rules. The definition will be invoked if
and only if the precondition can be proven. Furthermore, we permit
quantifiers within both the precondition and the function body.
6 REDUCTION
Reduction forms the kernel of the automatic portion of the
theorem prover. It is built on top of simplification, rewriting,
forward chaining, and invocation. The basic idea is that a formula is
reduced (to its normal form) by an innermost leftmost application of
each of the above procedures to each of the subexpressions. As such,
reduction is similar to applying simplification, rewriting, forward
chaining and invocation to an entire formula but has the advantage of
being much faster.
The performance of the reducer is further improved by the
addition of a cache which holds valid reductions for a particular
context in the formula being reduced.
Reduction can operate in three distinct modes. The first,
returns a reduced formula. The second is a predicate which tells
whether or not the formula can be reduced to "true", while the third
is like the second but accepts a list of variables which it can
instantiate as required. The last two modes are used by the rewriter
for the proof of subgoals and preconditions.
7 FUNCTION ACCEPTANCE AND AUTOMATIC INDUCTION
Our mechanism for accepting recursive function definitions is
based on the Boyer-Moore technique for analyzing recursive
definitions. However, we require that the measure of a recursive
function be explicitly supplied as part of the function's definition.
From this analysis, the prover will generate a proof requirement for
the acceptance.
As with the Boyer-Moore system, the analysis of recursive
definitions is also used for automatic induction. Currently,
automatic induction is only part of a very simple automatic proof
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 5
strategy.
8 USER COMMANDS
Each formula which is being proven has been established by the
current or a previous user command. As each proof step is completed a
new command may be issued either to establish a new current formula,
or to continue with the current formula as established by the last
proof step. The proofs are saved and may be printed out in full or in
summary, or continued later. Examples of the commands currently
implemented are assume, auto-induct, back, equality-substitute, help,
instantiate, invoke, label, prenex, prove, prove-by-induction, reduce,
rewrite, simplify, and split.
None of the commands have fancy interfaces or the capability of
working on subexpressions as of yet. However, the instantiation
command not only performs simple instantiations but will also move
quantifiers as required, where possible, so that the requested
instantiation can be performed.
We also have the ability to have lemmas which are not used
automatically. These lemmas can be manually used within a proof by
the assume command.
9 INPUT/OUTPUT AND THE DATABASE
A substantial part of the prover provides for the input/output of
formulas at the Lisp level and for managing the database. For
input/output, the routines perform the conversions to/from the
internal form used by the prover as well as numerous checks on the
formulas which are input by the user. All symbols input to the prover
are required to have a type and we enforce name sameness type checking
on all formulas input to the prover. Additional checks are made on
declarations to ensure they meet the restrictions which we impose upon
them.
Once entered into the prover, the formulas become part of the
database. This database provides access to the formulas for the rest
of the prover as well as supplying a primitive "undo" capability and a
few user routines for examining the contents of the database. The
database keeps track of whether an event has been proven and its
complete or partial proof, including commands issued by the user. A
status command allows the user to see what has or has not been proven
thus far. Once a proof is started, it can be continued later by
calling a proof step command. Proofs can even be continued in another
session by freezing the entire state of the database and then thawing
in some later session.
A second database, called the "deductive database", keeps track
of the contextual information contained in a formula during the actual
traversal. It provides for the assumption or denial of predicates as
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 6
well as undoing the most recent addition. The deductive database also
supports a query function which can be called upon any expression, and
may return the expression or a simpler but equivalent expression.
Much of what we call simplification (such as the handling of equality,
integers and instantiations) in fact happens within the deductive
database.
10 M-VERDI INTERFACE
Currently, the language for EVES is m-Verdi. An interface for
the m-Verdi language is being developed and is nearing completion,
with "executability", "environments" and "packages" being the major
features of m-Verdi which are not yet implemented.
Users of the system interact by means of the m-EVES command
language through either a listener or the editor. The command
language is based on m-Verdi with a few modifications and extensions,
and it reflects the "incremental with last-in-first-out undo" nature
of the underlying theorem prover database.
There are two major components to the m-Verdi interface. The
first deals with the m-Verdi language. The input part of this
component performs parsing and semantic checking. The parser for the
m-EVES command language is specified with an attribute grammar and fed
through a parser generator. Once a command has been successfully
parsed and checked, it is translated into a sequence of one or more
Lisp level prover commands. The output part of this component
consists of a pretty printer.
The second major component deals with the m-Verdi logic. The
initial theory as required by the m-Verdi logic is implemented as a
combination of prover declarations. Many of the axioms in the initial
theory and those associated with m-Verdi declarations are declared as
rewrite and forward rules so that they can be applied automatically.
Additionally, a verification condition generator produces proof
requirements for m-Verdi procedure declarations.
11 PROVER TESTING
After each change to the prover system (including the examples),
all of our collected examples are run through the prover. Our testing
tool then compares each of the results to the corresponding results
from a previous run. The tool then produces a report outlining any
differences between the two runs. We then can examine these
differences to discover their causes and determine whether the changes
to the system have uncovered any bugs or simply shown the results of
the intended changes.
The examples for testing may be supplied in any of the language
levels (currently Lisp or m-Verdi). The theorem prover will be
invoked at the appropriate level based on the file type.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 7
12 EXAMPLES
The following is a complete list of the examples which have been
successfully proven by the NEVER system. Each is briefly described.
First, the Lisp level examples:
1. affirm-mfm - This is a version of the micro flow modulator as
it is handled by the Affirm system.
2. crypto - The RSRE crypto controller example.
3. demos - A collection of simple examples that demonstrate some
of the capabilities of the theorem prover.
4. hdm-dsets - A simple specification of sets as handled by HDM.
5. insert-sort - The specification and proofs for a linear
insertion sort on lists as written in recursive functions.
6. library-spec - The library specification and proofs from
Kemmerer's example.
7. low-water-mark - Specification for the security of data
objects by Cheheyl et al.
8. mark-sort - Verification conditions for a selection sort
program.
9. musser-fdm - Trivial specification example from FDM.
10. network-security - Specification for the security of a
communication network taken from a version by Don Good as
done within the Gypsy system.
11. post-schenectady - Several variations on the flow modulator
specification as done by Dan Craigen following the assessment
study.
12. saddleback-search - Verification conditions for the
saddleback search program as taken from the Gypsy version of
the same problem.
13. secure-terminal - Affirm-style equational specification of a
secure terminal.
14. symbol-table - Equational-style specification for the symbol
table example.
15. tests - A collection of tests and examples used as a standard
test of Never.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 8
Second, a list of m-Verdi level examples. These examples include
mathematical theories as well as programs.
1. activenonint - A solution to the Low-Water-Mark problem using
non-interference.
2. arraymin - A simple program that calculates the minimum value
of an array.
3. decls - Examples that show various proof requirements for
m-Verdi declarations.
4. euclid - Euclid's greatest common divisor algorithm.
5. finset - A theory of finite sets.
6. finset-model - A model for the above theory of finite sets.
7. lowwatermark - Another version of the Low-Water-Mark problem.
8. micro - A version of a micro flow modulator.
9. partial-mapping - A theory of partial mappings.
10. seqmodel - A model for a theory of sequences.
11. xfinishednonint - Yet another version of the Low-Water-Mark
problem using non-interference.
12. xmanualmicro - The version of the micro flow modulator taken
from the m-Verdi language definition manual.
13. xtsquare - A solution to Gries' t-square problem taken from
his book "The Science of Programming".
13 DOCUMENTATION
This is a complete list of the documents describing both the
theorem prover Never and the examples performed with it, as well as
related documents.
- WP 070 Overview of an EVES Prover (25 Aug 1983). The
original blueprint for the theorem prover.
- WP 071 Bibliography on Automated Deduction (26 Sep 1986). An
extensive (over 1000 references) bibliography on the field of
automated deduction.
- WP 089 Automated Deduction and Program Verification (20 Mar
1984). Abstracts describing several existing theorem provers
and program verification systems.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 9
- WP 113 Status of the prover NEVER (16 June 1987). This
document.
- WP 119 An Overview of the Deductive Database (6 Dec 1985). A
brief description on the functioning of the deductive
database used by the theorem prover.
- WP 120 Preliminary User's Guide to the Prover "NEVER" (30 Sep
1986). A draft version of the user's guide to the theorem
prover containing examples.
- WP 123 Prover Examples I: The Library Specification Example
(25 Sep 1986). A brief report describing results of our
experiments.
- WP 124 Prover Examples II: The Micro Flow Modulator (not yet
released). A brief report describing results of our
experiments.
- WP 125 Prover Examples III: Some Equational Implementation
Examples (25 Sep 1986). A brief report describing results of
our experiments.
- WP 126 Prover Examples IV: Some V.C. Proof Examples (26 Sep
1986). A brief report describing results of our experiments.
- WP 127 Prover Examples V: The Network Security Example (26
Sep 1986). A brief report describing results of our
experiments.
- WP 131 Installation Guide for NEVER (26 Sep 1986). The
installation guide for the theorem prover.
The following list of documents are of historical interest. They
show some of our early work on automated deduction prior to the
development of the current theorem prover.
- WP 005 Vax Migration of the Stanford Prover (19 Feb 1981). A
brief report describing our efforts to migrate the Stanford
prover to the VAX/VMS system.
- WP 014 A Vector Type in Boyer-Moore Theory (20 Apr 1981). A
demonstration of how one can handle a Euclid-like vector type
within the Boyer-Moore logic. This document consists of
listings only.
- WP 028 A Version of the Knuth-Bendix Algorithm (26 Jan 1982).
A description of an implementation of the Knuth-Bendix
algorithm in the Euclid programming language.
- WP 099 Quarterly Report on Environments, Workstations, and
Provers (28 Sep 1984). Early progress report describing our
efforts on programming environments, work stations, and
theorem provers.
!
WP-87-5400-113D Page 10
14 WHAT REMAINS
We intend to work on the prover in a number of key areas over the
next year.
1. Strengthen the expressibility of the logic.
The expressibility of the logic is limited by the fact that
it is neither higher order nor polymorphic. Currently,
portions of the prover have been extended to deal with higher
order expressions. It is intended that experimentation
continue in developing this capability. In addition, the
current system is restricted to "name sameness" for type
checking. Extending this to a polymorphic system would
greatly increase the expressibility.
2. Develop more examples.
The development of new examples is an ongoing aspect of this
project. In addition, there is a need to develop a library
of mathematical theories that users can access when solving
their own problems.
3. Develop proof logs and libraries.
There is also a need for some kind of proof logs for the
user, as well as for the automated checking of completed
proofs. We hope to make a strong soundness statement about
proofs performed by the prover without actually doing a
soundness proof for the entire system.
4. Implement a graphical user interface called "Never Land"
(where all your theorems come true).
Such an interface will permit commands and their arguments to
be pointed at for selection as well as the selection of
alternative results from menus and convenient undoing of
commands. Further, commands will be enabled to operate on
subexpressions of the current formula.
15 REFERENCES
[Boyer 79a] R.S. Boyer, J S. Moore, A Computational Logic,
Academic Press, NY, 1979.
[Thompson 81] D.H. Thompson, R.W. Erickson (eds.), AFFIRM
Reference Manual, USC Information Sciences Institute, Marina
Del Ray, CA, 1981.
[Nelson 80] G. Nelson, D.C. Oppen, Fast decision procedures based
on congruence closure, STAN-CS-77-646, Stanford U,; also J.
ACM 27(2):356-364, April 1980.
∂17-Jul-87 0900 JMC
july 3 science
∂17-Jul-87 0900 JMC
Fenaughty
∂17-Jul-87 0938 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU AI Core Curric
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jul 87 09:38:35 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Jul 87 09:32:32-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: AI Core Curric
To: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
BINFORD@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU, latombe@Whitney.Stanford.EDU,
nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: reges@Score.Stanford.EDU, mayr@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12319113678.30.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Recently, Mike Genesereth and Yoav Shoham and I met to discuss possible
changes to CS223 and CS323, the two "logic-oriented" AI courses. Our
conversation soon extended to all of the core AI curriculum, and we
came up with the following suggestions:
We should make available a year-long sequence of core AI courses.
The first course in the sequence would be what is now called CS224. It
will be aimed at seniors (who are majoring in one of the CS-related
majors) and first-year graduate students who want a broad but intensive
course in AI. The syllabus would be about the same as that proposed by
Paul Rosenbloom who has volunteered to teach it this coming year. (It
would cover the major approaches to AI and discuss some of the
applications.) It is to be expected that different instructors would
probably emphasize different aspects of AI, but we should all play a
role in shaping the syllabus.
The next course would be what we now call CS223. Although the course
would use logic, its main emphasis would be on the "declarative
knowledge" approach to AI. Since it will assume familiarity with logic
gained in CS157 (see below), it will not have to spend any time
explaining resolution and such but can go right on to describing systems
based on declarative knowledge and the various representations for
states, actions, time and use these to discuss planning, the frame
problem, etc. This course will be aimed at those majoring in the
cs-related majors and at graduate students.
The next course would be what we now call CS323. It would pretty much
be what CS323 is now--a treatment of nonmonotonic reasoning (from
various points of view), learning and induction, uncertainty, knowledge
and belief, and related advanced topics. This course will be aimed
mainly at graduate students going on to work in AI.
Each of these courses would have CS157 as a prerequisite (as would some
other CS courses). CS157 will be "logic for computer scientists":
syntax and semantics of logical languages, proof methods (including
resolution). Zohar Manna has volunteered to teach this course this
coming year.
Each of the courses in the sequence would have the preceding ones in
the sequence (or equivalent) as prerequisites. This addresses a bug
in our previous curric, namely that people taking CS223 as a first
intro to AI got a big smattering of the logical approach to AI but
didn't hear anything about natural language processing, expert
systems, production systems, etc. Even Mike and I now think that
such background is essential before taking CS223. Also, people
can take just as much or as little of the sequence as they want to.
The undergrad programs will have to decide whether they will require
only cs224 or cs223 additionally. People doing PhD work in AI or
related fields ought to take the sequence through CS323.
Probably the following timing for when the courses are given would
work out:
Autumn: 224 157
Winter: 223 224
Spring: 323 157
Normally, someone would take 157 in the Spring and then the
sequence the next year. Also possible would be to take
157 concurrently with 224 in the Autumn and then continue
with the sequence.
I would like to collect suggestions and comments and then bring
a formal proposal to the curriculum committee for implementation
this coming year.
-Nils
-------
∂17-Jul-87 1000 JMC
Hearn
∂17-Jul-87 1125 CLT dinner
we have reservations at an italian place in the Opera Plaza
should leave home about 5:30
∂17-Jul-87 1224 CLT Qlisp demo reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: 2-3pm
Date: Tuesday July 21st
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Demonstration of (qlet t ...)
Ron will talk about how to run Qlisp on the Alliant,
Dick will demo some simple functions (fibonacci, etc).
∂18-Jul-87 1335 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU [Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>: Natural Kinds]
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Jul 87 13:35:00 PDT
Date: Sat 18 Jul 87 15:34:18-CDT
From: Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: [Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>: Natural Kinds]
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12319419834.40.AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Mail-From: AI.CAUSEY created at 18-Jul-87 15:17:43
Date: Sat 18 Jul 87 15:17:43-CDT
From: Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Natural Kinds
To: ailist-request@STRIPE.SRI.COM
Message-ID: <12319416814.40.AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
In a message posted 7/15, John McCarthy says that philosophers
have recently introduced the concept of natural kind, and he
suggests how this concept may be useful in AI. I think this
deserves serious comment, both historical and substantive. The
following is lengthy, but it may illustrate some general
characteristics about the relationships between philosophy and AI.
HISTORY
In their messages, Ken Laws and others are correct -- the idea of
natural kinds is not new. It is at least implicit in some
Pre-Socratic Greek philosophy, and Aristotle extensively
developed the idea and applied it in both philosophy and biology.
Aristotle's conception is too "essentialist" to fit what McCarthy
refers to.
In the late 1600's John Locke developed an impressive empiricist
analysis of natural kinds. Further developments were contributed
in the 1800's in J. S. Mill's, _A_System_Of_Logic_. Mill also
made important contributions to our understanding of inductive
reasoning and scientific explanation; these are related to
natural kinds.
In our century a number of concepts of natural kinds have been
proposed, ranging from strongly empiricist "cluster" approaches
(which need NOT preclude expanding the cluster of attributes
through the discovery of new knowledge, cf. McCarthy 7/17), to
various modal analyses, to some intermediate approaches. Any of
these analyses may have some value depending on the intended
application, but the traditional notion of natural kinds has
almost always been connected somehow with the idea of natural
laws.
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
1. Whatever one's favorite analysis might be, it is important to
distinguish between a NATURAL kind (e.g., the compound silicon
dioxide, with nomologically determined physical and chemical
attributes), and a functional concept like "chair". There is
generally not a simple one-to-one correspondence between our
functional classifications of objects and the classification
systems that are developed in the natural sciences. This is true
in spite of the fact that we can learn to recognize sand,
penguins, and chairs. But things are not always so simple -
Suppose that Rip van Winkle learns in 1940 to recognize at sight
a 1940-style adding machine; he then sleeps for 47 years. Upon
waking in 1987 he probably would not recognize at sight what a
thin, wallet calculator is. Functional classifications are
useful, but we should not assume that they are generated and
processed in the same ways as natural classifications. In
particular, since functional classifications often involve an
abstract understanding of complex behavioral dispositions, they
are particularly hard to learn once one gets beyond simple things
like chairs and tables.
2. Even discovering the classic examples of NATURAL kinds (like the
classification of the chemical elements) can be a long and
difficult process. It requires numerous inductive
generalizations to confirm that the attributes in a certain Set
of attributes each apply to gold, and that the attributes in some
other Set of attributes apply to iodine, etc. We further
recognize that our KNOWLEDGE of what are the elements of these
Sets of attributes grows with the general growth of our
scientific knowledge. Also, we need not always use the same set
of attributes for IDENTIFICATION of instances of a natural kind.
Most of this goes back to Locke, and philosophers have long
recognized the connection between induction and classification;
Carnap, Hempel, Goodman, and others, have sharpened some of the
issues during the last 50 years.
3. Now, getting back to McCarthy's suggestion -- in his second
message (7/17) he writes: "...for a child to presume a natural
kind on hearing a word or seeing an object is advantageous, and
it will also be advantageous to built (sic) AI systems with this
presumption." His 7/15 message says, "When an object is named,
the system should generate a gensym, e.g., GOO137. To this
symbol should be attached the name and what the system is to
remember about the instance." This is an interesting suggestion,
but it prompts some comments and questions:
i) Assuming that children do begin to presume natural kinds at
some stage of development, what inductive processes are they
using, what biologically determined constraints are affecting
these processes, and what prior acquired knowledge is directing
their inductions. These are interesting psychological questions.
But, depending on our applications, we may not even want to build
robots that emulate young children. We can attach a name
to a gensym, but it is not at all easy to decide "...what the
system is to remember about the instance," or to specify how
it is to process all of the stuff it generates in this manner.
ii) Children receive much corrective feedback from other people;
how much feedback will we be willing or able to give to the
"maturing" robots? Will the more mature robots help train the
naive ones?
iii) Given that classification does involve complex inductive
reasoning, we need to learn a lot more about how to implement
effective inductive procedures, where "induction" is understood
very broadly.
iv) If the AI systems (robots, etc.) are to learn, and reason with,
functional concepts, then things get even more complex. Ability
to make abstractions and perform complex analogical reasoning
will be required. In my judgment, we (humans) still have a lot
to learn just about the representation of functional knowledge.
If my Rip van Winkle story seems farfetched, here is a true
story. I know a person who is familiar with the appearance and
use of 5 1/4 inch floppy diskettes. Upon first seeing a 3.5 inch
mini-diskette, she had no idea what it was until its function was
described. Knowledge of diskettes can extend to tracks, sectors,
etc. The concept of natural kinds is relatively simple (though
often difficult to apply); functional concepts and their
relations with physical structures are harder subjects.
-------
-------
∂19-Jul-87 1052 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU thanks
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jul 87 10:52:00 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Jul 87 12:51:18-CDT
From: Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: thanks
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12319652304.7.AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
John,
Thanks for your (quick) reply, with which I partly agree.
I think we are interested in some of the same problems, and I
look forward to discussing these things further with you this
fall.
Bob
-------
∂19-Jul-87 1705 RA tomorrow
I will come in tomorrow after 5:00. If you need anything done, please
let me know.
Thanks,
∂19-Jul-87 1934 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
The following message has expired without successful delivery to recipient(s):
karen@RATLIFF.CS.UTEXAS.EDU
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂16-Jul-87 2122 JMC re: textbooks
To: karen@RATLIFF.CS.UTEXAS.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 13 Jul 87 14:17:34 CDT.]
I use a collection of papers that we have been reproducing for the class
and charging reproduction costs. Is this an option at U.T. also?
------- End undelivered message -------
∂19-Jul-87 2138 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU NASA Money?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jul 87 21:38:32 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Jul 87 21:33:06-PDT
From: Ramin D. Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: NASA Money?
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12319769139.11.RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Someone from NASA Ames approached me at AAAI and said that they would
"like to support my research", i.e. give me money. I told him that as
I am a Hertz fellow I can't accept other support, but that it would be great
if he could give us (i.e. the people who work for you) bucks or, especially,
Lisp Machines. So he wants me to give a talk at NASA about what I've been
doing, with an eye towards persuading them that this is stuff they want to
fund.
Naturally, I know nothing whatsoever about the funding process. Can you
give me some advice sometime about what I (we?) should do?
Ramin
-------
∂20-Jul-87 0955 CLT moving expenses
Below is Brownes reply to my query.
I propose to ask for
air fair for hazel and me (plus extra for baggage if needed)
driving expenses for you
(you should figure out mileage and number of motels / days )
maybe $100 extra for mailing some books and papers
I can't think of anything else.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
∂25-Jun-87 0744 yvo@im4u.utexas.edu Visiting Appointment Expenses
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jun 87 07:44:13 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA05800; Thu, 25 Jun 87 08:13:33 CDT
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 08:13:08 cdt
From: yvo@im4u.utexas.edu (Yvonne Van Olphen)
Posted-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 08:13:08 cdt
Message-Id: <8706251313.AA25866@im4u.UTEXAS.EDU>
Received: by im4u.UTEXAS.EDU (4.22/4.22)
id AA25866; Thu, 25 Jun 87 08:13:08 cdt
To: clt@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Visiting Appointment Expenses
Cc: ics.browne@r20.utexas.edu, manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu
There isn't a definite, specific formula for computing moving
expenses. Something like the following seems reasonable in your case;
please give me feedback.
1. A trip to Austin to look around for houses
2. Travel expenses to and from Austin, together with provision
for moving of personal effects, office goods, etc.
Is it your intention to drive to Austin in August, or to fly and rent
a car?
Word to the wise: it is very difficult for us to back date payment
of expenses. If you give us advance notice, we will be able to
straightforwardly reimburse your expenses for a future trip to
look for a house.
If you will send me your list of expenses in conjunction with attendance
at the YOP workshop and looking for a house, I will see what
I can do to get repayment at this juncture.
We look forward to having you around in the Fall.
Best regards,
J. C. Browne
∂20-Jul-87 1000 JMC
Fenaughty
∂20-Jul-87 1108 DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Market Research
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Jul 87 11:07:57 PDT
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1987 14:07 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12319917404.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: dam%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, shankar@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Market Research
From: Jussi Ketonen <JK at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
I [agree that] justifying mechanical theorem-proving activities in
the eyes of the Computer Science or Mathematics community is important,
but:
(1) It is not sufficient to merely prove mathematical facts.
First, this is not likely to impress a working mathematician. Second,
the issue is not really about mere ability to perform such functions
--- the question is about ease and naturality. Moreover,
if we want mathematicians to be our "customers", we need to
demonstrate clear advantages over the current pencil-and-paper
practices.
I disagree completely with your first point --- in my experience
working mathematicians do not believe that machine verification
of deep theorems is possible in practice. Consider
a machine verification of the independence of the continuum hypothesis.
I also disagree somewhat with your second point. It seems
that an effective verification system is a prerequisite to verifying
deep theorems. Thus the existence of machine verification for
a deep theorem depmonstrates the required effectiveness and
naturality of the verifier. Again consider a machine verification
of the independence of the continuum hypothesis.
I think it is premature to try to get mathematicians to use these
systems, specially if we are unwilling to use them ourselves. I
suspect it is not hard to convince mathematicians that a working,
effective, verification system would be useful. However, it may be
hard to convince them (or ourselfs) that progress is being made. We
need clear benchmarks, such as the foundational verification of deep
theorems. Once deep theorems have been verified we can invoke other
performance measures such as expansion factor and structural
comparisons of natural language and machine-verified arguments.
David
∂20-Jul-87 1224 diana@brillig.umd.edu seminar
Received: from BRILLIG.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Jul 87 12:24:22 PDT
Received: by brillig.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA06745; Mon, 20 Jul 87 15:23:50 EDT
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 87 15:23:50 EDT
From: Diana Gordon <diana@brillig.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8707201923.AA06745@brillig.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: seminar
Dr. McCarthy-
We at the Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence
would like to know if you are interested in giving a talk here
this fall. So far, Allen Newell, Marvin Minsky and Tom Binford
have agreed to come here. It would work out best if all talks
were scheduled for the same day. Perhaps we could have panel
discussions about trends in AI. Please reply soon so we can
try to coordinate a date.
--Diana Gordon
(If you don't respond directly you can respond to me at
diana@maryland.arpa or gordon@nrl-aic.arpa - but the
latter is a less reliable connection.)
∂20-Jul-87 1228 CLT Market Research
To: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
CC: JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, NSH@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Before we get too deep, I wonder if you could clarify what you
mean by ``foundational verification''? Can you give examples of
existing verifications that are and are not `foundational'.
Does it depend on the system? Are all Boyer-Moore verifications
foundational / non-foudational? Ditto for Automath, EKL, and Ontic.
I don't see that existence of machine verification for
a deep (or other) theorem demonstrates effectiveness and naturality of a verifier.
More likely it demonstrates heroic effort on the part of the person(s)
using the verifier.
∂20-Jul-87 2142 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU ai courses
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Jul 87 21:42:39 PDT
Date: Mon 20 Jul 87 21:37:00-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ai courses
To: feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
winograd@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
binford@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
latombe@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: reges@Score.Stanford.EDU, mayr@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12320031995.11.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I found myself unsure about the structure of the ai-related courses here,
and so, prompted by the discussion with Nils and Mike about which Nils wrote,
decided to compile a list for myself. I think such a list might be
useful to others too, such as visitors and incoming students. I'm still
missing much information, both in detail and in overall structure.
Clearly I know less than any one of you. With your permission, I'll
see to it that you each get a copy. You'll recognize at once that it
consists of patches trying to cover my holes of ignorance. I'm willing to
rework it, given your comments. In the meanwhile I'll prod other
departments for a list of their AI-like courses.
Yoav
P.S. I copied the list of addressees from Nils's message. If anyone
else should be seeing this, please let me know.
-------
∂21-Jul-87 0920 DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Market Research
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jul 87 09:20:09 PDT
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1987 12:06 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12320157442.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Cc: JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, NSH@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Market Research
In-reply-to: Msg of 20 Jul 1987 15:28-EDT from Carolyn Talcott <CLT at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
By "foundational verification" I mean a verification that is
built up via definitions and lemmas from a foundational system.
Foundational systems do not allow the user to enter arbitrary
axioms. All verifications with the Boyer-Moore prover are foundational.
My understanding of EKL is that it is also foundational --- all terms
must be defined and all facts in the library must be proved ---
no user-introduced axioms are allowed. Resolution theorem provers,
as they are generally used, are not foundational. Automath was not
foundational (about twenty axioms were arbitrarily added in the verification
of Landau's Grundlagen). NuPRL, on the other hand, is foundational.
I agree that performance measures are needed; expansion factors and
structural similarities between natural and mechanical arguments
should be examined. Before one can examine these other performance
measures however, the mechnaical proofs must exist. Furthermore,
I do think the existence of a mechnaical proof is good evidence
for a powerful system. Consider Automath. Landau's Grundlagen
contains only the most basic and absolutely trivial facts about
the real and complex numbers (the well definedness of the basic
operations of addition and multiplication). The verification of
the most trivial facts immaginable took TWO MAN YEARS. No amount
of effort short of a manhatten project (and perhaps not even that)
could have used automath to verify deep results in analysis. It seems
to me that any mechanical proof of deep results in analysis by a small
research group indicates a theorem proving environment much more
powerful than automath.
In any case, the construction of mechanical verifications seems
to be the only way to evaluate sysetms and I think people working on
theorem proving should commit themselves to constructing verifications
that allow for objective evaluation. I think we need to establish
a set of benchmark theorems so that we can convince the mathematical
and computer science community that we are making progress.
∂21-Jul-87 1141 WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: ai courses
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jul 87 11:41:24 PDT
Date: Tue 21 Jul 87 11:34:00-PDT
From: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: ai courses
To: SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU
Cc:
reges@Score.Stanford.EDU, mayr@Score.Stanford.EDU,
feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, winograd@CSLI.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, binford@Whitney.Stanford.EDU,
shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, latombe@Whitney.Stanford.EDU,
nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
My courses are as follows (they are all cross-listed in CS and
Linguistics)
NATURAL LANGUAGE:
CS 75. Computers and Language (for undergraduate distribution, no
prerequisites, not for grad students). Spring
CS 275. Computational Models for the Syntax Natural Language (no
prerequisites). Alternate years Winter
CS 276. Computational Models for the Semantics of Natural Language (no
prerequisites, though with the new organization I may think of changing
that). Alternate years Winter
You should also list
CS 277. Computational Models of Discourse (no prerequisites). Offered
by CSLI consulting faculty (SRI people). Spring
PHILOSOPHY OF AI
CS378. Phenomenological Foundations of Computation, Cognition and
Language. (no prerequisites, but demands some maturity). Fall
------
In 87-88 I will be on levae. 75 and 275 will be offered by Martin Kay,
277 by the usual faculty (you should check with Hobbs and Appelt to see
who will be in charge). The others will not be offered.
∂21-Jul-87 1303 LES
∂21-Jul-87 1301 JMC
There are apparently many incarnations of Tom Knight.
LES - Where?
∂21-Jul-87 1309 CLT alex
To: JMC, IAM
how about monday at 3pm to here a presentation of
his thesis proposal / current state of research?
∂21-Jul-87 1315 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Pigott Professorship
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jul 87 13:15:39 PDT
Date: Tue 21 Jul 87 13:03:32-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Pigott Professorship
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU, LES@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12320200664.20.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, for your information, the University will give you $500/year and the
School of Engineering will give you $1,000/year as holder of the Pigott
Professorship. So you will have $1500/year in unrestricted funds from this
source.
Betty
-------
∂21-Jul-87 1636 ME
To: LES, JMC
I changed the password on [1,TK] and sent him mail at MIT.
∂21-Jul-87 1811 DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Lyn & JMC on Nicaragua
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jul 87 18:10:56 PDT
Date: Tue 21 Jul 87 18:15:58-PDT
From: David Liu <DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Lyn & JMC on Nicaragua
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 20 Jul 87 22:23:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12320257540.11.DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
John
re: your message about the Pilgrims to Nigaragua
I believe what you have said. It is really easy to fool some of the
smartest, but naive, persons by carefully planned tours. To cite the
Cultral Revolution as example, I remember that in 1974, Dr C.N. Yang, a
phsicist and Nobel Prize winner, talked that the Chinese scholars and
research workers were totally undisturbed, and some even voluntarily
joined the actions in Cultral Revolution after his repeated trips to China.
The truth we know now is that the intellectuals were one of the major
target of the political movement.
David Liu
-------
∂21-Jul-87 2139 RPG Loop
Steele has already made that objection to LOOP. You ought to
state the objection once more. I believe that either LOOP
will be standardized or become a ``standard library'' routine.
-rpg-
∂22-Jul-87 0824 TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU Re: connectionist summer school
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Jul 87 08:24:26 PDT
Received: ID <TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 22 Jul 87 11:24:13-EDT
Date: Wed 22 Jul 87 11:24:12-EDT
From: Dave.Touretzky@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Re: connectionist summer school
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 21 Jul 87 11:56:00-EDT
Message-ID: <12320411956.15.TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Thanks for the $10K. I wish all my funding requests were handled this
easily!
-- Dave
-------
∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
visa
∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
snyder
∂22-Jul-87 0900 JMC
dina bolla
∂22-Jul-87 1508 RA talk tonight
Your talk is at the main dinning room in the faculty club. The banquet
is scheduled 6:30 - 9:30. Joleen did not know the exact time of your talk.
∂22-Jul-87 2043 CLT
miro called - please call him tomorrow at his office
he will be there after 9am our time
∂22-Jul-87 2137 PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Some Responses on Nicaragua
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Jul 87 21:37:18 PDT
Date: Wed 22 Jul 87 21:31:32-PDT
From: Liam Peyton <PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Some Responses on Nicaragua
To: su-etc@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
cc: siegman@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12320555287.9.PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for the comments and criticisms both public and private (even
you Mr. Pao. I take great delight whenever someone makes a fool of
themselves by sending hate mail blindly across the network without
having any knowledge of who the person on the other end is. :-))
Prof. McCarthy's criticisms are important and I would like to answer
them. Its just not true that I did not speak to people individually.
I mentioned the various group meetings to show that an effort was
made to hear different sides. For example, the remark the member of
the Coordinacion Democratica made to me about it being a mistake to
boycott the elections as opposed to boycotting the assembly after the
election happened AFTER the group talk when I approached him privately.
He perceived ( as Tony Siegman has) that I am anything but pro-Sandinista
(being against the Mafia, doesn't mean you like the Democrats) and we had a
frank discussion in which I criticized their boycott of the election and his
unwillingness to criticize the Contras ("I will not criticize how others
chose to oppose the government, even if their methods are ones I would not
use.") and he asked that I tell people in the US about his complaints (which
I have been doing). Witness for Peace is not
associated in any way with the Sandinista government, nor was our itinerary
arranged with the Government. What sort of groups we talked to was determined
by the group itself, with the actual meetings arranged and set up by the
Witness for Peace organization in Nicaragua.
We did not talk to the Contras in Honduras
(sorry student budget, limited time),
but we did talk to a health care worker who had been kidnapped by the
contras. He escaped from their camp into a refugee camp then got back into
Nicaragua. We talked to a contra who had laid down his arms under the amnesty
project. One of the long term volunteers for WFP had just gotten back from
a two week visit in Honduras in which she visited many of the Nicaraguan
refugee camps on the Atlantic Coast.
I also wandered around on my own for several hours in Managua, Leon, Somotillo
and the relocation camp and talked to many people. My spanish well not good
was sufficient to talk with them asking what they did, what they thought of
the revolution, the Sandinistas. As well, 5 out of the 15 people in the group
were fluent spanish speakers. I became good friends with one of them and
he was usually around to translate if I really needed help. I certainly have
no way of verifying the actual statistics I quoted about literacy (how many
people can verify the statistics they quote?) BUT I would not quote them if
I had not
seen dramatic evidence of it myself. I talked to several men and women over
40 who learned to read after the revolution. In a small poverty stricken
village while wandering around I got swamped by a group of twenty young kids
(tall white boys are quite a curiosity in such areas). I asked them how
many could read and write. All but one or two very little kids said they
could. I didn't believe them so they proved it by drawing words in the dirt
and reading some literature I had in Spanish. I talked to nuns and teachers
who had been in Nicaragua since before the revolution, all of them confirmed
that dramatic changes had been made. The clincher to prove what I say about
literacy is that all the books in the schools have a big Sandinista party
flag on the inside cover and often have a Sandinista party slogan thrown in
here and there....
It is no accident that Tony sees a lot of confirmation of what the Reagan
administration has said about the Sandinistas in what I say. I am not saying
don't fund the contras you don't have to worry about the Sandinistas. I am
saying don't fund the contras, they are not a solution to the very real problem
the Sandinistas pose. But lets keep the problem in perspective and understand
what is the problem and what causes it. I quote from the representative of
the U.S. embassy we talked to (barring transcription twiddles when I copied
it down in my notebook) "I'm not going to try to tell you that Nicaragua is
a threat to the U.S.. You've travelled around the country you've seen what
a backwater it is so you know that's just not true." There are some
Sandinistas who may want to export the revolution or want Nicaragua
to become a soviet launching base. I would point out that to export you
need a market and that Cuba has been sitting 90 miles off shore for 30 years.
Further, they have shown themselves responsive to political pressure. They
have done a complete turnaround on the moskito problem. Nicaragua is not a
Russia or a Cuba. Rule is not maintained through force. While they discourage
opposition parties who could take power away from them they actively encourage
discussion and input from the people. No attempt has been made to support
the democratic opposition within Nicaragua, to get the Sandinistas to
strengthen the skeleton of a democracy they have setup - in spite of their
insistent plea that they would like to negotiate and make peace with the US.
It is also no accident that Prof. McCarthy sees some of my statements as being
favorable to the Sandinistas. I will state unequivocally without hesitation
that the revolution was a good thing for Nicaragua. The problem is that
the Sandinistas are cheating the revolution. The vast majority of people
in Nicaragua (like in the rest of Latin America) are poor not middle class.
They used to live as feudal serfs (I am not being flamboyant that is the most
accurate description I can give) poor, uneducated, sick in fear of the
National Guard should they complain too loudly. They have a chance now to be
educated, they are not as sick as before, there is no National Guard, and
their demands can be heard (while the Sandinistas are ruthless towards
opposition
from other parties, they very actively promote free expression within the
party and from mass organizations like womens groups and unions). I can see
the dangers the Sandinistas pose but they cant. Remember this is Latin America
where the norm is military dictatorship not democracy. Remember that its hard
for them to worry about losing something they've never had.
In Nicaragua, 8 years after the revolution I saw neighborhoods comparable to
any upperclass neighborhood you would see in the U.S. (guess where Cardinal
Obando y Bravo lives). I also saw poverty and squalor unimaginable and far
worse than anything you could find in the worst ghetto here in the U.S. The
problem is underdevelopment. In theory, capitalism should if anything do a
better job of developing then communism. But that depends on there being
free enterprise and an educated populace. In practice, mafia-style thugs
choke off development by monopolizing the economy and suppressing change and
freedom. Supporting strongmen cuts off slow gradual change until pressure
builds up and a revolution results.
Its fine to say that communism is inherently evil. If you want to have a
solution you have to understand why it becomes popular and provide
alternatives. Funding terrorism may appease one's moral indignation, but
it does nothing for the people of Nicaragua.
---Liam
"You have to understand that when you are poor, starving with no hope
for improvement, communism becomes a very attractive politic."
A friend of mine who escaped from Czekoslovakia
"You don't understand. Communists are very popular when they come to power.
We all voted for them in 1948. They just never let go. ....
No, I agree the Contras are no solution - its a mess down there"
Another Czech friend who also escaped
"A military solution is not the answer. If that's all it would take
Marcos would have solved the communist problem 15 years ago."
Corazon Aquino
"Here in the US we speak of communists. The communists speak of the poor.
We must learn to speak of the poor."
Richard Nixon
(after returning from China)
-------
∂22-Jul-87 2337 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Some Responses on Nicaragua
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Jul 87 23:37:20 PDT
Date: Wed 22 Jul 87 23:31:35-PDT
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some Responses on Nicaragua
To: PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, siegman@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12320555287.9.PEYTON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12320577143.18.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Liam Peyton <PEYTON@sushi.stanford.edu> wrote:
Remember this is Latin America where the norm is military dictatorship
not democracy. Remember that its hard for them to worry about losing
something they've never had.
On page C1 of today's Chronicle (Wednesday, july 22), there is an
article titled "The Case for Latin American Democracy." It is
excerpted from an interview of Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa that
was published by L'Express, a French newsweekly.
The interviewer asked why Llosa "expressed cautious optimistism about
the future of democracy in Latin America."
Never in our history have there been so many freely elected democratic
governments in Latin America. Military dictatorships have fallen in
Ecuador, Peru, Boliva, Argentina, Brazil, and in Central America.
There are now civilian governments in El Salvador, Honduras, and
Guatemala, where, under extremely difficult conditions, President
(Vinicio) Cerezo has been struggling to make headway little by little
against the army.
Even if the fall of Baby Doc (Duvalier) in Haiti last year didn't
clear the way for a democratic, civilian government, it was
nonetheless a remarkable sign of progress. Only four dictatorships
remain: Those of (General Augusto) Pinochet in Chile and (Alfredo)
Stroessner in Paraguay on the right, and that of Cuba and the
Sandinista state of Nicaragua on the Left.
Liam also wrote:
No attempt has been made to support the democratic opposition within
Nicaragua, to get the Sandinistas to strengthen the skeleton of a
democracy they have setup - in spite of their insistent plea that they
would like to negotiate and make peace with the US.
Llosa replies:
To me, the most important phenomenon - important in that it represents
a chance at breaking the vicious circle of dictatorship-democracy-
dictatorship that has marked our history - is the fact that for the
first time these elected governments enjoy popular support. They were
neither chosen by local elites nor imposed by outside pressure: They
are the choice of the masses.
Later on, the interviewer asks about Llosa's criticism "of Western
intellectuals who disdain the young Third World democracies fighting
for pluralism and freedom."
It's this myth that the Third World, and especially Latin America,
must choose between revolution and dictatorship. ... The guerrilleros
continue to symbolize idealism and justice.
Interviewer: "Just as the Castroites did."
The real revolution for Latin America would be to renounce revolution.
The real heroism is to try to live within the law, to eradicate
violece, as the Dominican Republic is doing. Of course, that lacks
sex appeal...
Llosa's comments on Shining Path's roots agree with JMC's.
-andy
-------
∂23-Jul-87 0844 DEK sail
yes of course I'd like to discuss it. ... trouble is, I'm waking up
about 8pm these days (and I'm going to sleep soon this morning).
Can we talk by phone some evening?
∂23-Jul-87 1459 SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: ai courses
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Jul 87 14:58:57 PDT
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 87 14:56:17 PDT
From: Ted Shortliffe <Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: ai courses
To: SHOHAM%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
winograd%CSLI.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
binford%WHITNEY.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
latombe%WHITNEY.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
nilsson%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
reges%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
mayr%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12320031995.11.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Medical School Office Building X-215; (415) 723-6979
Message-ID: <12320745478.76.SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Yoav,
We offer several courses with significant AI content:
MIS 211A (cross-listed as CS 271A): Computer-Assisted Medical Decision Making
MIS 211B (cross-listed as CS 271B): projects course follow-on to 211A
MIS 229 (cross-listed as CS 524): Seminar on Rule-Based Expert Systems
(taught with Bruce Buchanan)
Regards,
Ted Shortliffe
-------
∂23-Jul-87 1621 JJW Alliant memory
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
IGS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I talked with Jack Test this afternoon and mentioned our problem with
paging performance. He asked how much memory we have and when I said
16 megabytes he said that's the smallest configuration that anyone uses
and we almost certainly will need more.
Also, it turns out they have started making boards with 1 megabit chips,
which are therefore 32 megabytes per board. These cost 4 times as
much as the 8 megabyte boards, so there appears to be no advantage for
us unless we want to push the total beyond 64 megabytes. At our 17%
discount, the price therefore remains $16,600 per 8 megabyte increment.
Jack plans to be here on July 31 and over the weekend to August 3, so
we can do some computations then and decide what we really need.
∂23-Jul-87 1900 JMC
connolly
∂23-Jul-87 2148 harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU Wittgenstein on Family Resemblances
Received: from PRINCETON.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Jul 87 21:48:09 PDT
Received: by Princeton.EDU (5.51/1.29)
id AA10813; Fri, 24 Jul 87 00:45:18 EDT
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 87 00:45:18 EDT
From: harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU
Received: by mind.Princeton.EDU (4.12/1.52)
id AA01957; Fri, 24 Jul 87 00:45:29 edt
Message-Id: <8707240445.AA01957@mind.Princeton.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Wittgenstein on Family Resemblances
Cc: sher@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU, dmark@sunybcs
In conformity with the vote to end the symbol grounding discussion, I
have taken to my tent awhile and am not responding on the Net. Here is
what I would have replied to your recent posting on natural kinds,
a discussion that arose from some criticisms I had been making of
graded category "models" in the Rosch/Wittgenstein line of research:
In comp.ai.digest, rlw@philabs.philips.COM (Richard Wexelblat)
of Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff Manor, NY, on the topic of
Natural Kinds quotes Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations):
>"Consider, for example the proceedings that we call `games.' I mean board-
>games, card-games, ball-games, Olympic games, and so on. What is common to
>them all? -- Don't say: ``There must be something common, or they would not be
>called `games','' but look and see whether there is anything common to all.
>For if you look at them you will not see something that is common to all,
>but similarities, relationships, and a whole series of them at that ... a
>complicated network of similarities overlapping and criss-crossing; sometimes
>overall similarities, sometimes similarities of detail. I can think of no
>better expression to characterize these similarities than `family
>resemblances'; for the various resemblances between the members of a family:
>build, features, colour of eyes, gait, temperament, etc. etc. overlap and
>criss-cross in the same way.--And I shall say: `games' form a family."
It's exhilarating -- and yet another virtue of the Net -- to be able
to debate electronically a great nonliving philosopher in the same style as a
contemporary colleague. It's only a pity that this remarkable
technology is not quite powerful enough to allow him to respond in kind...:
I *do* reply that "there must be something in common, or they
[*could*] not be called `games' " -- as they are indeed called, reliably and
demonstrably. We are not speaking here about where successful
categorization breaks down -- the ambiguous and uncertain cases there may
well be, rendering all of our categories provisonal, approximate,
open-ended, dependent on the cases we've sampled to date, and ever
open to revision and updating -- but about the reliable cases for
which everyone agrees on the correct all-or-none classification. If there
is nothing in common here, how does Wittgenstein imagine that we succeed
in our naming?
We succeed by using features. The features need not be simple, conjunctive,
monadic properties. They can be disjunctive, negative, conditional,
relational, even probabilistic. They may be "natural" and physical
or they may be based on arbitrary (but shared) conventions and stipulations.
They may involve directly perceptible properties or they may be constructive,
drawing on a long chain of inferences and abstractions. But as long as
successful all-or-none categorization performance is demonstrable,
such features must exist and be used.
But what is a "feature"? It seems to be a matter of logic or even
definition that a feature must be any property (however complex) whose
presence or absence in a given instance can provide the basis for a categorical
decision. Let us call these properties, collectively, the "invariants" in
the instances that "afford" categorization (although this convenient
Gibsonian terminology is hardly meant as an endorsement of his "direct
realism"). To say that they sometimes resemble "family resemblances" is only
to say that not all features are simple, monadic and conjunctive. So what? Who
promised they would be?
The Roschian line of categorization research has taken to dismissing such
features as "metafeatures," but that is either just an arbitrary stipulation
or it trivializes the issue (or both).
Stevan Harnad harnad@mind.princeton.edu (609)-921-7771
----------------------------
From rlw@philabs.philips.com Thu Jul 23 09:56:27 1987
Subject: Re: Wittgenstein on family resemblances
Thanks twice for your comments. Once because I never saw my own posting and
was not sure it got out; twice for your insight.
I missed the original argument and almost put the topic in my kill file. But
perseverence won out and eventually I found it fascinating -- mostly because
it repeated arguments we had in Logic class in 1961, but with immense insight
from the AI experience.
--Dick Wexelblat
----------------------------
∂24-Jul-87 1441 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Jul-87 00:11-PT.]
Are you registered for the Milan conference, or should I buy a Proceedings
for you?
∂24-Jul-87 1836 ESWOLF@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Readings on scientific explanation
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Jul 87 18:36:44 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Jul 87 18:30:53-PDT
From: Elizabeth Wolf <ESWOLF@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Readings on scientific explanation
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: eswolf@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321046690.14.ESWOLF@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Dr. McCarthy:
At my talk on explanation in Yoav Shoham's seminar on causality
this past spring, you made some references to literature on the subject
of scientific explanation. I am now trying to write a paper for a phil-
osophy class on the subject of explanation, and would appreciate any
pointers to the literature which you could give me.
Thank you.
Liz Wolf
-------
∂24-Jul-87 2056 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU Nien Cheng's "Life and Death in Shanghai"
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Jul 87 20:56:42 PDT
Received: from KSL-1186-4.Stanford.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri, 24 Jul 87 20:51:55 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 87 20:47:50 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Nien Cheng's "Life and Death in Shanghai"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <584152422.A0346.KSL-1186-4.Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>
Have you read this book? I just finished it. It is a remarkable work. I
expected it to be stridently anti-Communist, considering Mrs. Cheng's sad
experiences, but what I found was a book that was pro-humanity instead.
∂25-Jul-87 0036 GROSOF@Score.Stanford.EDU Delgrande AAAI paper
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jul 87 00:36:25 PDT
Date: Sat 25 Jul 87 00:30:46-PDT
From: Benjamin N. Grosof <GROSOF@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Delgrande AAAI paper
To: shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU, sjg@Sail.Stanford.EDU, val@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU, myers@Sushi.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, konolige@STRIPE.SRI.COM
cc: grosof@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321112203.11.GROSOF@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I've read Delgrande's AAAI paper "An Approach to Default Reasoning
Based on a First-Order Conditional Logic". I think it's pretty
interesting and recommend looking at it. If you do, I'd be interested
in discussing it. A comment/suggestion: I think his use of
"simplest", "least exceptional", etc. is mushy and doesn't add much to
the exposition, so concentrate on his definitions and examples.
Benjamin
-------
∂25-Jul-87 1813 CLT
856-6173
∂25-Jul-87 1814 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method Project Schedule
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jul 87 18:14:20 PDT
Date: Sat 25 Jul 87 18:13:12-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Inverse Method Project Schedule
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321305613.7.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
(cc: Gene Haberman, IBM)
Vladimir,
I'm acquiring enough knowledge of the algorithm and of MRS to begin work. MRS
is quite free of contamination by comments, so it takes longer to comprehend
it. And I am remembering LISP from the course I took over a year ago. The
occasion of this note is the fact I was rereading the paper to begin planning
my attack on the coding by making the algorithm more concrete in my mind.
I am having to use vacation time to do this project, and that's fine, but I can
only do so as the job schedule permits, which is turning out to be less than
one day per week plus Saturdays, and that time is shared with homework for
CS237A (numerical analysis), which is a time hog requiring more than just
evenings, which is what I originally allocated to it. As a result I am moving
very much more slowly than I thought I would and than I think I should be.
By copy of this note I would like clarification from Dr McCarthy on the
schedule for the project. I know he will be off campus (in Austin?) fall
quarter, but since you are doing the actual evaluation I was hoping we could
informally set a date later than September.
..Ed
-------
∂26-Jul-87 1307 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of June computer charges.
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jul 87 13:07:16 PDT
Date: Sun 26 Jul 87 13:05:30-PDT
From: Billing Editor <BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summary of June computer charges.
To: MCCARTHY@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321511744.13.BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Mr. McCarthy,
Following is a summary of your computer charges for June.
Account System Billed Cpu Job Disk Print Adj Total
JMC SAIL 2-DMA480 329.19 214.78 ***.** 16.96 5.00 2738.34
MCCARTHY SCORE 2-DMA480 .00 .00 6.49 .00 5.00 11.49
MCCARTHY SUSHI SUSHI .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
Total: 329.19 214.78 ***.** 16.96 10.00 2749.83
University budget accounts billed above include the following.
Account Principal Investigator Title
2-DMA480 McCarthy DCR 84-14393
In future, each computer user will receive a monthly electronic statement
summarizing their computer usage. This statement is a condensed version of
the detailed summary sheets sent monthly to departments.
Verify each month that the proper university budget accounts are paying for
your computer usage. Check the list of account numbers below the numeric
totals. If the organizations/people associated with that account number
should NOT be paying for your computer time, please send mail to
BEDIT@SCORE.
This statement is sent to the preferred EMAIL address listed in the PEDIT
database on SCORE. If no address is specified in PEDIT, this statement
is sent one of the listed computer accounts.
Please direct questions/comments to BEDIT@SCORE.
-------
∂26-Jul-87 1346 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: liberal bias in SU Humanities departments
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jul 87 13:46:37 PDT
Date: Sun 26 Jul 87 13:51:39-PDT
From: Lyn Bowman <LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: liberal bias in SU Humanities departments
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 26 Jul 87 13:11:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12321520143.16.LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
It's Hearst's personal editorial on the inside back page of the first
section, I think. (I'm away from the paper right now.)
-------
∂26-Jul-87 1428 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU re: JPL Issue on Logic & AI
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jul 87 14:28:08 PDT
Received: ID <THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Sun 26 Jul 87 17:27:59-EDT
Date: Sun 26 Jul 87 17:27:57-EDT
From: Rich.Thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: re: JPL Issue on Logic & AI
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 6 Jul 87 09:33:00-EDT
Message-ID: <12321526753.39.THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
This is to confirm our brief conversation at the AAAI, anout
the JPL issue that I'm hoping to get out on AI and Philosophical
Logic. You still seemed willing to contribute a position paper, with
logicians in mind as the audience.
The main question, of course, is timing. As I recall, you
seemed to think that the fall of this year would be reasonable.
I don't think we were more precise than that, but if it's OK with
you I'd hope for something around Dec 1.
Do we have an understanding?
--Rich
P.S. I didn't find Vladimir, but am trying to arrange by netmail for
him to contribute a paper for the issue. I hope that his visa
problems can be resolved without a lot of heat being generated, though
I suppose this isn't likely.
-------
∂26-Jul-87 2110 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Your N-queens suggestion
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jul 87 21:10:35 PDT
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1987 21:09 PDT
Message-ID: <RDZ.12321599829.BABYL@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Your N-queens suggestion
You once suggested the following N-queens optimization. If you have a
column that you wish to place a queen in that has only 2 unattacked
squares A and B, then you can eliminate the squares in other columns
that both A and B would attack.
It turns out that this suggestion actually fits well into the SAT
algorithm I'm currently writing (in fact, it fits in reasonably for
arbitrary SAT problems). There's a certain natural optimization for
our SAT algorithm that implements this suggestion when applied to
N-queens.
Ramin
∂27-Jul-87 0900 JMC
kotov
∂27-Jul-87 0948 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu A question both of you agree on (I think?)
Received: from SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Jul 87 09:48:35 PDT
Received: by sonoma.stanford.edu; Mon, 27 Jul 87 09:46:54 PDT
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 87 09:46:54 PDT
From: John Acken <acken@sonoma.stanford.edu>
Subject: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mrc@sail.stanford.edu
Dear Sirs:
My name is John M. Acken and I am both a PhD EE student and
a student reporter for Stanford's KZSU radio station. Only the latter
point is relevant to my request. I think I remember that one or both
of you have indicated some knowledge of atheists, and even an atheist
organization. I am planning a news special in a couple of weeks
which will present several answers to the question:
"Is the concept of god or God relevant to modern Stanford students?"
My approach will be to get several 30 second quotes that will not
convince people, but at least get them to seriously consider the
question. As it is my belief that Stanford students don't really
analyze the concept of god as it relates to themselves, but consider
it to old fashioned to think about, yet they continue to behave and
believe as their parents do (whatever that might be in each individual
case).
Anyway, finding preachers will be easy, I can just look in the phone
book. And i think I have a lead on an Agnostic. But I would
like some good quotes from atheists, especially from an official
spokesperson from an atheist organization. I would like quotes from
either or both of you - but I know in our society that could be
detrimental to your careers or social interaction with peers,
so I will understand if you decline. At least, you might have a
local name or phone number I could contact.
The hard part of the assignment is to say something in 30 seconds
that might jolt a Stanford student or two into really thinking
about their own perspective on the concept of god (supreme being,
whatever).
.
. ... .
.......
................. SINCERELY,
... ... JOHN M. ACKEN
. .
∂27-Jul-87 1020 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Jul 87 10:20:44 PDT
Date: Mon 27 Jul 87 10:19:38-PDT
From: Richard Marty <MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: check
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321743691.18.MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
there is a check for you at the reception desk. MJH
-------
∂27-Jul-87 1202 VAL re: Inverse Method Project Schedule
To: brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU sent Sat 25 Jul 87 18:13:12-PDT.]
Ed,
Let me suggest that you try to do a few inverse method examples on paper before
you begin coding. You can take any problems done by resolution in your favorite
text, or I can recommend something if you wish.
There is a chance that I'll be travelling from Aug. 7 till the end of the month.
Also, if you want to talk, I have more time this week than the next.
Thanks very much for the list of typos.
Vladimir
∂27-Jul-87 1207 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU '87-July-tecrpts-mailinglist
Received: from RED.RUTGERS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Jul 87 12:07:32 PDT
Date: 27 Jul 87 15:02:06 EDT
From: PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: '87-July-tecrpts-mailinglist
To: arpanet.mail: ;
cc: petty@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Message-ID: <12321762346.24.PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
@make(text)
@begin(description)
Below is a list of our newest technical reports.
The abstracts for these are available for access via FTP with user account
<anonymous> with any password. The file name is:
<library>tecrpts-online.doc
If you wish to order copies of any of these reports please send mail via the
ARPANET to PETTY@RUTGERS. Thank you!!
[ ] CBM-TR-150 - "THEORY FORMATION IN POSTULATING KINETIC
MECHANISMS: REASONING WITH CONSTRAINTS," V. Soo, C.A.
Kulikowski, D. Garfinkel and L. Garfinkel.
[ ] LCSR-TR-89 - "INCREMENTAL ITERATION: WHEN WILL IT WORK?",
B.G. Ryder, T.J. Marlowe and M.C. Paull.
[ ] DCS-TR-209 - "EXPERIMENTS IN OPTIMIZING FP", B.G. Ryder and
J.S. Pendergrast.
[ ] DCS-TR-210 - "RECENT RESULTS ON PERFECT GRAPHS", V. Chvatal.
[ ] DCS-TR-211 - "(THESIS) - (If you wish to order this thesis, a
prepayment of $15.00 is required.) "LEARNING CONCEPTS WITH A
PROTOTYPE-BASED MODEL FOR CONCEPT REPRESENTATION", D.J. Nagel.
[ ] DCS-TR-212 - "ALMOST SORTING IN ONE ROUND", M. Ajtai, J.
Komlos, W.L. Steiger and E. Szemeredi.
[ ] DCS-TR-213 - "ON SETS OF NATURAL NUMBERS WHOSE DIFFERENCE SET
CONTAINS NO SQUARES", J. Pintz, W.L. Steiger and E. Szemeredi.
[ ] DCS-TR-214 - "THE PARALLEL COMPLEXITY OF ELEMENT DISTINCTNESS
IS (LOG n)1/2", P. Ragde, W.L. Steiger, E. Szemeredi and A. Wigderson.
[ ] ML-TR-9 - "FORMULATING CONCEPTS ACCORDING TO PURPOSE", S.T.
Kedar-Cabelli.
[ ] ML-TR-10 - "EXPLANATION-BASED GENERALIZATION AS RESOLUTION
THEOREM PROVING", S.T. Kedar-Cabelli and L.T. McCarty.
[ ] ML-TR-11 - "CONCEPT LEARNING IN CONTEXT", R.M. Keller.
[ ] ML-TR-12 - "DEFINING OPERATIONALITY FOR EXPLANATION-BASED
LEARNING", R.M. Keller.
[ ] ML-TR-13 - "PROLEARN: TOWARDS A PROLOG INTERPRETER THAT
LEARNS", A.E. Prieditis and J. Mostow.
[ ] ML-TR-14 - "AUTOMATED REUSE OF DESIGN PLANS", J. Mostow and M.
Barley.
[ ] LRP-TR-20 - "INTELLIGENT LEGAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS: AN
UPDATE", L.T. McCarty.
@end(description)
-------
∂27-Jul-87 1300 JMC
Check with Virginia Mann.
∂27-Jul-87 1459 CLT
we are in 252
∂27-Jul-87 1535 harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU Natural Kinds
Received: from PRINCETON.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Jul 87 15:34:32 PDT
Received: by Princeton.EDU (5.51/1.31)
id AA02461; Mon, 27 Jul 87 18:30:28 EDT
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 87 18:30:28 EDT
From: harnad@mind.Princeton.EDU
Received: by mind.Princeton.EDU (4.12/1.52)
id AA20854; Mon, 27 Jul 87 18:33:39 edt
Message-Id: <8707272233.AA20854@mind.Princeton.EDU>
To: minsky@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Natural Kinds
Cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Marvin, because of the poll, I'm not posting to the Net awhile. Here
are some unposted e-mail replies to material from you and others that has
appeared on the Net. -- Cheers, Stevan
-----------------------
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: AIList Digest V5 #170
I would like to see that discussion of "symbol grounding" reduced to
much smaller proportions because I think it is not very relevant to
AI, CS, or psychology. To understand my reason, you'd have to read
"Society of Mind", which argues that this approach is obsolete because
it recapitulates the "single agent" concept of mind that dominates
traditional philosophy. For example, the idea of "categorizing"
perceptions is, I think, mainly an artifact of language; different
parts of the brain deal with inputs in different ways, in parallel.
In SOM I suggest many alternative ways to think about thinking and, in
several sections, I also suggest reasons why the single agent idea has
such a powerful grip on us. I realize that it might seem self-serving
for me to advocate discussing Society of Mind instead. I would have
presented my arguments in reply to Harnad, but they would have been
too long-winded and the book is readily available.
------------------------------
[The above posting from Marvin Minsky came after the poll, so I did
not reply; however, for anyone interested in how the discussion would have
gone if I had replied , I have saved the files of an earlier exchange with
Minsky and others on the topic of his new book. (He posted a summary
around the time it was about to be published, launching a discussion
whose header was "Minsky on Mind(s)".) The file is available on
request.]
-------------------------
[The following reply to David Mark was not posted on the Net but sent by email,
because the poll was already underway as to whether or not to continue
the symbol grounding discussion and I was waiting for the results
before posting any more on it.]
dmark@sunybcs.uucp (David M. Mark) wrote:
> dictionaries may not be a good authority on categories...
> "What is a map?" If you check out dictionaries, the definitions seem
> unambiguous, non-fuzzy, concrete. Even the question may seem foolish,
> since "map" probably is a "basic-level" object/concept. However, we
> conducted a number of experiments and found many ambiguous stimuli
> near the boundary of the concept "map"... some people feel very
> strongly that [certain examples] *are* maps, others sharply reject
> that claim, etc... [These are hence] examples of the ambiguous
> ("fuzzy"?) boundary of the concept to which the English word "map"
> correctly applies. I strongly suspect that "map" is not unique in
> this regard!
Your reply is thoughtful and interesting, and such experiments (formal and
informal) can be very informative about the scope and limits of our
current categorization capacity and its underlying representations. We
have to be clear, however, on what is meant by "graded" or "fuzzy" categories
when they are proposed as an alternative to all-or-none ones. In the
Roschian approach I was criticizing, the concepts were themselves
quite vague and changeable, but there was an overall sense in which
"all-or-none" was being contrasted with "graded" -- i.e., membership
as a matter of degree. This is really what I am attacking. Neither a
bird nor a map is a bird or map as a matter of degree. It just
is or isn't one, categorically.
This does not mean that I deny the existence of (1) unclassified or even
unclassifiable instances or (2) differences of opinion as to the correct
classification, but that's not quite the point, since the burden of a
category representation theory is to capture people's positive
categorization performance capacity -- how they successfully sort what they
CAN successfully sort. The fine-tuning (speed, errors) of this capacity is
a later (and much smaller) problem.
I suggest that a better interpretation of the ambiguous cases that
(I agree) always exist or can be artificially generated for any given
category name is that category representations are provisional and
approximate, based only on what features it takes to sort correctly
the instances encountered to date, and always open to revision if the
current feature set fails with a new, unclassifiable instance. (To
revise successfully of course also requires feedback as to whether or
not the tentative classification is "correct." Otherwise the category
is not "fuzzy" but indeterminate.)
I think it's this APPROXIMATENESS (of "map" as well as all other
categories) that your informal experiment shows. All category
boundaries are "fuzzy" in this sense, because they are the frail and
fallible boundaries of our current knowledge. Dictionaries,
encyclopedias and even scientific textbooks can codify only the relatively
static core of this knowledge, and they too are always open to revision and
updating.
But none of this implies that the current approximation to "map" or
any other all-or-none category is graded -- that maps are maps as a
matter of degree. (By the way, I also consider Rosch's notion of
"basic-level object" as arbitrary or perhaps even incoherent except as
a pragmatic default level or context for classification in some instances.)
Stevan Harnad
-------------------
>From: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU (John McCarthy) ailist@stripe.sri.com
Subject: Natural kinds
Recently philosophers, Hilary Putnam I think, introduced the concept
of natural kind which, in my opinion, is one of the few things they
have done that is useful for AI. Most nouns designate natural kinds,
uncontroversially "bird", and in my opinion, even "chair". (I don't
consider "natural kind" to be a linguistic term, because there may
be undiscovered natural kinds and never articulated natural kinds).
The clearest examples of natural kind are biological species -
say penguin. We don't have a definition of penguin; rather we
have learned to recognize penguins. Penguins have many properties
I don't know about; some unknown even to penguin specialists.
However, I can tell penguins from seagulls without a precise definition,
because there aren't any intermediates existing in nature.
Therefore, the criteria used by people or by the programs we build
can be quite rough, and we don't all need to use the same criteria,
because we will come out with the same answer in the cases that
actually arise.
In my view the same is true of chairs. With apologies to Don Norman,
I note that my 20 month old son Timothy recognizes chairs and tables.
So far as I know, he is always right about the whether the objects
in our house are chairs. He also recognizes toy chairs, but just
calls them "chair" and similarly treats pictures of chairs in books.
He doesn't yet say "real chair", "toy chair" and "picture of a chair",
but he doesn't try to sit on pictures of chairs. He is entirely
prepared to be corrected about what an object is. For example, he
called a tomato "apple" and accepted correction.
We should try to make AI systems as good as children in this respect.
When a an object is named, the system should generate a
gensym, e.g. G00137. To this symbol should be attached the name
and what the system is to remember about the instance. (Whether it
remembers a prototype or a criterion is independent of this discussion;
my prejudice is that it should do both if it can. The utility of
prototypes depends on how good we have made it in handling similarities.)
The system should presume (defeasibly) that there is more to the concept
than it has learned and that some of what it has learned may be wrong.
It should also presume (although will usually be built into the design
rather than be linguistically represented) that the new concept is
a useful way to distinguish features of the world, although some new
concepts will turn out to be mere social conventions.
Attaching if-and-only-if definitions to concepts will sometimes be
possible, and mathematical concepts often are introduced by definitions.
However, this is a rare case in common sense experience.
I'm not sure that philosophers will agree with treating chairs as
natural kinds, because it is easy to invent intermediates between
chairs and other furniture. However, I think it is psychologically
correct and advantageous for AI, because we and our robots exist
in a world in which doubtful cases are rare.
The mini-controversy about penguins can be treated from this point of
view. That penguins are birds and whales are mammals has been discovered
by science. Many of the properties that penguins have in common with
other birds have not even been discovered yet, but we are confident that
they exist. It is not a matter of definition. He who gets fanatical
about arbitrary definitions will make many mistakes - for example,
classifying penguins with seals will lead to not finding tasty penguin eggs.
---------------------
[As it came after the poll, I did not respond to McCarthy. Most of
what I would have said appears in earlier replies about
continuity/discontinuity discontinuity, approximateness and
provisionality. The fact that the current feature filter may be
defeasible by some future anomolay or ambiguity is not evidence that
it is not categorical (all-or-none). It only confirms that it is
provisional and approximate, always susceptible to revision. As to
"gensym GOO137" -- well, that's so firmly impaled on the horns of the
symbol-grounding problem that we'd have to start all over again in
order even to begin to work it loose...]
---------------------
E-mail (to R. Wexelblat) on Wittgenstein on Family Resemblances:
In conformity with the vote to end the symbol grounding discussion, I
have taken to my tent awhile and am not responding on the Net. Here is
what I would have replied to your recent posting on natural kinds,
a discussion that arose from some criticisms I had been making of
graded category "models" in the Rosch/Wittgenstein line of research:
In comp.ai.digest, rlw@philabs.philips.COM (Richard Wexelblat)
of Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff Manor, NY, on the topic of
Natural Kinds quotes Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations):
>"Consider, for example the proceedings that we call `games.' I mean board-
>games, card-games, ball-games, Olympic games, and so on. What is common to
>them all? -- Don't say: ``There must be something common, or they would not be
>called `games','' but look and see whether there is anything common to all.
>For if you look at them you will not see something that is common to all,
>but similarities, relationships, and a whole series of them at that ... a
>complicated network of similarities overlapping and criss-crossing; sometimes
>overall similarities, sometimes similarities of detail. I can think of no
>better expression to characterize these similarities than `family
>resemblances'; for the various resemblances between the members of a family:
>build, features, colour of eyes, gait, temperament, etc. etc. overlap and
>criss-cross in the same way.--And I shall say: `games' form a family."
It's exhilarating -- and yet another virtue of the Net -- to be able
to debate electronically a great nonliving philosopher in the same style as a
contemporary colleague. It's only a pity that this remarkable
technology is not quite powerful enough to allow him to respond in kind...:
I *do* reply that "there must be something in common, or they
[*could*] not be called `games' " -- as they are indeed called, reliably and
demonstrably. We are not speaking here about where successful
categorization breaks down -- the ambiguous and uncertain cases there may
well be, rendering all of our categories provisonal, approximate,
open-ended, dependent on the cases we've sampled to date, and ever
open to revision and updating -- but about the reliable cases for
which everyone agrees on the correct all-or-none classification. If there
is nothing in common here, how does Wittgenstein imagine that we succeed
in our naming?
We succeed by using features. The features need not be simple, conjunctive,
monadic properties. They can be disjunctive, negative, conditional,
relational, even probabilistic. They may be "natural" and physical
or they may be based on arbitrary (but shared) conventions and stipulations.
They may involve directly perceptible properties or they may be constructive,
drawing on a long chain of inferences and abstractions. But as long as
successful all-or-none categorization performance is demonstrable,
such features must exist and be used.
But what is a "feature"? It seems to be a matter of logic or even
definition that a feature must be any property (however complex) whose
presence or absence in a given instance can provide the basis for a categorical
decision. Let us call these properties, collectively, the "invariants" in
the instances that "afford" categorization (although this convenient
Gibsonian terminology is hardly meant as an endorsement of his "direct
realism"). To say that they sometimes resemble "family resemblances" is only
to say that not all features are simple, monadic and conjunctive. So what? Who
promised they would be?
The Roschian line of categorization research has taken to dismissing such
features as "metafeatures," but that is either just an arbitrary stipulation
or it trivializes the issue (or both).
Stevan Harnad harnad@mind.princeton.edu (609)-921-7771
----------------------------
From rlw@philabs.philips.com Thu Jul 23 09:56:27 1987
Subject: Re: Wittgenstein on family resemblances
Thanks twice for your comments. Once because I never saw my own posting and
was not sure it got out; twice for your insight.
I missed the original argument and almost put the topic in my kill file. But
perseverence won out and eventually I found it fascinating -- mostly because
it repeated arguments we had in Logic class in 1961, but with immense insight
from the AI experience.
--Dick Wexelblat
----------------------------
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Natural Kinds (Re: AIList Digest V5 #186)
About natural kinds. In "The Society of Mind", pp123-129, I propose a
way to deal with Wittgenstein's problem of defining terms like "game"-
or "chair". The basic idea was to probe further into what
Wittgenstein was trying to do when he talked about "family
resemblances" and tried to describe a game in terms of properties, the
way one might treat members of a human family: build, features, colour
of eyes, gait, temperament, etc.
In my view, Wittgenstein missed the point because he focussed on
"structure" only. What we have to do is also take into account the
"function", "goal", or "intended use" of the definition. My trick is
to catch the idea between two descriptions, structural and functional.
Consider a chair, for example.
STRUCTURE: A chair usually has a seat, back, and legs - but
any of them can be changed in so many ways that it is hard
to make a definition to catch them all.
FUNCTION: A chair is intended to be used to keep one's bottom
about 14 inches off the floor, to support one's back
comfortably, and to provide space to bend the knees.
If you understand BOTH of these, then you can make sense of that list
of structural features - seat, back, and legs - and engage your other
worldly knowledge to decide when a given object might serve well as a
chair. This also helps us understand how to deal with "toy chair" and
such matters. Is a toy chair a chair? The answer depends on what you
want to use it for. It is a chair, for example, for a suitable toy
person, or for reminding people of "real" chairs, or etc.
In other words, we should not worship Wittgenstein's final defeat, in
which he speaks about vague resemblances - and, in effect, gives up
hope of dealing with such subjects logically. I suspect he simply
wasn't ready to deal with intentions - because nothing comparable to
Newell and Simon's GPS theory of goals, or McCarthy's meta-predicate
(Want P) was yet available.
I would appreciate comments, because I think this may be an important
theory, and no one seems to have noticed it. I just noticed, myself,
that I didn't mention Wittgenstein himself (on page 130) when
discussiong the definition of "game". Apologies to his ghost.
------------------------------
E-mail reply to Minsky (not posted to Net)
[There's something to be said for functional as well as structural
properties, and considering both is no doubt helpful in disambiguating
artificial kinds -- perhaps even some natural ones (taking into account
adaptive function, say). But I somehow doubt that this was lost on
Wittgenstein. And often the problem of whether a given structure can
perform a given function is the *name of the game* (so to speak) -- i.e.,
that's the very question that appears to lack a clearcut answer, which
is what renders the category ambiguous or hard to define). But to suggest
that what Wittgenstein lacked was Newell/Simon's and McCarthy's "theory" seems
to be a bit of an overstatement, since (in my view, at least) it would
appear to be the latter who lack a theory!]
-----------------------------------
>From: Laws@STRIPE.SRI.COM (Ken Laws) ailist@stripe.sri.com
Subject: Natural Kinds
I would not be so quick to thank recent philosophers for the concept
of natural kinds. While I am not familiar with their contributions,
the notion seems similar to "species" in biology and "cluster" in
engineering and statistics. Cluster and discriminant analysis go
back to at least the 1930s, and have always depended on the tendency
of objects under study to group into classes.
------------------
[No comment, except "not familiar with their contributions" may tell
it all...]
---------------------------
>From: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: re: AIList Digest V5 #181
The distinction I had in mind between natural kind and cluster is
the presumed existence of as yet unknown properties of a natural
kind.
When I said "doubtful cases are rare", I left myself open to misunderstanding.
I meant that in case of chairs in Timothy's experience doubtful cases
are rare. Therefore, for a child to presume a natural kind on hearing
a word or seeing an object is advantageous, and it will also be advantageous
to built AI systems with this presumption.
Finally, a remark concerning the "symbol grounding" discussion. My
problems with it were mainly quantitative - there was just too much
to follow. I suspect that Stevan Harnad's capacity to follow very
long discussions is exceptional. I would welcome a summary of the
different points of view by someone who did follow it and feels himself
sufficiently uncommitted to any single point of view.
------------------
To: diamond.bbn.com!aweinste@husc6.harvard.edu (Anders Weinstein)
Because you were the most sophisticated of my interlocutors in the
symbol grounding discussion, I've taken the time to respond to your
last posting in full, formal Net-style. I am not posting my response
on the Net, however, as I elected to be bound by the vote, which ran
about 3/2 against continuing the discussion. I think the reasons given
by the nays were uncompelling, unreflective and even incoherent; I agree
with you that probably under such conditions even a majority vote
should not be binding; and of course I believe that the composition
and constraints of the Net as it now stands are gravely inadequate and
fail utterly to realize its colossal possibilities in scholarly communication
and the evolution of ideas. I am actively reflecting on what I can do to help
remedy this state of affairs and hasten the realization of the Net's
vast potential. However, I have taken to my tent awhile as promised;
so if you want to continue the dialogue, you'll have to take the
responsibility for posting my end yourself. Now my response. You wrote:
> the psychology of categorical perception won't do much to illuminate
> the difficult question of how formal symbols should be semantically
> interpreted, i.e. what the symbols really *mean*...
> in spite of some of the rhetoric about "symbol grounding", Harnad's
> project is not really *attempting* to do any such thing. It merely
> aims to discover the mechanisms underlying certain recognition skills.
Let me try to make it clearer just what aspects of the problem of
meaning it is and is not my intention to take on: Definitely not the
part about ontological essences, what the things that words refer to
*really are*; nothing that depends on omniscience or metaphysical
connections. But I am certainly not restricted to sensory recognition skills
either. The "grounding" concept is not just rhetorical. The proposal
is that the labels of sensory categories can be combined into
propositions about category membership, and that these (now grounded)
symbol strings thereby inherit a combinatory level of their own -- a
level involving knowledge by description rather than only knowledge by
sensory acquaintance.
Now another disclaimer: A primitive version of this bottom-up
grounding scheme -- in the hands of the 17th century British Empiricists
and their positivist and verificationist successors -- is generally
regarded as having *failed* as a theory of meaning (in the broad sense,
including the metaphysical aspects I have sworn off). I am now
proposing an upgraded, implementation-minded version of it as a theory
of *categorization* and symbol-grounding (i.e., anchoring symbols in
the objects that generate their sensory projections), not meaning. The
"recognition skills" involved include the categorization or absolute
identification of objects and states of affairs by labeling *and* by the
statement of category inclusion relations with label strings (i.e.,
descriptions). Now it can still be stated that none of these skills
has anything to do with "meaning." Fine. My last tenet is that the
objective is to determine whether mechanisms of the kind I
hypothesize are capable of generating labeling and label-stringing
performance that is turing-indistinguishable from the meaningful use
of names and descriptions under identical conditions, i.e., whether
they can be implemented as devices you can't tell apart from devices
that mean. [This is part of the abstemious strategy I've dubbed "methodological
epiphenomenalism," which pertains not only to subjective experience
("qualia") but to both the subjective and the metaphysical aspects of meaning
("intentionality").]
If I can accomplish this much successfully, I am perfectly content to concede
that I have utterly failed to capture the rest of what there is to
"meaning" -- all of it, in fact, if you insist that none of this has anything
whatsoever to do with meaning. Replace the word "meaning" in my earlier
formulation of the symbol-grounding problem with something like "the
connection of category labels with the objects to which they are reliably
applied." It's still true that in symbolic AI this connection depends
on human interpretation, and that in the grounded hybrid system I am
proposing it does not.
> meanings are supposed to contain a criterion which determines the
> correct application of the term... the metaphysical essence of the
> concept in question; they are supposed to serve as elementary
> constituents of more complex concepts and thoughts; and they are
> supposed to license analytic implications, such as "all bachelors are
> unmarried". Since none of these properties seem to be required of the
> representations in Harnad's theory, it is in a philosophical sense
> *not* a theory of "concepts" or "meanings" at all. As Harnad should be
> be happy to concede.
I certainly concede that my theory is not concerned with criteria for
metaphysical essences -- just with features to subserve (provisionally) reliable
labeling and label-stringing. The atomic labels do, however, serve as elementary
consituents for the label strings. And although I suspect that some
logical and syntactic constraints will have to be built in as primitives
of the mechanism, I don't see any special problem with the label
string "All bachelors are unmarried" -- whether as an empirical
category inclusion statement, a logical inference, a stipulative definition,
or a tautology (arising causally from the prior grounding of its constituents).
> There is a vast difference between the quick, observational
> categorization that psychologists tend (rightly) to focus on and the
> processes involved in what might be called "conclusive" classification.
> This is the difference between the ability to recognize something as
> fish-like in, say, 500 milliseconds, and the ability to ascertain that
> something *really* is a fish and not, say, an aquatic mammal...
> conclusive classification can require *years* of experiment,
> discussion and debate, and potentially involves everything we know.
> Harnad's model is only reasonably viewed as applying to
> [observational categorization]... concepts or meanings in the
> traditional sense are essentially *outside* the scope of forseeable
> psychology.
My model is *grounded* in observational categorization, but the story
hardly ends there. The perceptually grounded category labels can be
combined into descriptions about objects and states of affairs that I have
never observed. That was the motivation for the grounding in the first place.
As to "conclusive" categorization -- it's certainly not intended to be
that: just context-dependent, provisional, approximate classification
(as all of our actual classifications really are, I claim). Always
defeasible by an uncertain outside world and an uncertain future, my
categorical and symbolic representations are only intended to be as
"conclusive" as our current sorting and labeling capacity -- no more
nor less. And this is of course always open to updating and revision
on the basis of ensuing years of experiment, discussion, debate -- just
as everything we currently "know" is. ("Knowledge" is of course just
as a vexed a problem as "meaning" if we insist in adopting a metaphysical
or omniscient stance.) Moreover, my bottom-up grounding scheme is
quasi-hierarchical, and potentially quite "holistic" in the grounded
and systematic interrelations among its categories and levels of representation.
> I *do* agree that the aims of philosophy are different than those of
> psychology. Indeed, because of this difference of goals, you shouldn't
> feel you have to argue *against* Quine or Putnam or even me. You
> merely have to explain why you are side-stepping those philosophical
> issues (as I think you have done). And the reason in brief is that
> philosophers are investigating the notion of meaning and you are not.
> I also don't think that philosophers have been looking for "the wrong
> thing in the wrong way." I think they have made a host of genuine
> discoveries about the nature of meaning -- you cite several in your
> list of issues you'd prefer to ignore. The only "failure" I mentioned
> was the inability to come up with necessary and sufficient definitions
> for almost anything. (Not at all, by the way, a mere failure of
> "introspection".)
No one can have a greater respect for philosophy and philosophers than
I do. I think that the great philosophers -- along with the great mathematicians
and physicists -- have managed to use the human intellect in the most
powerful and rigorous way it can be used, and have addressed and
clarified some of the most profound and difficult problems the human mind has
contemplated, particularly those relating in various ways to skeptical
hypotheses. However, apart from the rigors of the undecidable, a
certain lure is exercised by solvable problems as well. That the
current prospects of progress on the "traditional" problem of meaning
are not very optimistic is attested to by a steady (perhaps even
growing) stream of defections from the ranks (possibly including one
of the philosophers you mention) -- analytic philosophers who are
giving up on finding the mysterious "word/world connection." Do I need
a better reason for "side-stepping" the "real" (metaphysical) issues of
meaning than that philosophers themselves are apparently becoming
increasingly pessimistic about them?
As to necessary and sufficient conditions (N/SC): I have preferred to opt for
the provisional, approximate, revisable representations that are all I
believe we have. I agree that the failure is not merely one of
introspection: I don't think N/SC ("conclusive" ones) exist; or, if they do,
that they can be known; or if they can be known, that it can be known that
they are known. And I have an abiding preference for going after the knowable.
Stevan Harnad harnad@mind.princeton.edu (609)-921-7771
-------------------------
From: searle%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (John R. Searle)
Subject: Re: B. Smith refs
Thanks for netting your note about computation to me. The point is
obviously decisive. Now could you do me a favor: I now have much to much
on the symbol grounding problem: tons of stuff from the AI list mixed in with
all sorts of other stuff. I will never be able to sort it all out much
less read it. You could do me and your other fans a big favor if you could
complile a file containing the essential s of the debate and send it to us
by email. Thanks. JRS
-----------------------------
∂28-Jul-87 0902 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU book on hold
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Jul 87 09:02:52 PDT
Date: Tue 28 Jul 87 09:01:45-PDT
From: Math/Computer Science Library <LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: book on hold
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12321991658.25.LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
qa76.6.k76 1987 - Kronsjo, L - algorithms
is being held for you at the Math/CS Library through 8/4/87.
-------
∂28-Jul-87 1156 VAL
Letter to Krishnaprasad
Dear Krishnaprasad,
Thank you for sending me your paper on the computability of circumscription.
As far as I know, your theorems are new. On the other hand, I must tell you
that I don't find them surprising: non-trivial properties of predicate
formulas are always undecidable, even much simpler properties than those
related to minimal models (for instance, satisfiability). My work was
directed to finding {\sl sufficient} syntactic conditions for the expressibility
of circumscription by first-order formulas because I felt that it would be
hopeless to look for {\sl necessary and sufficient} conditions (and your Theorem 4
shows that this is indeed the case).
About your proofs: it seems to me that it may be easier to prove some of the
undecidabilities by reducing the satisfiability problem for predicate logic
to the problem in question, rather than going all the way back to the halting
problem for Turing machines. For instance, Theorem 1 can be proved as
follows. Let $A$ be the sentence without minimal models defined on
p. 3 of your paper.
For any predicate formula $F$ which doesn't contain $0$, $S$ and $P$,
the disjunction $A∨F$ has a minimal model iff $F$ is satisfiable.
(If $F$ is satisfiable, consider its model on the natural
numbers and make $P$ empty; if not then $A∨F$ is equivalent to $A$).
If you have access to electronic mail then I will be glad to add your address
to the mailing list of our non-monotonic seminar. Meanwhile, I am sending you
some of my more recent papers. Let's keep in touch.
\closing
Best wishes,
Vladimir Lifschitz
\endletter
\end
∂28-Jul-87 1435 MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM Course at Austin
Received: from WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Jul 87 14:35:11 PDT
Date: Tue 28 Jul 87 14:34:45-PDT
From: Munindar Singh <MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Subject: Course at Austin
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, konolige@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
msingh@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM
Message-ID: <554506485.0.MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(215)+TOPSLIB(126)+PONY(165)@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I am a doctoral student at the University of Texas and am here at the SRI AI
Center for the summer. I am working with Kurt Konolige (and intend to work for
my PhD, too) on problems in AI that obtain in the discipline of formalizing
the notions of belief, action and intention. As far as I know, I must be among
some of the very few students at Austin who have such interests and was hoping
to register for the course you would teach there this Fall. It seems I have
been preempted by more senior students though (it seems again) I could still
register if I had your permission. I have talked to Kurt about this and he
agrees that your course would be important for the kind of work I plan to do.
He also said, he'd be happy to write a recommendation letter for me, should
you want to look at one before deciding.
Thank you for your consideration.
With the best wishes,
Munindar P. Singh
-------
∂28-Jul-87 1517 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Jul 87 15:15:19 PDT
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 87 15:15:29 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
To: acken%SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, mrc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John Acken <acken@sonoma.stanford.edu>" of Mon, 27 Jul 87 17:56:03 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12322059693.27.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
John -
I am a Life Member, but definitely NOT a spokesman (official or
otherwise) of an organization called American Atheists. It was founded
by Dr. Madalyn O'Hair (the woman who got the Supreme Court to ban
school prayer 25 years ago) and is basically run by her children
Robin Murray-O'Hair and Jon G. Murray (one of life's ironies is that
her third kid is a nutso fundamentalist preacher).
You could write to them at:
American Atheists
P.O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117
I like Dr. O'Hair's favorite quote, by Clarence Darrow: "I don't
believe in god because I don't believe in the Easter bunny."
-- Mark --
-------
∂28-Jul-87 1742 LES Bike Locker Move 8/10
To: LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RSF@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, bhayes@CASCADE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: ME@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In conjunction with the refurbishment of the region behind Jacks Hall, the
bike lockers are scheduled to be moved temporarily to the concrete pad on
the lower level in front of the Math building. This is scheduled to occur
on Monday, August 10 and it would be convenient for the movers if your
bike were not in the locker that day.
The lockers will remain at the temporary site until reconstruction is
complete in the back patio are. The lockers will not be anchored down in
this period and, consequently, will not be very secure -- it will be
possible to (awkwardly) lift the entire structure and steal any bikes that
are inside. In view of this, the Pony will not charge rent for the
lockers until they are re-secured and, if you use them, you do so at your
own risk.
The lockers will eventually be repositioned at a location next to the
Athropology building, about 10 yards from their current site.
Les Earnest
∂28-Jul-87 1816 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Jul 87 18:13:56 PDT
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 87 18:14:20 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: A question both of you agree on (I think?)
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: acken%SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue, 28 Jul 87 15:31:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12322092252.30.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
There is, of course, quite a disagreement on the issue of the threat
posed by religion, even among atheists. I think it's important to
understand that atheism is *not* a political cause; people in all
walks of life and of all political beliefs and backgrounds are
atheists. Perhaps there is somewhat of a correlation between
intelligence and atheism, but only in free countries.
-------
∂28-Jul-87 2339 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:eyal@wisdom.bitnet Re: natural kinds
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Jul 87 23:39:32 PDT
Received: from wisdom.bitnet by wiscvm.wisc.edu ; Wed, 29 Jul 87 01:40:16 CDT
From: Eyal mozes <eyal%WISDOM.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 87 08:43:05 -0200
To: ailist@stripe.sri.com
Subject: Re: natural kinds
Cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, minsky%oz.ai.mit.edu@xx.lcs.mit.edu
An important theory that has so far not been mentioned in the
discussion on "natural kinds" is the Objectivist theory of concepts.
In essence, this theory regards universal concepts, such as "chair" or
"bird", as the result of a process of "measurement-omission", which
mentally integrates objects by omitting the particular measurements of
their common characteristics. The theory takes into account the point
mentioned in Minsky's recent message about structure and function, and
completely solves Wittgenstein's problem.
The theory is presented in the book "Introduction to Objectivist
Epistemology" by Ayn Rand, and, more recently, in the paper "A theory
of abstraction" by David Kelley (Cognition and Brain Theory, vol. 7
no. 3&4, summer/fall 1984, pp. 329-357).
Eyal Mozes
BITNET: eyal@wisdom
CSNET and ARPA: eyal%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu
UUCP: ...!ihnp4!talcott!WISDOM!eyal
∂29-Jul-87 0956 MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM re: Course at Austin
Received: from WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jul 87 09:56:00 PDT
Date: Wed 29 Jul 87 09:55:40-PDT
From: Munindar Singh <MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: Course at Austin
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <554576140.0.MSINGH@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(215)+TOPSLIB(126)+PONY(165)@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM>
Thanks a lot; I have forwarded your message to the dept though they might still
want to confirm with you.
Best,
Munindar Singh
-------
∂29-Jul-87 1149 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU Japan trip
Received: from [128.114.129.2] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jul 87 11:49:49 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.57/1.1)
id AA05080; Wed, 29 Jul 87 11:48:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 87 11:48:42 PDT
From: beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8707291848.AA05080@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Japan trip
I want to thank you personally for the offer extended by Carolyn
of a trip to Japan. I'm departing Aug. 20 and returning Sept. 28.
I'll spend 3 weeks in Kyoto at RIMS, working with Hayashi (author
of the proof-checker PX based on Feferman's theories) and participating
in a conference. I'll spend two weeks in Tokyo at ICOT and nttlabs.
If there's anything you want me to pay special attention to while
I'm there, let me know.
∂29-Jul-87 1152 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU example of common sense inference
Received: from [128.114.129.2] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jul 87 11:52:04 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.57/1.1)
id AA05128; Wed, 29 Jul 87 11:50:55 PDT
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 87 11:50:55 PDT
From: beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8707291850.AA05128@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: example of common sense inference
If you see two fire engines in close succession with sirens on,
they're going to the same fire.
Note that the parallel inference: if you see two waiters passing by with food, they're going to the same table.
is invalid.
Even to conclude that the fire engines are going to some fire or
fires is not strictly valid logically.
∂29-Jul-87 1259 RA pictures
The name of the store is Jenney's Holmark. They need a check for $8 and
they will send you the pictures.
Their address: 305 Harrison St., Seattle, Washington 98109.Their tel.
(206) 441 2790.
∂29-Jul-87 1540 VAL Sol's reply
∂29-Jul-87 1526 SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: visa
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jul 87 15:26:38 PDT
Date: Wed 29 Jul 87 15:26:48-PDT
From: Sol Feferman <SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: visa
To: VAL@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 29 Jul 87 15:08:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12322323898.48.SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Vladimir,
I will send a telegram to Fenstad. As to John's letter and threat, I wonder
about the wisdom of his tactics both for your sake and as a matter of principle.
Sol
∂30-Jul-87 1754 RA request
Would you be willing to let me use my office (on the weekends)
and my account through August?
Thanks,
∂30-Jul-87 2011 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Jul 87 20:11:33 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA01685; Thu, 30 Jul 87 23:13:38 EDT
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 87 23:03:14 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2198437@um.cc.umich.edu>
Dear John,
First, please allow me to retract my statement to the extent that
Fenstadt is probably one of those who draw their power from their
positions. I had no grounds for such a statement. It is just that
I was offended by his not answering my letter and his (silly and
pompous, from my point of view) remarks in his letter to Scott.
Also, I had somehow an impression that he is sort of a big officer in
one of those international organizations sponsoring the Moscow congress;
this is why I had mentioned impeaching (or purging) in the conversation.
But he has a purely professional position of chairing the program
committee.
Sorry.
Second, I sent a cablegram to Hilpinen right after our conversation.
Tomorrow I am going to call him.
I have asked a couple of logicians about going to the Moscow congress;
none of them gave me the positive answer.
Third, I happened to be the program chairman for the next LICS (Logic
in Computer Science) conference. The next message of mine will give
an e-mail version of the call for papers. Also, I am sending you
a hardware copy of the call. We are very interested in publicizing
the conference to AI people interested in logic. If you can help us in
that, I would greatly appreciate.
Thank you again for your call and the information. If your letter appears
in New York Times, can you please tell me the date? I read the Times only
occasionally: it is too easy to become addicted and spend too much time
on the Time. If I can't go to Moscow, I will also write something to
somewhere.
Best regards,
-Yuri
∂30-Jul-87 2012 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Jul 87 20:11:55 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA01688; Thu, 30 Jul 87 23:14:09 EDT
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 87 23:03:38 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2198438@um.cc.umich.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
THIRD ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
5-8 July 1988
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland
Concepts and methods from Logic are influential throughout Computer
Science. The Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS)
aims to attract broad participation of Computer Scientists, whose design
or research activities involve Logic, and Logicians interested in Computer
Science. Suggested (but not exclusive) topics of interest include:
abstract data types, computer theorem proving, concurrency, data base
theory, knowledge representation, finite model theory, lambda and
combinatory calculi, logic programming, modal and temporal logics,
program logic and semantics, software specification, types and categories,
constructive mathematics, verification.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE: M. Dezani, Y. Gurevich (chair), J. Halpern, C.A.R.
Hoare, G. Huet, P. Kanellakis, J.-L.Lassez, J. Mitchell, R. Platek,
G. Plotkin, S. Rosenschein, P. Sistla, J. Tiuryn, M. Wand
PAPER SUBMISSION: Send 14 copies of an extended abstract to the
program chairman:
Yuri Gurevich - LICS (313) 971-2652
Electrical Engineering and Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
Computer Science Department
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2122
The package must be airmail postmarked by 27 NOVEMBER 1987 or received by
4 DECEMBER 1987. The abstract should be clearly written and provide
sufficient detail to allow the program committee to assess the merits of
the paper. References and comparisons with related work should be
included where appropriate. The entire extended abstract should not
exceed 10 double-spaced pages in 10 or 12-point font. Late abstracts or
those departing significantly from these guidelines run a high risk of
not being considered. If a copier is not available to the author, a
single copy of the abstract will do.
The authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 27 JANUARY
1988. Accepted papers, typed on special forms for inclusion in the
symposium proceedings, will be due 14 MARCH 1988.
The symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, Technical
Committee on Mathematical Foundations of Computing , and the University
of Edinburgh, in cooperation with ACM SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS.
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: J. Barwise, W. Bledsoe, A. Chandra (chair),
E. Dijkstra, E. Engeler, J. Goguen, D. Gries, D. Kozen, Z. Manna,
A. Meyer, R. Parikh, G. Plotkin, D. Scott
GENERAL CHAIRMAN: LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS:
Ashok K. Chandra George Cleland
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Department of Computer Science
P.O. Box 218 The King's Buildings
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 University of Edinburgh
(914) 945-1752 Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, SCOTLAND
ashok@ibm.com 011 44 31 667 1081 ext. 2775
glc%lfcs.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa
∂30-Jul-87 2017 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:stevens@anl-mcs.ARPA Journal of Automated Reasoning
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Jul 87 20:16:57 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 30 Jul 87 20:15:39-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 30 Jul 87 23:11:29-EDT
Received: from anl-mcs.ARPA (TCP 3200200067) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 30 Jul 87 23:05:03 EDT
Received: by anl-mcs.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA14310; Thu, 30 Jul 87 22:02:40 cdt
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 87 22:02:40 cdt
From: stevens@anl-mcs.ARPA (Rick L. Stevens)
Message-Id: <8707310302.AA14310@anl-mcs.ARPA>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Journal of Automated Reasoning
Cc: stevens@anl-mcs.ARPA
Because of the rapidly growing interest in the interconnected
fields of automated reasoning, automated theorem proving, logic
programming, and artificial intelligence, the following information
might be of particular interest.
The Journal of Automated Reasoning, which is very inexpensive
compared to most computer science journals, now includes in each issue
two interesting columns: The Problem Corner, which presents test
problems from the world of puzzles, from mathematics, and from various
applications; and Basic Research Problems, which presents open problems
for research in automated reasoning.
The journal is published quarterly, each issue containing
approximately 110 pages. Beginning next year, each issue will contain
approximately 20% more material, which makes it even more attractive in
view of its cost. Subscription costs are lower for individuals that
are members of the Association of Automated Reasoning. Information in
that regard is also included.
The Journal of Automated Reasoning published its first issue in
February, 1985. It is an interdisciplinary journal that maintains a
balance between theory and application. The spectrum of material
ranges from the presentation of a new inference rule with proofs of its
logical properties to a detailed description of a computer program
designed to solve some problem from industry. The papers published in
this journal are from, among others, the fields of automated theorem
proving, logic programming, expert systems, program synthesis and
validation, artificial intelligence, computational logic, robotics, and
various industrial applications. The papers share the common feature
of focusing on some aspect of automated reasoning.
The journal provides a forum and a means for exchanging
information for those interested in theory, in implementation, and
in specific industrial or commercial applications.
To Subscribe write to Kluwer Academic PO Box 358 Accord
Station Hingham, MA 02018-0358
For outside the U.S. and Canada
Kluwer Academic Publishers Distribution Center PO Box 322 3300 AH
Dordrecht The Netherlands
$97 for institutions, $39 for private non-members of AAR,
$29.50 for members of AAR
AAR, Association for Automated Reasoning
The Association for Automated Reasoning is an organization for
disseminating and exchanging information. It is international in form,
and publishes a newsletter acyclically to announce workshops, discuss
software advances, present problem sets, etc.
To Join send a $5 check to Larry Henschen 780 S. Warrington
Road Des Plaines, IL 60016
∂31-Jul-87 1119 CLT japan collaboration
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RWW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We have obtained approval for a no-cost extension of NSF-Japan grant
to March 31 1988. There will be no extension beyond this time.
∂31-Jul-87 1327 VAL Moscow Congress
1. I got a call from Bukovski's associate who is in contact with the Voice of
America. Apparently they'll want to interview you.
2. Elaine from Dina Bolla managed to contact the Consulate by telephone yesterday.
They told her no visas for any participants can be issued at this time because
the Organizing Committee hasn't sent some paper to the Embassy in Washington
(is that what Gurevich was told?)
3. I compiled a chronology of events, see MOSCOW.CAL[1,VAL]. One thing that is
obviously missing at the very beginning is the date when Scott was first
informed about Gurevich and me. If you can find out without spending too
much time when it happenned, please tell me or add to the file.
∂31-Jul-87 1541 LES EBOS funding
To: AIR, JMC
Confirming the earlier report, the IBM grant is essentially used up now,
so if Arkady is to continue, it must be on another project. In any case,
we owe them a report.
∂31-Jul-87 1632 SJG your paper, "Circumscription -- a Form of Non-monotonic Reasoning"
John:
The version you gave Morgan Kaufmann for inclusion in the book is not
a reprint of the original AIJ paper. I assume that you have a reason for
this -- i.e., that the text has changed or some such. A photocopy of the
original paper might look better, otherwise. (I would also be able to
include the 1980 addendum ...)
I'll assume that you want things left as they are, unless I hear from you.
Thanks.
Matt
∂01-Aug-87 0729 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Beers
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 07:29:06 PDT
Date: Sat 1 Aug 87 07:27:41-PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Beers
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 00:56:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323023108.7.PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I haven't listed anything on su-etc for a while, and I agree with your
general sentiment, but I'd be willing to give you 2 to 1 odds on $100
that I can determine blindfolded which good beer is which among 5 of
my choosing. It's fairly trivial to choose 5 distinctive beers.
--Oren
-------
∂01-Aug-87 0936 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Beers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 09:36:39 PDT
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 87 09:37:14 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Beers
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat, 1 Aug 87 00:56:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12323046692.13.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
That was not a good bet, since anyone could collect from you simply by
listing 5 quite distinctive beers.
Most American beer is pretty bad, particularly Budweiser. Most American
beers are clones of each other since they are generally quite watered-
down. The current fad for Corona is much the same; it's Bud in a clear
bottle.
There are a few American beers which are OK: Henry Weinhard, Michelob,
Anchor Steam.
Foreign beers tend to be quite distinctive, although there are a few
clones there (witness Corona and Fosters). You can't mistake Pinkus
Alt or Guinnis (sp?) for anything else.
-- Mark --
-------
∂01-Aug-87 1648 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Lying Defined
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 16:48:18 PDT
Date: Sat 1 Aug 87 16:46:55-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lying Defined
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 12:25:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323124914.13.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
The fact that one party's lying is pointed out in no way
suggests a condoning of an adversary's lies or anyone else's for
that matter.
There is no double standard in the following definition
of lying, taken from Ms. Bok's book:
``
... I shall define as a lie any intentionally deceptive
message which is *stated*. Such statements are most often made
verbally or in writing, but can of course also be conveyed via
smoke signals, Morse code, sign language, and the like. Deception,
then, is the larger category, and lying forms part of it.
''
p. 14
Col. North admitted to having lied and yet, given the
context and traditions of *covert* operations, I'm on record as
having stated that he should not be hounded - it is that tradition
of covertness that is the root cause needing attention.
I'm not sure that Prof. McCarthy implied anything partisan
in *my* attitude on the matter - if he did, it is inaccurate.
To switch to an uglier, more appropriate image, this crisis
is merely the pus showing from an underlying rot that has countenanced
a large number of repulsive `covert' actions in the name of `national
security'. Judging by the historical record, it is not clear that such
interventions have done the U.S. national interest one iota of good.
Now that the pus is visible for all to see, why not clean up the
underlying mess for good by *specifying* what the populace of this
nation is or is not willing to have done in its name?
My earlier question to that effect remains un-answered. I ask it
yet again :-), of Prof. McCarthy or anyone else who cares to respond based
on *their* knowledge of the kinds of activities undertaken by covert
operatives. We know of assassinations and mining of harbors already.
From what *you* know, what if anything exists as a practice that *you*
will not support? Or are you at ease with *everything* that is known to
you to be standard covert operating procedure(s)?
As a companion question, would you agree that whatever you promote
as acceptable US covert behaviour is also then fair for any/all other
nations to engage in within US borders? ( I do not think ANY nations,
including the Soviets, ought to be meddling thus; Soviet actions can
be used for only so much mileage in excusing US actions in third
countries.)
Inder
-------
∂01-Aug-87 1749 HENNING@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: JMC and major/minor issues
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 17:49:16 PDT
Date: Sat 1 Aug 87 17:46:15-PDT
From: Albert K. Henning <HENNING@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: JMC and major/minor issues
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 17:38:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323135715.10.HENNING@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
All right, I buy that. Being born more than a decade after the fact, my
perspective tends to be not all it should.
But I still bet there was considerable discussion about the matter in the
State Dept, and probably the DoD, too. Having read through the section of
the newest Churchill biography (forgot the name of the fellow who wrote it)
on Yalta, and Churchill's perception that the US was unwilling or unable to
stand up to the growing and visible Soviet 'hegemony' (to use their own
word), I wonder whether that was evidence of a political machine unable
to make up its mind on the subject, or just an ailing Roosevelt unable to
make or orchestrate a decision. (Yes, I know, Yalta happened much later;
and, had we decided not to help the Sovs, there probably wouldn't have
*been* a Yalta.)
Al
-------
∂01-Aug-87 1855 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU An Opportunity (was Re: covert actions)
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 18:55:15 PDT
Date: Sat 1 Aug 87 18:53:52-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: An Opportunity (was Re: covert actions)
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 17:23:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323148024.11.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
My thanks to Prof. McCarthy for a candid and fair response.
It seems likely to me that on the issue of covert actions
it may be possible to develop a bi- (or multi)-partisan consensus
in as diverse a group as su-etc is.
It would be quite an accomplishment if as few as a half-dozen
or so bboarders could agree on a draft and send it off to various
publications, starting with our own beloved Daily and including
various news weeklies and national papers.
Defining the scope of acceptable and un-acceptable covert
actions is surely worth a try - so here's a project for any of
the many peace-mongers (I mean that affectionately) in our midst.
Developing and articulating a local consensus on the matter could
be a *concrete* contribution towards world peace, wouldn't you agree?
Here's an opportunity to send something off to your favorite
Congressmen and Senators on a topic of great international import.
As a foreign national, I'm disinclined to lead a group that
might be writing, as constituents, to elected US officials. That
initiative should rightly come from registered voters, I think.
However, I'm game for signing my name to letters to editors of
publications.
The initiative hereafter will need to come from someone else
and, not being very verbal, I'll content myself in the interim by
occasionally putting up a quote or two on su-etc.
Inder
-------
∂01-Aug-87 2039 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 20:39:27 PDT
Date: Sat 1 Aug 87 20:39:05-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Lying
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 12:25:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323167178.10.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Vietnam-Cambodia issue may or may not be more important than the
Iran-Contra affair, the point is that the hearings are about the latter,
not the former. Likewise, the topic of Nuclear annihilation should not
be discussed at the hearings either.
-------
∂01-Aug-87 2157 VAL Moscow
John,
Here is my msg to Gurevich and his replies. I agree with him that Hilpinen
should be notified. I'll call Hilpinen, unless you want to do that.
∂31-Jul-87 1351 VAL re: Reply
To: "Yuri_Gurevich"@UM.CC.UMICH.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 31 Jul 87 14:34:54 EDT.]
My travel agent called the Consulate in San Francisco yesterday. They said
nobody can be given a visa for the participation in the Congress at this
time because the Embassy in Washington hasn't received some paper from the
Organizing Committee. Is that what they told your agent?
∂01-Aug-87 1721 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu Visas
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 17:21:05 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA18803; Sat, 1 Aug 87 20:23:31 EDT
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 87 20:21:24 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2202104@um.cc.umich.edu>
Subject: Visas
We heard different stories from them. Once Zoe was told that our
visas are in the mail on their way to our travel agent.
But lately the story was that they are waiting for a signal from
Moscow. It was always about our two visas, never a more general
statement, as far as I know.
∂01-Aug-87 2121 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu Very important
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 87 21:21:21 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA19869; Sun, 2 Aug 87 00:23:46 EDT
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 87 00:21:06 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2202231@um.cc.umich.edu>
Subject: Very important
Volodia,
The bit of information in your last message is very important.
Hilpinen told me that Soviet organizers told him that they did all
necessary. He said he believed they were sincere.
Now you have contradicting info.
That info should be forwarded to Hilpinen as soon as possible.
If you or John did not do that yet, please do.
I can call him too, but you are closer to the source in this case.
Please reply. Thanks, -Yuri
∂02-Aug-87 0322 DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Aug 87 03:22:06 PDT
Date: Sun 2 Aug 87 03:20:43-PDT
From: David Liu <DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Lying
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 12:25:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323240295.10.DLIU@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
RE: North's success in turning the minor subjects to major one: what the
communist has been doing in Vietnam and in Central America
I can not agree more. The dramatic difference between the US public and the
Nigaragua's neighbors in the i mpression about the Contra nd the Ortega
government is the direct result of our media's manipulations. Now what
can we do about it?
Regards,
David Liu
-------
∂02-Aug-87 1049 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu San Francisco consul may be right
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Aug 87 10:49:21 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA22923; Sun, 2 Aug 87 13:51:47 EDT
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 87 13:49:48 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2202464@um.cc.umich.edu>
Subject: San Francisco consul may be right
Thank you very much for the message.
I spoke to a number of former Soviet citizens (living here in Ann Arbor,
in Boston, in Toronto, etc.) the last couple of days,
and it appears that many former Soviet citizens were able recently to
to visit USSR (though some of them had to wait till the last minute for
their visas). Moreover, I told about visiting relatives from USSR.
Some of my interlocutors think that much more depends now on local
authorities and whoever you deal with than before. In this
light I tend to believe the San Francisco vice consul that they need
a cable from the organizing committee to release any visas for the
Congress.
What is the role of Feferman ?
∂02-Aug-87 1144 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Lying
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Aug 87 11:44:25 PDT
Date: Sun 2 Aug 87 11:43:55-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Lying
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 1 Aug 87 12:25:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323331899.12.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
None of the more recent witnesses has had North's courage and ability
to emphasize the important.
I expect better from JMC. Too many people at the center of this issue
have refused to admit the obvious: that not everyone agrees about how
important certain things are. Col. North and Adm. Poindexter clearly
believe that the threat of communism in Nicaragua is more important
than democracy in the US. Others in the administration appear to
agree, including Mr. Meese (whose opinion of the Constitution seems in
general not to be very high).
The congressional hearings, as much as JMC and others might wish, are
not about Iran, the Contras, or the threat of communism. They are
about the system by which we are governed. They are about the
incredible power the executive branch wields of which the framers of
the Constitution never dreamed. They are about responsibility,
authority, and the chain of command. Most importantly, they are about
democracy (or, if you prefer, democratic federalism).
The hearings have brought to light that there is something far more
important than communism:
The notion that we must abandon our ideals in order to preserve them
is certain to destroy us.
joe
-------
∂02-Aug-87 1515 R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: international terrorism
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Aug 87 15:14:55 PDT
Date: Sun 2 Aug 87 15:14:17-PDT
From: Roland van Gaalen <R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: international terrorism
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 2 Aug 87 13:44:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323370195.22.R.ROLAND@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
I wrote "terrorist liberation movements" to underscore my
own cynicism. (In the case of Nicaragua, I don't think I
could support either the contras or the sandinistas).
-------
∂03-Aug-87 0900 JMC
medal
∂03-Aug-87 1103 JSW Alliant
To: LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: Tom@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Pam Widrin from Alliant called me just now, because she couldn't reach
either of you, to say that they will offer discounts on maintenance
and memory prices for the Qlisp machine if the department decides to
buy an Alliant for CSD-CF use. Their offer is to reduce the
cooperative maintenance from $31K per year to $12K, and the price of a
32MB memory board from $80K to $40K. (I didn't ask whether the 17%
discount would then still apply.) She'll try to call you again this
afternoon to discuss this.
∂03-Aug-87 1236 VAL
I've received my visa.
∂03-Aug-87 1303 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET:masahiko@nttlab Re: Tohoku lecture
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 13:03:34 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Mon, 3 Aug 87 13:03:04 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Tue 4 Aug 87 00:16:42
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Tue, 4 Aug 87 00:18:47 jst
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 00:18:47 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8708031518.AA02766@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 02 Aug 87 1429 PDT <8708031508.AA02685@nttlab.NTT>
Subject: Re: Tohoku lecture
Thank you very much for editing your Tohoku lecture. It is especially
nice that you have TEXed it. I am sure I can produce a hard copy from
your TeX source (if all the necessary macros are also povided).
In any case, please send the source by computer mail AND send a
printed version by airmail. Thank you again.
∂03-Aug-87 1550 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU CS309 Titles
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 15:50:28 PDT
Date: Mon 3 Aug 87 15:47:32-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CS309 Titles
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12323638393.41.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Do you know what the titles of the CS309 (Industrial Lecturship) series will
be this year? I've received a blurb and title from John Sowa, but nothing
for CS309B or C. Any help you can give will be appreciated, and very helpful
when I'm putting together the Winter and Spring Qtr time schedules.
Thanks.
Claire
-------
∂03-Aug-87 1601 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: manufacturing science
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 16:01:11 PDT
Date: Mon 3 Aug 87 16:00:40-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: manufacturing science
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 3 Aug 87 14:30:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323640783.21.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John,
A copy has been put in your mailslot.
-Anne
-------
∂03-Aug-87 1615 LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Hitler'S ends and means
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 16:15:28 PDT
Date: Mon 3 Aug 87 16:09:19-PDT
From: Lyn Bowman <LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hitler'S ends and means
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12323642358.46.LYN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
The British and French treaty with Poland was negotiated in a hurry in
early 1939 when it became clear that the next German-populated territory
outside Germany that Hitler was likely to demand was the "Polish
Corridor". (This territory had been carved out of Germany after WWI to
cut off East Prussia from the rest of Germany and to provide historically
landlocked Poland with access to the Baltic. The "Polish Corridor" was
historically German lock, stock, and box.)
I agree that the question is not so much why the British abided by this
treaty as why they felt compelled to make it in the first place.
Hitler himself, by the way, felt time was against him, that other powers
were arming rapidly in the attempt to catch up with Germany, and that
when they did it would be with more modern technology. In fact, he thought
he had to get the job done by 1943. He was correct. He thought he had a
brief window of opportunity to unify and secure German interests.
Now, nationalism was a weird new 19th century populist idea that
collided head on with communism in the 20th century. Since WWII the
communists have tried to co-opt national liberation movements all over
the world. As the proprietors of an empire, I can understand that
nationalism would have been anathema to the British. People can
be very slow to come to grips with new political ideas. (Just consider
how many people have still not come to grips with communism.)
Historically, nationalism had never mattered for squat in Europe.
British politicians might still have been thinking of European
politics in terms of nonideological imperial ambitions and seeking a
balance of powers. But the concept of balance of powers doesn't mean
much in an ideological context, either communist or fascist.
I don't believe for an instant that Hitler wanted to conquer Britain,
let alone the world. To say so is just self-indulgent hysteria in
flagrant contradiction to his explicitely stated aspirations and
consistent political acts. In fact, if his aspirations were not
crystal clear, how the hell did the British KNOW to make a treaty with
Poland in the first place? Why not Hungary? Because there were no
Germans in Hungary. So, they understood Anschluss.
I agree, though, that while Germans may not have invaded Britain, the
British government and traditional parliamentary British people may
have feared the indigenous British fascist movement. The popularity of
fascism was sweeping the world wherever there were masses of
industrial workers and bureaucrats. Britain may have been next.
-------
∂03-Aug-87 1632 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 16:32:06 PDT
Date: Mon 3 Aug 87 16:31:38-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 3 Aug 87 15:52:00-PDT
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12323646421.25.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks very much!
-------
∂03-Aug-87 1807 HART@SRI.Com Re: workshop policies
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 18:07:03 PDT
Date: Mon 3 Aug 87 18:07:01-PDT
From: Peter Hart <HART@SRI.Com>
Subject: Re: workshop policies
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 30 Jul 87 14:42:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12323663783.15.HART@SRI.Com>
Thanks for the policy msg. I'll use it with minor adaptations for the
applications workshops. --Peter←
-------
∂03-Aug-87 2207 stefik.pa@Xerox.COM Open Systems Workshop
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 87 22:07:01 PDT
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 AUG 87 22:06:52 PDT
Date: 3 Aug 87 22:06 PDT
Sender: stefik.pa@Xerox.COM
From: Mark stefik <stefik.pa@Xerox.COM>
Subject: Open Systems Workshop
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: stefik.pa@Xerox.COM, MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <870803-220652-2507@Xerox>
John,
Did you receive the request Bernardo Huberman and myself for AAAI to
sponsor a workshop on Open Systems (costing $5-7K) next January?
Originally, we were interested in a much greater sponsorship (covering
travel) and at Claudia's advice submitted it to Raj Reddy. He approved
a trimmed down version, but then Claudia suggested that we get your
approval too, in your role as chairman of the workshops.
I think that we are in limbo pending your approval. Have you decided?
----- mjs:
∂04-Aug-87 0038 norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Re: AAAI will support it with $10K. Please make all further arrangements
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 00:38:47 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.58/1.26)
id AA18185; Tue, 4 Aug 87 00:40:11 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 00:40:11 PDT
From: norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Peter Norvig)
Message-Id: <8708040740.AA18185@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, norvig%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: AAAI will support it with $10K. Please make all further
arrangements
Cc: aaai-office@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Thanks.
∂04-Aug-87 0305 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 4 August 1987
Previous Balance 12.72
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.13
Current Charges 1.00 (bicycle lockers)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 13.85
THE BIKE LOCKERS WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR ABOUT 60 DAYS BEGINNING 10 AUG 1987.
Please remove the bike from your locker before that date. The lockers
will be moved to a temporary site where they will remain until
reconstruction is completed in the back patio area. The lockers will not
be anchored down in this period and, consequently, will not be very secure
-- it will be possible to (awkwardly) lift the entire structure and steal
any bikes that are inside. In view of this, the Pony will not charge rent
for the lockers until they are re-secured and, if you use them during this
period, YOU DO SO AT YOUR OWN RISK. If you have questions regarding this
temporary inconvenience, please contact Les Earnest at 723-9729.
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 4/30/87.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂04-Aug-87 0816 Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
Received: from UMIX.CC.UMICH.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 08:16:36 PDT
Received: by umix.cc.umich.edu (5.54/umix-2.0)
id AA01160; Tue, 4 Aug 87 11:18:39 EDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 11:11:50 EDT
From: Yuri_Gurevich@um.cc.umich.edu
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <2207122@um.cc.umich.edu>
We have got our visas. See you in Moscow.
-Yuri
∂04-Aug-87 0929 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 09:29:19 PDT
Date: Tue 4 Aug 87 09:28:53-PDT
From: Richard Marty <MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: check
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12323831606.17.MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
there is a check for you at the reception desk, MJH
-------
∂04-Aug-87 1019 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Area X qual
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 10:19:03 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 4 Aug 87 10:15:37 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 10:15:37 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Area X qual
To: genesereth@score.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
nilsson@score.stanford.edu, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
winograd@csli.stanford.edu
I received the attached note. There seems to be significant interest
among my students to take a qual that covers database systems and
related areas of logic-oriented AI. Saraiya would also be interested
if the exam were available. I would say that this area covers
an amount of material comparable to what many of the quals cover,
and people with skills in the broad area including database systems
and related AI would be well prepared for post-academic life.
because it is my students who want the exam, I am reluctant to
take the lead in setting the syllabus.
Will someone volunteer to compile suggestions into a reading list,
preferably before Gio goes on sabbatical?
Terry--can we set the wheels in motion to get this approved as an
acceptable qual?
---jeff
***********************************
Does the following look fine :
----------------------------------------
Dear Sir,
This is a request for starting a qualifying examination in the area of
logic and databases from the next academic year. We believe there has
already been talk about such a qualifying examination, under what has
been called the area 'X', but nothing definite seems to have been
done.
We consider the field of logic and databases to be an active area of
current research, assuming great importance as it promises to lead to
development of the "Knowledge Base Systems", bridging the areas of
Database Systems and AI.
We are interested in pursuing research in this area, and would like to
take the qualifying examination in the area 'X' next year.
We would request that the area 'X' qual be set up for the coming year
and a syllabus and reading list defined as soon as possible.
Inderpal Singh Mumick
Hakan Jacobsson
-------
∂04-Aug-87 1035 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Aug-87 10:30-PT.]
Gurevich has his visa too, and Gelfond doesn't.
∂04-Aug-87 1049 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X qual
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 10:49:17 PDT
Date: Tue 4 Aug 87 10:47:47-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Area X qual
To: ullman@Navajo.Stanford.EDU
cc: genesereth@Score.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, winograd@CSLI.Stanford.EDU,
NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>" of Tue 4 Aug 87 10:18:53-PDT
Message-ID: <12323845968.24.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm worried about creating a qual in an area as specialized as "area x."
True, we now have a qual in robotics, and we agreed that we would organize
a qual in any area in which 3 fac members wanted to do so BUT will this
lead to quals in natural language processing, in nonmonotonic reasoning,
in planning, in expert systems, .... ? If so, is that bad? (I think
we ought to insist on more breadth in the quals then a special exam
in these fine-grained topics would demand.)
-Nils
-------
∂04-Aug-87 1124 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: Area X qual
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 11:23:55 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 4 Aug 87 11:20:33 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 11:20:33 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Area X qual
To: NILSSON@score.stanford.edu, ullman@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: genesereth@score.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
wiederhold@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, winograd@csli.stanford.edu
I agree that we don't want specialized exams, but I don't think
Area X is specialized by the standards of the department.
I've always partitioned the world the way the COSERS report does, assuming
that as a rough guideline, its areas were of equal weight.
These areas are:
1. NA
2. Theory
3. Hardware
4. AI
5. Programming Languages
6. Database Systems
7. Software Methodology
8. Special Topics
9. Applications
10. Operating Systems
Now look at the scope of our quals.
AA about 1/2 topic
MTC about 1/2 topic
AI 1 topic
NA 1 topic
SYS 4 topics
As I see area X, it covers most of modern database systems
and a fraction of AI, thus being at least the equivalent of
one "topic".
---jeff
∂04-Aug-87 1225 RPG Meeting with Nils
How about lunch (time) on thursday to discuss the Lisp Institute?
Nils wrote:
Richard, Yes, John did mention something about this to me, and
I think it's a great opportunity for Stanford. I've forgotten
when John is leaving for Europe, but perhaps the three of us
could meet before he goes to talk over plans, etc. How about
lunch sometime next week? Would you like to check with John and
then name a day?
-rpg-
∂04-Aug-87 1413 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Area X qual
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 14:13:16 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 14:13:13 PDT
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Area X qual
To: NILSSON%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ullman%NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
winograd%CSLI.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12323845968.24.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12323883367.22.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
NIls,
I don't see the harm, especially when an area is getting popular. Even
more radically, I don't see why we need have qual areas at all. If
three faculty members can agree on a sykllabus, why not lewt them just
make upo a specialized qual. We do that already within our established
areas, where the AI people (for example) make up a qual
without the advice or consent of the aa folks.
mrg
-------
∂04-Aug-87 1721 JMC
For those interested in the implications of the Putnam/Kripke philosophy of
natural kinds for the psychology of concepts, I recommend the article I
alluded to in a previous message, Georges Rey's "Concepts and Stereotypes",
Cognition 15:1-3 (1983).
This piece is a philosophically informed critique of Smith & Medin's book
"Categories and Concepts" (1981). Medin & Smith offer a reply in Cognition
17:3 (1984), and Rey answers their reply in Cognition 19:3 (1985).
∂04-Aug-87 1748 LES Qlisp funds
Projecting to January 1, there appear to be enough funds to support
the Qlisp project, including Arkady, with about $500k left over.
∂04-Aug-87 1912 WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Area X qual
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 19:12:14 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 19:12:31 PDT
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Area X qual
To: NILSSON%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ullman%NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
genesereth%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, winograd%CSLI.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12323845968.24.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12323937853.12.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
maybe we just need a name which looks less narrow (x being one char /26?)
Gio
-------
∂04-Aug-87 1917 CLT
call jussi 493-4799(home)
∂04-Aug-87 2130 VAL lost luggage
It belongs to Alex Gorbis. How can he get it?
∂04-Aug-87 2132 VAL wics
I covered STRIPS, briefly the role of non-monotonic reasoning (and said you'd
say more about it), second-order logic and the simplest case of circumscription
(with just one predicate minimized and nothing else varied). They're reading
your 1980 paper tonight.
Would you like to lecture in the morning tomorrow? I'll come at 1:30 then.
∂04-Aug-87 2235 broder@src.DEC.COM Re: Taste Tests & JMC's challenge
Received: from SRC.DEC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 87 22:35:02 PDT
Received: by src.dec.com (5.54.3/4.7.34)
id AA21742; Tue, 4 Aug 87 22:35:12 PDT
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 22:35:12 PDT
From: broder@src.DEC.COM (Andrei Broder)
Message-Id: <8708050535.AA21742@src.dec.com>
To: isaacs@psych.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: broder@src.DEC.COM, su-etc@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: Taste Tests & JMC's challenge
In-Reply-To: Your message of 4 Aug 87 15:06:38 PDT.
Ellen Isaacs writes:
It seems that, by having people taste a great many different brands
[of ice cream] all at the same time, the brands with the more
*distinctive* taste, not necessarily the *best* taste, have the
advantage.
This might be true for inexperienced tasters, but I don't believe
experienced tasters fall into this trap. However this might be
because they rationalize the tasting process: that is, they will
identify the various flavors, consider their appropriateness, will
award points for some flavors, subtract points for others, consider
the overall balance, etc. To a great extent, their ``likes'' and
``dislikes'' are the automatization of this process.
(I actually don't know anything about tasting ice-cream, but
extrapolate from wine tasting.)
With respect to JMC's challenge, I believe that even experienced
tasters are seldom able to correctly identify a particular wine among
similar wines, e.g. a California Chardonnay among similarly styled
California Chradonnay's - people have a weak memory of tastes.
Probably the same holds for beer. However a good taster is very
consistent in his rankings, and experienced tasters are fairly
consistent with each other.
In other words, if JMC will give the same 5 good quality beers to an
experienced beer taster, to test blindly, say 10 times, the taster's
rankings will be very highly correlated, or even identical.
Furthermore the rankings of 15 different experienced tasters for
those 5 beers will also show a statistically significant correlation.
(My opinions are based on my experience with wine tasting and wine
tasters. I am a member of a wine tasting group. We taste all the
wines in the single blind ranking method, that is in general we know
what wines or what kind of wines are in the tasting but don't know
which wine is which - bottles are wrapped in paper bags and
relabeled. Each taster ranks all wines in his order of preference.
From this data we compute a group ranking and even some times,
significance intervals and correlations. Usually the correlation
among frequent tasters is quite high, certainly enough to reject the
independence hypothesis. Now and then, relatively inexpensive wines
get high marks, and often expensive wines get low marks, but
unfortunately, within each type of wine there is also a high
correlation between blind rankings and price.)
- Andrei
∂04-Aug-87 2331 ME stripe.sri.com
According to a message posted to SU-COMPUTERS, the host Stripe.SRI.COM
is now gone and any mail formerly sent there should go to SRI.COM.
I noticed you had mail queued to ailist@Stripe. I've rerouted all
such queued mail to SRI.COM, but you should mail there directly
in the future.
∂05-Aug-87 0859 RPG Lunch
Turns out tomorrow is no good for me. How about Friday?
-rpg-
∂05-Aug-87 1011 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Aug-87 23:19-PT.]
OK, lunch Thursday 12:15.
∂05-Aug-87 1235 VAL Maslov's book
Can you give me back the copy I gave you? I'd like to take all the copies I have
here to Moscow to give to Maslov's colleagues as gifts.
∂05-Aug-87 1403 jc@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu AI discussion group at UT
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Aug 87 14:03:07 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA23603; Wed, 5 Aug 87 16:02:56 CDT
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 87 16:02:45 CDT
From: jc@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (James Crawford)
Posted-Date: Wed, 5 Aug 87 16:02:45 CDT
Message-Id: <8708052102.AA18926@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA18926; Wed, 5 Aug 87 16:02:45 CDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: AI discussion group at UT
Cc: dvorak@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu, jc@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu
About a year ago several of us organized an informal weekly discussion
group ( sometimes called AI chat ) to establish some communication among
graduate students at the University of Texas interested in AI. We have had
discussions of various topics in AI and visits from most of the AI faculty
in the department. I know that your schedule will be busy while you are
here but we would be interested to hear about your current research interests
and your perspective on the field of AI as a whole.
We generally meet on Wednesdays around noon in the faculty
lounge ( Taylor 3.128).
Thanks,
Jimi
∂05-Aug-87 1748 RA your sabatical
Are you going to be away for just the Fall quarter or beyond. This is
re a msg I got from Claire Stager who wants to know whether you are
going to be here to teach your assigned courses.
∂05-Aug-87 2000 JMC
Maslov's book
∂06-Aug-87 0101 VAL
Gelfond got his visa.
∂06-Aug-87 0859 VAL re: reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Aug-87 01:04-PT.]
Gelfond asked me to thank you for your efforts on his behalf.
My parents' telephone number in Leningrad is 238-5928. My mother speaks
some English.
∂06-Aug-87 0900 JMC
Snyder
∂06-Aug-87 1322 SMC embassy and consulate numbers
To: JMC, VAL
The number you wanted are as follows, beginning with country code.
U.S. Embassy in Moscow 7 096 252 2451
U.S. Consulate in Leningrad 7 12 274 8235
∂06-Aug-87 1337 VAL wics
I'm leaving on your terminal the folder I found in the classroom at the
end of the first day. It contains some questionnaires and certificates that
I assume we're supposed to distribute at the end of the last lecture.
(I've never been told anything about it though).
∂06-Aug-87 1403 VAL transparencies for Moscow
I'm leaving a copy of what I've prepared on your terminal. Please look at them
before we discuss the presentation tomorrow.
∂06-Aug-87 1648 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU ehud shapiro's e-mail address
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 87 16:48:13 PDT
Date: Thu 6 Aug 87 16:47:33-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ehud shapiro's e-mail address
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12324435749.24.RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Professor Mccarthy, would you have it?
-------
∂06-Aug-87 2255 SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: visas
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 87 22:55:28 PDT
Date: Thu 6 Aug 87 22:54:32-PDT
From: Sol Feferman <SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: visas
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 6 Aug 87 10:40:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12324502557.11.SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Good. Alls well that ends well except we don't have our visas yet. Do
you?
Sol
-------
∂06-Aug-87 2300 SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: visas
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 87 23:00:18 PDT
Date: Thu 6 Aug 87 22:59:20-PDT
From: Sol Feferman <SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: visas
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 6 Aug 87 22:58:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12324503431.11.SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for reassurance.
-------
∂07-Aug-87 1208 SMC hawk
The file HAWK is now on e87,jmc.
∂07-Aug-87 1310 SMC pam widrin
Pam Widrin of Alliant called. She would like to set up an appointment to
discuss the upgrade proposal. Please call her at (408) 295-7222
∂07-Aug-87 1453 SMC shipping books
UPS has a maximum wt of 70lbs, and a maximum girth times height of 108". The
cost of shipping 70# of books between stanford and austin is about $20.37, and
takes about 5 working days.
∂07-Aug-87 1455 SMC phone
The phone company can indeed centrally reroute our number to another number
and provide the house with different service. The charges are as follows.
Initially, $5.00 to set it up, then $18.00/mo and 2-3 cents/min of forwarded call
When you return, it will cost about $40.00 to restore the number to the house
again. In addition, all the normal charges would apply to establishing the
interim service to the house.
∂07-Aug-87 1622 SMC pam widrin again
She left a message on your answering machine (when?) saying that she and
Les are meeting Mon. at 3pm. She sounded as tho she thought you would be there.
∂07-Aug-87 2028 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Some are lucky
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Aug 87 20:28:42 PDT
Date: Fri 7 Aug 87 20:28:09-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some are lucky
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 7 Aug 87 20:00:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12324738054.10.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
0<distance(Palo Alto, San Francisco)<50
Unless small planes are forced to fly over scenic highway 1.
-------
∂10-Aug-87 0748 CLT rabinov
what did you decide to do with him?
Sharon B. needs to know what to charge him too?
∂10-Aug-87 0758 CLT moving expenses
Have you figured it out? Here is what I have so far and I think it
should be mailed today.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
air fair for 3 persons - approx $750.00
(myself, our son Timothy, his nanny Hazel Henry)
driving expenses
based on UT formula for the miles from Stanford to Austin and
motel expenses for 3 days travel
shipping books and some personal effects
????
∂10-Aug-87 0959 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Rabinov charges
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Aug 87 09:59:33 PDT
Date: Mon 10 Aug 87 09:58:50-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Rabinov charges
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 10 Aug 87 09:56:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325409921.19.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for the informtaion. I'll make sure the paperwork is processed
to change the account number for Rabinov's salary.
-Sharon
-------
∂10-Aug-87 1038 WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X qual
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Aug 87 10:38:21 PDT
Date: Mon 10 Aug 87 10:31:00-PDT
From: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: Area X qual
To: ullman@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc:
genesereth@score.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
nilsson@score.stanford.edu, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
winograd@csli.stanford.edu
My understanding of the policy is that the kind of discussion that went
on between Nils and Mike is intended to remain the province of the
faculty as a whole. The procedure is:
1) Three faculty agree it is a valid area and propose a syllabus.
2) They present it to the faculty who vote on it at a faculty
meeting.
3) If approved, it goes onto the list for as long as three people
are willing to set a syllabus and exam schedule each year (i.e.,
there is no procedure for re-evaluating an existing area).
Therefore it seems appropriate for Jeff, Gio and whoever else is
interested to do the first part, getting a syllabus together. If this
can be done relatively soon, it can be brought up for action at the
start-of-fall faculty meeting. As far as I can tell, nothing else
officially needs to be done before then except putting it on the agenda,
although it would be appropriate to publicize the syllabus for student
comment first.
Since Mike will be handling these things next year (assuming Nils's
preliminary committee list becomes reality) I hereby pass this issue
along to him. --t
∂10-Aug-87 1058 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu area X
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Aug 87 10:58:50 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 10 Aug 87 10:55:49 PDT
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 87 10:55:49 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: area X
To: genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
nilsson@score.stanford.edu, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
winograd@csli.stanford.edu
I am reluctant to take the lead on creating the syllabus, because my students
will be the first ones through the pipe. Gio--I know you
are on sabbatical, but can you at least take a first crack at the
syllabus in the database area? Someone else-- can you take the
lead in outlining appropriate aspects of AI, e.g., logic-based systems
and nonmonotonic reasoning?
I'll offer to be responsible for publishing the syllabus based on
what the addressees of this list propose.
One note of progress: Gio and I suggest "Data and Knowledge Systems"
as the value of "X".
---jeff
∂10-Aug-87 1113 AIR Ordering
Let me know when we can talk about vectors, ordering and circumscription.
∂10-Aug-87 1146 CLT coissons
will come tonight at 7 to discuss arrangements
and findout about the house
∂10-Aug-87 1213 jbn@glacier.stanford.edu Re: AI and science
Received: from GLACIER.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Aug 87 12:13:25 PDT
Received: by glacier.stanford.edu; Mon, 10 Aug 87 12:15:00 PDT
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 87 12:15:00 PDT
From: John B. Nagle <jbn@glacier.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: AI and science
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
In-Reply-To: <8708100540.AA25885@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Organization: Stanford University
Cc:
In article <8708100540.AA25885@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> you write:
>Sometimes it is as if the geneticists
>were required to do their work with elephants on the grounds that
>elephants are useful and fruit flies are not.
For a rather literal example of this phenomenon, note that
autonomous vehicles have become much larger and heavier since DARPA
and the Army Tank Command began supporting work in the area.
Early research vehicles such as the Stanford Carts, Shakey, MOBI,
the Hopkins Beast, and the Terragator were all of reasonable proportions.
Current work includes the DARPA autonomous recreational vehicle, the
CMU Chevy Step-Van, and the FMC Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Performance
does not seem to have improved with size.
John Nagle
∂10-Aug-87 1323 LES Pullen-Scherlis Visit
It just came to my attention that you didn't receive this. Your calendar
reveals no conflict.
∂07-Aug-87 1853 pullen@vax.darpa.mil DARPA Visit to Stanford
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Aug 87 18:53:46 PDT
Posted-Date: Fri 7 Aug 87 21:53:36-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA10796; Fri, 7 Aug 87 21:53:41 EDT
Date: Fri 7 Aug 87 21:53:36-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: DARPA Visit to Stanford
To: LUCKHAM@sail.stanford.edu, jlh@score.stanford.edu,
Cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu, Ullman@navajo.stanford.edu,
Les@sail.stanford.edu, ENGELMORE@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil, Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <555386016.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
The following is our "planned" schedule for 12 Aug (we rarely stick
exactly to plan, however...).
0930 Hennessy (incl 15 min w/EE contracts person)
1100 Cheriton
1230 lunch
1330 Ullman (incl 15 min w/CSACS contracts person)
1500 McCarthy
1600 Engelmore
1700 Luckham
1800 depart
We (Pullen & Scherlis) plan to stay together all day (unless it becomes
necessary to separate...). We are looking forward to spending the day
with you.
Mark & Bill
-------
∂10-Aug-87 1427 SMC car rental
The best rate I found was at Snappy Car Rental.
$425/mo. Univ. of Texas rate for compact car.Rate should include insurance.
U of T #2310
Snappy (512)458-8266, or (800) 762-7791
∂10-Aug-87 1459 SMC account numbers
The various account numbers that I have for you are as follows:
1-DMA154 UNRESTRICTED
1-DMA404 INT 84-12680 NSF JAPAN
2-DMA451 DCR-8206565-03 NSF KETONEN
2-DMA480 DCR 84-14393 NSF
1-DMA608 GIFTS SAIL GENERAL GIFTS
1-DMA609 GIFTS SAIL RESEARCH GIFTS
2-DMA705 N00039-84-C-0211 DARPA QLISP TASK 8
2-DMA780 MDA903-83-C-0188 ARPA MCCEQUIP
2-DMA781 MDA903-83-C-0188 ARPA CSDEQUIP
2-DMA792 5069800 LAWRENCE CSD-CF OUTSIDE USER
2-DMA901 646716 IBM EBOS
∂10-Aug-87 1612 SMC book
Positivism, by R. von Mises seems to be out of print.
∂10-Aug-87 1656 ME bike locker
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: pony@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
OK, when the bike lockers are re-installed, we'll offer yours on a
temporary basis until January. If no one takes it, we'll charge you
to keep it reserved for you; otherwise we'll charge the temporary
renter. This will guarantee that you have it available again by
January.
∂10-Aug-87 2110 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Computer chess game
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Aug 87 21:10:35 PDT
Date: Mon 10 Aug 87 21:09:17-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Computer chess game
To: su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, rivin@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12325531974.15.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hitech the Carnegie Mellon computer was challenged to a 2 game match
against the under 14 world champion (does this mean that Hitech is now
the world's best under 14 player--it is 4 years old??) France's Joel
Lautier (FIDE 2290). The match was played in Cannes, France last
february. Hitech won both games. One of the games was judged by
several grandmasters as the best game they had ever seen a computer
play. American GM Fedorowicz said the computer played 3 wonderful moves
(10th,18'th,19'th). He said that Hitech played better than Karpov would have.
Note that Hitech's moves 10,11,12 are a manoeuvre to get the white queen
to h5, where it can't be dislodged and attacks black's king side. These
moves would seem to be a counter example to the commmon belief that
computers are unable to formulate a good plan.
Hitech-Lautier (French Defense)
1. e4 e6
2. d4 d5
3. Nd2 c5
4. Ngf3 a6
5. exd5 exd5
6. dxc5 Bxc5
7. Nb3 Bd6
8. Bd3 Ne7
9. O-O O-O
10. Nfd4 Ng6
11. Qh5 Nc6
12. Nf3 Nce7
13. Re1 h6
14. Nbd4 Bd7
15. Be3 Bf4
16. Re2 Qc7
17. Rae1 Rae8
18. Bxg6 fxg6
19. Bxf4 Qxf4
20. Qe5 Qf7
21. Qxe7 Rxe7
22. Rxe7 Qf6
23. Rxd7 g5
24. Ree7 Rc8
25. Rxb7 g4
26. Ne5 h5
27. Nf5 Kh8
28. Nxg7 Rxc2
29. Re8+ Kh7
30. Nf5+ Black resigns.
-------
∂11-Aug-87 0034 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Computer chess game
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 87 00:34:01 PDT
Date: Tue 11 Aug 87 00:33:18-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Computer chess game
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, IGS@Sail.Stanford.EDU, ilan@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 10 Aug 87 23:53:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325569112.14.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I found the article in the september issue of ``Chess Life''. I suppose
that Berliner, who wrote the article, felt that chess life readers were
more interested in grandmaster's comments rather than about how the computer
works.
Attributing a plan to a computer may or may not make sense, however
finding a plan seems to be essential to playing optimal (human) chess.
In the sense that chess has a (limited) degree of objectivity, one
concludes that good computers will play in a way that humans will interpret
as having a plan.
It is interesting, that when one plays chess, one gets a feeling about
the opponent's personality. This indicates that, as computers improve
in other human endeavours, a ``computer consciousness'' may result.
Tangentially, I had always heard the name of Berliner associated to
Hitech. Having recently looked at ``All the Right Moves'' by Carl Ebeling,
it seems that Ebeling was the one responsible for Hitech's archhitecture,
while Berliner's role was basically to supply the chess knowledge.
-------
∂11-Aug-87 0536 WENTWORTH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Computer chess game
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 87 05:36:30 PDT
Date: Tue 11 Aug 87 05:35:04-PDT
From: Robert Wentworth <WENTWORTH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Computer chess game
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 10 Aug 87 23:53:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325624047.12.WENTWORTH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Hmmm... might or might not be very feasible to figure out what the
program was thinking about. If the program is as good as it
apparently is, it probably goes through a enough logical steps for
each move that unraveling its "thinking" could be rather difficult.
Philospher Daniel C. Dennet makes a pretty good case for thinking
about "intelligent" systems as "intensional" (sp? Britishism, or am I
just confused?) systems, i.e., systems which to a zeroth approximation
act as if they seek to achieve various ends and do so in a perfectly
logical and intelligent manner; to the next order of description, they
are described by their deviations from this ideal. The fact that a
microscopic analysis of the system's functioning does not clearly
reveal the ascribed purpose does not change the usefulness of the
"intensional stance" (i.e., the stance where one explains a system's
functioning by ascribing logical purposes) in explaining and
predicting the behavior of intelligent or pseudo-intelligent systems
which approximate ideal behavior.
But then, who wants to argue philosophy.
-------
∂11-Aug-87 0944 J.JACKK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: Computer chess game
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 87 09:44:29 PDT
Date: Tue 11 Aug 87 09:43:34-PDT
From: Jack Kouloheris <J.JACKK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Computer chess game
To: WENTWORTH@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU
cc: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU,
J.JACKK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12325624047.12.WENTWORTH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12325669286.213.J.JACKK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
The discussion about ascribing "intelligence" to computer programs
reminds me of a discussion that I had with one of my professors.
At the time, I was a naive undergraduate who believed that the
professors had all the answers. I asked him whether or not he believed
that it would ever be possible for a computer to be "intelligent".
He replied that he thought it would be possible for a computer to
simulate human "intelligence" in specific fields of endeavor, but
that it would take a long time to accomplish and be very expensive.
He then added that "making babies is cheaper and a LOT more fun."
-------
∂11-Aug-87 1100 SMC Nat. Med.
Review the forms sent by Dr. Anderson ASAP.
∂11-Aug-87 1533 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU bert
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 87 15:33:16 PDT
Date: Tue 11 Aug 87 15:32:03-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: bert
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12325732726.16.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
"All philosophers, of every school, imagine that causation is one
of the fundamental axioms or postulates of science, yet, oddly enough,
in advanced sciences such as gravitational astronomy, the word `cause'
never occurs ... The law of causality, I believe, like much that passes
muster among philosophers, is a relic of a bygone age, surviving, like the
monarchy, only because it is erroneously supposed to do no harm ..."
B. Russell, On the Notion of Cause, Proceedings of the Aristotelian
Society, 13 (1913), pp. 1-26.
Text actually reproduced from:
P. Suppes, "A Probabilistic Account of Causation,"
Acta Philosophica Fennica, Fasc. XXIV, North Holland, 1970.
-------
∂11-Aug-87 2237 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: chess game
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 87 22:37:31 PDT
Date: Tue 11 Aug 87 22:36:54-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: chess game
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: GINSBERG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 11 Aug 87 22:22:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325810068.8.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hitech's hardware is especially designed to take alpha-beta into
account, since move order is all-important. It is so successful that
Hitech examines the best move first about 90% of the time. I don't
know it handles quiescence.
-------
∂12-Aug-87 0828 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: great leaders of peace
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 87 08:28:18 PDT
Date: Wed 12 Aug 87 08:27:06-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: great leaders of peace
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 11 Aug 87 17:47:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325917510.27.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
and you think i don't?
-katie
-------
∂12-Aug-87 0908 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: great leaders of peace
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 87 09:08:23 PDT
Date: Wed 12 Aug 87 09:07:47-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: great leaders of peace
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 12 Aug 87 09:01:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325924915.27.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
enough people have written brief messages to me wrt j.c. that i've had
to reexamine what i wrote. i guess i didn't include him as a prime
example because i rarely think of "jesus the pacifist."
i tend to think more of "jesus who started that funky new religion way
back when which has turned out to be a pain in the tush throughout
history, in contemporary life, and tends to be a real hassle for me
personally." i said i wanted some historical perspective, i got it.
-katie
-------
∂12-Aug-87 0919 ROSE@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Courtesy Appointments
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 87 09:18:58 PDT
Date: Wed 12 Aug 87 09:17:32-PDT
From: Susan J. Rose <ROSE@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Courtesy Appointments
To: dek@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, ullman@Score.Stanford.EDU,
cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
cc: rose@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12325926691.20.ROSE@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Greetings,
I am in the middle of reappointing you as a professor by courtesy to the
EE Department. One thing I need from you is a current CV to submit with
the paperwork. You can send it to Sue Rose, 150 McCullough or if you have
it on line, send to rose@sierra. Thank you for your help.
Sue Rose
-------
∂12-Aug-87 1038 SMC NY Times letter
The New York Times is considering using your letter to the editor. They would
like to speak to you about it A.S.A.P. Please call Mr. Belzer at
(212) 556-1873. You may call collect.
∂12-Aug-87 1229 SMC new york times letter
The Times called back and spoke to me about your letter. Thy asked about
Vladimir Lifschitz' Visa and I told them that as far as I knew Vladamir had
received a visa d was indeed already in the Soviet Union. Mr. Belzer indicated
that if that were so, then they would use something else instead.
Did I do right?
∂12-Aug-87 1246 GINSBERG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: chess game
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 87 12:46:51 PDT
Date: Wed 12 Aug 87 12:45:46-PDT
From: Matthew L. Ginsberg <GINSBERG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: chess game
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 11 Aug 87 22:22:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12325964598.7.GINSBERG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I don't know about HiTech and quiescence. Ilan may well be right about
the 64 processors being used principally to speed up move generation;
I remember talking to Berliner about the idea of deciding what the value
was of having a particular piece on any particular square (the key thing
in the machine's "plan" as described by Ilan) -- I was amused because
it was something I had tried back when I wrote a chess-playing program
while in college.
Matt
-------
∂12-Aug-87 1328 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU qlisp meeting
Received: from GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 87 13:28:11 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Wed, 12 Aug 87 13:26:23 pdt
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 87 13:26:23 pdt
From: Igor Rivin <rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@sail
Subject: qlisp meeting
I have scheduled a meeting for tomorrow (thursday 13) at 2pm in
MJH352.
∂12-Aug-87 1618 SMC Caspian
My old roomy in Kentucky suddenly seems intent on getting rid of Caspian
as soon as possible. Martha has reluctantly agreed to take him until I am
situated in Davis. He will be shipping in possibly as soon as tomorrow (although
I can't reach Anita at the moment) Anita kenneled him while she was out of town,
and a check in the amount of $111.50 needs to be made out to Central Kentucky
Veterinary Services. I have the address of these people. Also he will arrive C.O.D.
and shipping will be $156.50. I don't know yet whether a check can simply be
made out to United Airlines or whether we will need to reimburse Martha or myself.
∂13-Aug-87 0122 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: long distance phone companies
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 01:22:22 PDT
Date: Thu 13 Aug 87 01:19:29-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: long distance phone companies
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 13 Aug 87 00:28:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12326101808.10.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
OK, I retract the second part of my message. However, a few lines being
used at night costs the phone company absolutely nothing. The newspaper
headlines are just propaganda. Could you imagine ATT saying:``Actually
those teen age hackers who just spent 1,000 hours on the phone between
LA and NY only cost us around a millionth of a cent in maintenance costs,
however it is the principle of the thing that matters, we have to pay
interest on money we borrowed to set the system up in the first place,
you know.''
-------
∂13-Aug-87 0828 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A book by Larry Wos
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 08:28:27 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 13 Aug 87 08:25:28-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 13 Aug 87 11:26:56-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 13 AUG 87 11:26:11 EDT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1987 11:26 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12326179502.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: A book by Larry Wos
Announcing. . . a new book published by Prentice-Hall
AUTOMATED REASONING:
33 BASIC RESEARCH PROBLEMS
by
LARRY WOS
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, Illinois
The beauty of a theorem from mathematics, the preciseness of
an inference rule of logic, the intrigue of a puzzle, and
the challenge of a game-all are present in the field of
automated reasoning. This new book discusses ways individu-
als can contribute significantly to this fascinating field,
and help researchers gain access to a computer program that
dwarfs the power of reasoning programs now in use. Readers
are challenged to
o+ overcome various obstacles confronting the automation of
reasoning;
o+ solve one or more of the 33 research problems proposed in
this book;
o+ evaluate ideas on test problems; and
o+ explore new approaches to automating reasoning that
exploit state-of-the-art technologies such as parallel pro-
cessing and logic programming.
The research problems are difficult-otherwise they would
have been solved already. The book is thus of especial
interest to individuals seeking a topic for a Ph.D. thesis,
and can be used in honors courses and in graduate courses in
automated reasoning, artificial intelligence, logic, and
philosophy.
But, it is not necessary to be an expert in mathematics or
logic or computer science, since the book reviews the basic
concepts of automated reasoning and presents numerous exam-
ples in a clear and readable form. What is needed is
curiosity, imagination, zeal, and a willingness to experi-
ment.
Because reasoning-in particular, logical reasoning-is vital
to so many applications, answers to the problems presented
here will sharply affect the ways and degree to which com-
puters are used. This book is an invitation to students and
researchers alike to contribute to the future success of
automated reasoning.
CONTENTS
Preface
1 INTRODUCTION
2 AN OVERVIEW OF SOME OBSTACLES TO THE AUTOMATION
OF REASONING
3 THE LIST OF BASIC RESEARCH PROBLEMS
4 REVIEW OF AUTOMATED REASONING
5 33 BASIC RESEARCH PROBLEMS: DETAILED
DISCUSSION
6 TEST PROBLEMS AND EXPERIMENTATION
7 THE FUTURE OF AUTOMATED REASONING
APPENDIX A: General Information
APPENDIX B: Set Theory Clauses in Mathematical
Notation
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
ORDER THIS BOOK FROM YOUR LOCAL BOOKSTORE OR FROM
PRENTICE-HALL, INC., ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS, N.J. 07632
ATTENTION: Maura Vill
Please send me ( ) copies of AUTOMATED REASONING: 33 Basic
Research Problems
by Wos at $11.95 (ISBN 013-04552-X).
Enclosed is my ( ) check or ( ) money order. (If payment
accompanies order, plus your state tax where applicable,
publisher pays all postage and handling charges.)
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY STATE
ZIP
OR ORDER BY MasterCard or Visa: 1-800-526-0485
LW and thanks
∂13-Aug-87 0948 CBARSALOU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: area X
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 09:48:01 PDT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 87 09:47:42 PDT
From: Caroline Barsalou <CBARSALOU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: area X
To: ullman@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
cc: genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
winograd@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>" of Mon, 10 Aug 87 10:59:14 PDT
Message-ID: <12326194326.52.CBARSALOU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Gio has already left on his sabbatical. He prepapred the syllabus draft.
I'll email it to you probably next week
Caroline
-------
∂13-Aug-87 1041 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK new report
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 10:40:57 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 13 Aug 87 10:35:48-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 13 Aug 87 13:35:55-EDT
Received: from Cs.Ucl.AC.UK (TCP 1600000011) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 13 Aug 87 13:06:04 EDT
Received: from computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk by nss.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa01878; 13 Aug 87 14:23 BST
Received: from cl.cam.ac.uk by Jenny.CL.Cam.AC.UK
with SMTP with TCP/IP over Ethernet id a010701;
13 Aug 87 14:07 BST
Received: by uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3)
id AA21594; Thu, 13 Aug 87 13:07:15 GMT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 87 13:07:15 GMT
From: lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Message-Id: <8708131307.AA21594@uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: new report
The following is available as Technical Report 113 from
Computing Service Bookshop
University of Cambridge
Corn Exchange Street
Cambridge CB2 3QG
England
Unfortunately they require a Money Order for 2 pounds sterling
(.50 pounds + 1.50 pounds for airmail postage).
The Representation of Logics in Higher-Order Logic
by Lawrence C Paulson, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Abstract:
Intuitionistic higher-order logic -- the fragment containing
implication, universal quantification, and equality -- can serve as a
meta-logic for formalizing various logics. As an example, axioms
formalizing first-order logic are presented, and proved sound and
complete by induction on proof trees.
Proofs in higher-order logic represent derivations of rules as well as
proofs of theorems. A proof develops by deriving rules using
higher-order resolution. The discharge of assumptions involves derived
meta-rules for `lifting' a proposition.
Quantifiers require a similar lifting rule or else Hilbert's
epsilon-operator. The alternatives are contrasted through several
examples. Hilbert's epsilon underlies Isabelle's original treatment of
quantifiers, but the lifting rule is logically simpler.
The meta-logic is used in the latest version of the theorem prover
Isabelle. It extends the logic used in earlier versions. Compared
with other meta-logics, higher-order logic has a weaker type system but
seems easier to implement.
∂13-Aug-87 1101 SMC renting the car
rent-a-heap-cheap charges aprox $440.00 per month for older economyish car.
∂13-Aug-87 1232 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 12:32:43 PDT
Date: Thu 13 Aug 87 12:31:36-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Inverse Method project
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12326224163.21.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
My new manager does not seem able to spare me for any time at all, even if I
take vacation time. Consequently the project has stopped cold. I have applied
for a transfer, and they are working on it, but they are not encouraging about
the prospects. Times are tight, and no one can get all the people he needs, so
managers are trying to get all the work they can out of their existing forces.
My plan is to take an incomplete on the project for summer, take no courses in
fall, and complete the project on the resulting spare time from the end of
summer quarter (or earlier, if I get enough credits in Numerical Analysis to
pass without taking the final) until it is finished. There could be a rebound:
if I take no classes, IBM could insist on 40 hours per week instead of the 32
they require now. They give, I think, five or six hours off per 3-unit course
up to a maximum of eight hours. But on balance I would be better off; eight
hours is nowhere near what is required for one three unit course, counting
class time and homework time.
If this happens, I would likely not finish the MS in June unless some change in
the requirements occurs or I can petition to change my own plan, which is
unlikely to succeed since the remaining courses are core. But I think the PhD
sufficiently important that I will risk that outcome; after all, I can always
finish the MS in summer or fall of 1988 if the PhD fails to materialize.
What is your impression of this development?
..Ed
-------
∂13-Aug-87 1254 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Inverse Method project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 12:54:27 PDT
Date: Thu 13 Aug 87 12:53:18-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Inverse Method project
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 13 Aug 87 12:50:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12326228115.21.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks. I'll get Vladimir's ideas before I do, if he's around to give them; he
was my first target in the note.
..Ed
-------
∂13-Aug-87 1321 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU The Journal of Automated Deduction
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 87 13:21:27 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (AI.AI.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 13 Aug 87 13:18:20-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 13 Aug 87 16:17:56-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 13 AUG 87 16:15:39 EDT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1987 16:15 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12326232167.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: The Journal of Automated Deduction
*********************
This message was sent to the list once but, apparently,
it did not reach all members of the list. Therefore I am
sending it again.
*********************
Because of the rapidly growing interest in the interconnected
fields of automated reasoning, automated theorem proving, logic
programming, and artificial intelligence, the following information
might be of particular interest.
The Journal of Automated Reasoning, which is very inexpensive
compared to most computer science journals, now includes in each issue
two interesting columns: The Problem Corner, which presents test
problems from the world of puzzles, from mathematics, and from various
applications; and Basic Research Problems, which presents open problems
for research in automated reasoning.
The journal is published quarterly, each issue containing
approximately 110 pages. Beginning next year, each issue will contain
approximately 20% more material, which makes it even more attractive in
view of its cost. Subscription costs are lower for individuals that
are members of the Association of Automated Reasoning. Information in
that regard is also included.
The Journal of Automated Reasoning published its first issue in
February, 1985. It is an interdisciplinary journal that maintains a
balance between theory and application. The spectrum of material
ranges from the presentation of a new inference rule with proofs of its
logical properties to a detailed description of a computer program
designed to solve some problem from industry. The papers published in
this journal are from, among others, the fields of automated theorem
proving, logic programming, expert systems, program synthesis and
validation, artificial intelligence, computational logic, robotics, and
various industrial applications. The papers share the common feature
of focusing on some aspect of automated reasoning.
The journal provides a forum and a means for exchanging
information for those interested in theory, in implementation, and
in specific industrial or commercial applications.
To Subscribe write to Kluwer Academic PO Box 358 Accord
Station Hingham, MA 02018-0358
For outside the U.S. and Canada
Kluwer Academic Publishers Distribution Center PO Box 322 3300 AH
Dordrecht The Netherlands
$97 for institutions, $39 for private non-members of AAR,
$29.50 for members of AAR
AAR, Association for Automated Reasoning
The Association for Automated Reasoning is an organization for
disseminating and exchanging information. It is international in form,
and publishes a newsletter acyclically to announce workshops, discuss
software advances, present problem sets, etc.
To Join send a $5 check to Larry Henschen 780 S. Warrington
Road Des Plaines, IL 60016
∂13-Aug-87 1432 SJG meta-commentary
Hi John:
Without reading the original paper (which I can't volunteer to do this
week!), I have some trouble making sense of what you're saying, and
certainly can't comment on how sharply it addresses Smolensky's original
points.
Here are some micro-comments:
2nd paragraph: "creativeness" --> "creativity"
isn't it the "physical symbol SYSTEM hypothesis" ?
item (3): bathrooms frequently adjoin bedrooms only, and don't always have
windows
As far as something more major goes, it seems that you are continuing to
address the problem of restricting the language with which you are working.
Connectionism (or any myopic "unary" system) is making a specific restriction
that you argue is unacceptably harsh. But the learning problem is so
computationally severe in the absence of ANY restriction that it appears
intractable. Do contexts provide a way around this? I haven't got a
solid feeling about that -- they may, or may be a complete blind alley.
Could one ever prove a meta-theorem about what theorems or propositions
one needs to state (or perhaps is likely to need to state) in order to
solve a particular problem?
So I guess those are my impressions. The feeling I get from thinking
about your commentary is that logic and connectionism are at ends of
a continuum (actually, logic is at an end -- connectionism may be in
the middle somewhere), and that that continuum is in need of exploration.
I'm not sure how this ties into the subsymbolic stuff you mention, or
even what "subsymbolic" really is. Presumably, that's a reflection on the
fact that I haven't read the original paper.
Anyway, I hope this helps ...
Matt
∂14-Aug-87 0031 YORAM@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Favors
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Aug 87 00:31:46 PDT
Date: Fri 14 Aug 87 00:30:37-PDT
From: Yoram Moses <YORAM@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Favors
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12326355057.10.YORAM@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Hi John,
I've just arrived in the Stanford area, and will be around
for the next couple of months. Carolyn just told me that you
are leaving this weekend. I have a couple of favors to ask:
Could my discarded sail account be reactivated? Also, will it
be possible to give me a key to my old office and the nearby
romms? I'll be working with Joe Halpern at IBM, but would like
the ability to stay around Stanford occasionally.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, and have a nice trip to Russia and Texas!
Yoram
-------
∂16-Aug-87 0812 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET:masahiko@nttlab
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 87 08:12:23 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Sun, 16 Aug 87 08:10:20 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Sun 16 Aug 87 22:44:35
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Sun, 16 Aug 87 22:45:11 jst
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 87 22:45:11 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8708161345.AA20834@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
In-Reply-To: Sarah McCarthy's message of 10 Aug 87 1253 PDT <8708102044.AA22667@nttlab.NTT>
Thank you very much for send me the TeX source of your Tohoku Lecture.
It came out fine. However, I had to edit your source a little because
your TeX source contained some SAIL specific characters (for math
symbols like universal quatinfier.)
** masahiko **
∂16-Aug-87 1125 norman%ics@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu AI and science
Received: from SDCSVAX.UCSD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 87 11:25:12 PDT
Received: by sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (5.57/5.0)
id AA14727 for JMC@sail.stanford.edu; Sun, 16 Aug 87 10:25:16 PST
Received: by sdics.ICS scf2.7vax; Sun, 16 Aug 87 11:26:45 PDT
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 87 11:26:42 pdt
From: norman%ics@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Donald A. Norman)
Message-Id: <8708161826.AA20370@sunl.ICS>
Received: by sunl.ICS scf2.7sun; Sun, 16 Aug 87 11:26:42 pdt
Organization: Donald A. Norman, UCSD Institute for Cognitive Science
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 02 Aug 87 2159 PDT
Subject: AI and science
John
I find your essay on AI and science in AL list to be exactly the kind
of response I was hoping for: inteligent, well reasoned, sensible.
Thanks. I hope it helps the debate.
don
--------
Donald A. Norman
Institute for Cognitive Science C-015
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(619) 534-6770 (UCSD)
(619) 481-9191 (home)
norman@nprdc.arpa {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!ics!norman
norman@sdics.ucsd.edu norman%sdics.ucsd.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
Donald A. Norman
Institute for Cognitive Science C-015
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(619) 534-6770 (UCSD)
(619) 481-9191 (home)
norman@nprdc.arpa {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!ics!norman
norman@sdics.ucsd.edu norman%sdics.ucsd.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
∂18-Aug-87 1152 pullen@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting Invitation
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 87 11:52:01 PDT
Posted-Date: Tue 18 Aug 87 14:27:40-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA07743; Tue, 18 Aug 87 14:27:46 EDT
Date: Tue 18 Aug 87 14:27:40-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: PI Meeting Invitation
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu,
D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu, ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu,
cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu, CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@relay.cs.net,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, TAYLOR@ics.uci.edu,
DCL@sail.stanford.edu, trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
despain@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, lk@cs.ucla.edu,
jes%cs.brown.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu, rich@ai.ai.mit.edu
Cc: Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <556309660.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Arpanet message for:
- architecture and software PI's under contract or selected
- selected VLSI and networking PI's
- some support contractors
- all agents
- ISTO, ISAT, SDIO
1. This invites addressees to and provides details on the previously
announced DARPA/ISTO Computer Systems Principal Investigator (PI) meeting,
involving the Architecture Program and Software Program.
2. The meeting will be held 15-17 Sep 87 at the Holiday Inn, Gaithersburg,
MD. Local arrangements are being made by Bob Carpenter of NBS
<carpenter@icst-cmr.arpa>, 301-975-5677. Please contact Bob if you have
not received information from him by 24 August.
3. PI's are encouraged to bring two colleagues. Architecture PI's are
asked to ensure that one of these is prepared to focus on system hardware,
the other on system software.
4. The meeting will have the following format:
15 Sep: Starting at 0900 we will have an all-day overview of the Architecture
and Software Programs. Some introduction by DARPA, 7-10 minute overview
briefings by all projects. Dinner at 1900, socialize afterward.
16 Sep: Break into working groups on selected topics. Expect to present
details about your project to your working group. All attendees should
be so prepared, as project personnel may not be assigned to the same
team, and non-project attendees are expected to contribute also.
17 Sep: Reports of the working groups, interspersed with various other
topics (e.g. MOSIS support of projects, FCCSET computing initiative
concept, etc.). Meeting will conclude by 1600, after which a panel
from our Information Science and Technology (ISAT) advisory group
may meet.
5. As part of your ten-minute briefing, please generate (and leave
with us) a single 8-1/2 x 11 viewgraph of the following format:
Upper LH quadrant: an icon symbolic of your project, with the project
name.
Lower LH quadrant: key technical challenges and innovative results
expected from your project.
Upper RH quadrant: Potential impact of your project on the technical
community, military systems, and society.
Lower RH quadrant: major tasks and milestones of your project, organized
as a Gantt chart.
6. Only the one "quarter chart" will be used in the 7-10 minute briefing,
however you should split it into four separate slides for presentation
purposes. Thus we expect you to leave with us five overhead masters.
This is how we communicate your project to higher management, so a
good job here is important. Make them clear and concise (this is
not an exercise in packing the most type into a slide).
7. Please also bring for distribution 200 copies of the following
consolidated (and stapled together) document:
a. Cover: your quarter chart.
b. List of key personnel with area of responsibility and contact
information (telephone, Arpanet, mail).
c. List of major subsystems being developed and used by your project.
Identify interfaces between subsystems and give brief functional description
of each.
d. One to three papers representing your work.
e. List of principal publications arising from your work.
8. We are looking forward to this meeting- it should be an exciting
one!
Stephen Squires, Bill Scherlis, and Mark Pullen
-------
∂19-Aug-87 1715 LES PI Meeting Invitation
Looks like Pullen again neglected to send this to you.
∂18-Aug-87 1140 pullen@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting Invitation
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 87 11:40:27 PDT
Posted-Date: Tue 18 Aug 87 14:22:35-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA07727; Tue, 18 Aug 87 14:22:47 EDT
Date: Tue 18 Aug 87 14:22:35-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: PI Meeting Invitation
To: Marvin@godot.think.com, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu, Rick.Rashid@pt.cs.cmu.edu,
hector@princeton.edu, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, nassi@multimax.arpa,
SHarvey@ibm.com, BURDVAX!MG333@seismo.css.gov, Despain@ji.berkeley.edu,
gclhbx@gcuxb.att.com, rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu, WALKER@a.isi.edu,
Ullman@score.stanford.edu, Les@sail.stanford.edu, Sal@cs.columbia.edu,
GREEN@kestrel.arpa, lyon@icst-cmr.arpa, Weems%Umass.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
CHUCK@vlsi.caltech.edu, jlh@score.stanford.edu,
dardy@nrl-acoustics.arpa
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <556309357.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Arpanet message for:
- architecture and software PI's under contract or selected
- selected VLSI and networking PI's
- some support contractors
- all agents
- ISTO, ISAT, SDIO
1. This invites addressees to and provides details on the previously
announced DARPA/ISTO Computer Systems Principal Investigator (PI) meeting,
involving the Architecture Program and Software Program.
2. The meeting will be held 15-17 Sep 87 at the Holiday Inn, Gaithersburg,
MD. Local arrangements are being made by Bob Carpenter of NBS
<carpenter@icst-cmr.arpa>, 301-975-5677. Please contact Bob if you have
not received information from him by 24 August.
3. PI's are encouraged to bring two colleagues. Architecture PI's are
asked to ensure that one of these is prepared to focus on system hardware,
the other on system software.
4. The meeting will have the following format:
15 Sep: Starting at 0900 we will have an all-day overview of the Architecture
and Software Programs. Some introduction by DARPA, 7-10 minute overview
briefings by all projects. Dinner at 1900, socialize afterward.
16 Sep: Break into working groups on selected topics. Expect to present
details about your project to your working group. All attendees should
be so prepared, as project personnel may not be assigned to the same
team, and non-project attendees are expected to contribute also.
17 Sep: Reports of the working groups, interspersed with various other
topics (e.g. MOSIS support of projects, FCCSET computing initiative
concept, etc.). Meeting will conclude by 1600, after which a panel
from our Information Science and Technology (ISAT) advisory group
may meet.
5. As part of your ten-minute briefing, please generate (and leave
with us) a single 8-1/2 x 11 viewgraph of the following format:
Upper LH quadrant: an icon symbolic of your project, with the project
name.
Lower LH quadrant: key technical challenges and innovative results
expected from your project.
Upper RH quadrant: Potential impact of your project on the technical
community, military systems, and society.
Lower RH quadrant: major tasks and milestones of your project, organized
as a Gantt chart.
6. Only the one "quarter chart" will be used in the 7-10 minute briefing,
however you should split it into four separate slides for presentation
purposes. Thus we expect you to leave with us five overhead masters.
This is how we communicate your project to higher management, so a
good job here is important. Make them clear and concise (this is
not an exercise in packing the most type into a slide).
7. Please also bring for distribution 200 copies of the following
consolidated (and stapled together) document:
a. Cover: your quarter chart.
b. List of key personnel with area of responsibility and contact
information (telephone, Arpanet, mail).
c. List of major subsystems being developed and used by your project.
Identify interfaces between subsystems and give brief functional description
of each.
d. One to three papers representing your work.
e. List of principal publications arising from your work.
8. We are looking forward to this meeting- it should be an exciting
one!
Stephen Squires, Bill Scherlis, and Mark Pullen
-------
∂19-Aug-87 1756 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of July computer charges.
2-DMA480 McCarthy DCR 84-14393
In future, each computer user will receive a monthly electronic statement
summarizing their computer usage. This statement is a condensed version of
the detailed summary sheets sent monthly to departments.
Please verify each month that the proper university budget accounts are paying
for your computer usage. Please also check the list of account numbers below
the numeric totals. If the organizations/people associated with that account
number should NOT be paying for your computer time, send mail to BEDIT@SCORE.
Note: the "percent" column following the university budget account numbers
indicates what percent of your computer charges were billed to that account.
This statement is sent to the preferred EMAIL address listed in the PEDIT
database on SCORE. If no address is specified in PEDIT, this statement
is sent one of the listed computer accounts.
Please direct questions/comments to BEDIT@SCORE.
-------
∂20-Aug-87 0649 rc@icst-cmr.arpa PI Meeting Arrangements
Received: from ICST-CMR.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Aug 87 06:49:24 PDT
Received: by icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA (5.51/4.7)
id AA10766; Thu, 20 Aug 87 09:40:20 EDT
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 87 09:40:20 EDT
From: Robert Carpenter <rc@icst-cmr.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8708201340.AA10766@icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA>
To: Balzer@vaxa.isi.edu, Walker@A.ISI.EDU, CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, mld@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Chuck@VLSI.CALTECH.EDU,
lk@cs.ucla.edu, DCL@sail.stanford.edu, Les@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu,
D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu, Rick.Rashid@a.cs.cmu.edu,
rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, Sal@CS.Columbia.edu,
Green@kestrel.ARPA, Green@Kestrel.ARPA, Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
jlh@score.stanford.edu, ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu,
cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu, taylor@ics.uci.edu,
despain@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, Despain@JI.BERKELEY.EDU,
hector@princeton.ARPA, jes%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu,
lyon@icst-cmr.ARPA, dardy@nrl-acoustics.ARPA, nassi@multimax.ARPA,
Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu, pullen@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: PI Meeting Arrangements
Cc: rc@icst-cmr.arpa
United States Department of Commerce
National Bureau of Standards
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
August 20, 1987
Dear Invitee,
The Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology of the
National Bureau of Standards is hosting the DARPA/ISTO Com-
puter Systems Principal Investigator (PI) meeting of the Ar-
chitecture Program and the Software Program on September
15-17, 1987, at the Holiday Inn in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
The meetings will follow this approximate schedule.
Monday 1900-2100 Registration
Tuesday 0730-0900 Registration
Tuesday 0900-1730 Combined sessions
Tuesday 1900- ? Dinner
Wednesday all day Simultaneous sessions
Thursday until 1600 Combined sessions
Thursday after 1600 ISAT group may meet
GETTING TO THE HOTEL
The hotel can be reached by leaving Interstate 270 at Mary-
land 124 in the direction of Montgomery Village (to the
northeast). The hotel is on the far-left corner of the in-
tersection of MD 124 and MD 355, the first major intersec-
tion off I-270.
Limo service is available from all three Washington-
Baltimore airports. You must reserve in advance.
Washington Flyer 1-800-431-5472 National and Dulles
" " (703) 685-1400 " "
Gaithersburg Limo (301) 670-1115 All three airports
BWI Limo (301) 441-2345 BWI
REGISTRATION
I am enclosing an advance registration form. Please complete
one for each attendee and send them to <pimeet@icst-
cmr.arpa> as soon as possible. This will help us better
plan for your needs and reduce the sign-in crush at the
meeting. The meeting registration fee will be $100 (check
or cash). Among other things, this will include a buffet
lunch and coffee breaks each of the three days and the Tues-
day buffet dinner.
-1-
I am also enclosing a HOTEL RESERVATION FORM. Please return
it to the hotel by AUGUST 31, 1987. Their phone number is
301-948-8900; mention the DARPA/NBS meeting.
If you have any problems contact us at NBS.
Bob Carpenter 301-975-5677 <rc@icst-cmr.arpa>
John Roberts 301-975-5683 <roberts@icst-cmr.arpa>
Gordon Lyon 301-975-5679 <lyon@icst-cmr.arpa>
I'm looking forward to seeing you all.
Robert J. Carpenter
Parallel Processing Group
Advanced Systems Division
Institute for Computer Sciences
and Technology
-2-
==========================================================
MEETING REGISTRATION FORM - DARPA PI Meeting, 15-17 Sep 87
Send to <pimeet@icst-cmr.arpa>
==========================================================
NAME:
ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
ORGANIZATION:
MAIL ADDRESS:
Staying at Holiday Inn? Yes / No
Required projection equipment (other than for overheads):
==========================================================
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM: Mail or phone directly to hotel!!
==========================================================
HOLIDAY INN OF GAITHERSBURG ARRIVAL DATE________
2 Montgomery Village Ave. NUMBER OF NIGHTS________
Gaithersburg, MD 20879 RATE: $53.00
(301) 948-8900 Attn: Sales Office
Print Name ____________________________ Phone ____________
Address __________________________________________________
City and State ________________________ ZIP ______________
GROUP NAME: DARPA/NBS Meeting -- Sept. 15-17, 1987
Please reserve (check one) SINGLE ( ) DOUBLE ( )
METHOD OF GUARANTEE:
1. Credit card and number _______________________
2. Corporate number _____________________________
3. Advance Deposit (dollar amount) ______________
4. NBS "DARPA" Conference Rate: $53.00
All night reservations will be guaranteed with the following
credit cards (American Express, Master Card, Visa, Diner's
Club), corporate number, or with an advance deposit of one
night's lodging plus 10% tax.
THIS FORM MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE HOTEL BY 31 AUG 87.
==========================================================
-3-
∂21-Aug-87 0953 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU overdue tr
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Aug 87 09:53:08 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Aug 87 09:50:05-PDT
From: Math/Computer Science Library <LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: overdue tr
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: "*PS:<LIBRARY>OVERDUES..14"@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12328291913.24.LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
MATH & COMPUTER SCIENCES LIBRARY
LIBRARY@SCORE
723-4672
_______________________________________________________________________________
DATE 8/21/87
CALL#: 24652
AUTHOR: Nelson & Oppen
TITLE: Simplification by cooperating design procedures
The above publication is overdue.
Renewable only in person with book.
If we do not hear from you by 9/21/87 we will proceed with a replacement bill.
-------
∂24-Aug-87 1519 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Area X
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Aug 87 15:19:43 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 24 Aug 87 15:16:38 PDT
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 87 15:16:38 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Area X
To: ark@sail.stanford.edu, genesereth@score.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu, nilsson@score.stanford.edu,
val@sail.stanford.edu, wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
winslett@score.stanford.edu
The following is my revision of GIo's draft of the "Area X" qual.
I added detail to some of his entries, deleted the Codd 1970 ref
(OK to leave in, but what does it add?) and Date's book (again,
what does it add?).
I solicit comments, and I especially need some help from the AI
people regarding what belongs in the exam from that side.
---jdu
**********************************************
SYLLABUS FOR PH. D. QUALIFYING EXAM IN
DATA- AND KNOWLEDGE-BASE SYSTEMS
Draft of Aug. 24, 1987
J. D. Ullman
1. Wiederhold, "File Organization for Database Design," McGraw, 1987,
Ch. 5-8 (file organization and performance).
2. Wiederhold, "Database Design," McGraw, 1983, Ch. 7-9 (database models),
11-14 (database security and operation).
3. Ullman, "Principles of Database Systems," CSP, 1982, Ch. 5-7 (relational
database systems and theory), 8 (query optimization), 9.3 (acyclic hypergraphs).
Ch. 5-7 will be replaced by Ch. 2,4,7 of "Principles of Database and
Knowledge-Base Systems," Vol. I, when available.
4. Ullman Ch. 3 of "Principles of Database and Knowledge-Base Systems"
(logic as a database model).
5. Ceri and Pelagatti, "Distributed Databases," ch. 3,7,8.
6. Bernstein, Hadzilacos, and Goodman, "Concurrency Control and
Recovery in Database Systems", AW, 1987 (some subset to be specified).
7. Papadimitriou, "The Theory of Database Concurrency Control",
CSP, 1986, Ch. 1-4 (except 3.3).
8. Brodie and Mylopoulos, "On Knowledge-Base Management Systems,"
Springer, 1986, articles 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 13-16, 18, 19, 22, 23, 38-40.
9. Minker and Gallaire, "Logic and Databases," Plenum, 1978,
articles: Reiter, "On closed world databases" (pp. 55-76),
Reiter, "Deductive question answering on relational databases (pp. 149-178),
Clark, "Negation as failure" (pp. 293--324).
10. Bancilhon and Ramakrishnan, "An amateur's introduction to recursive
query-processing strategies," 1986 SIGMOD Conf., pp. 16-52.
11. Fifth PODS Conf. (1986): articles by
Bancilhon, Maier, Sagiv, Ullman (pp. 1-15),
Naqvi (114-122), Bidiot and Hull (123-132), Naughton (267-279).
12. Sixth PODS Conf. (1987): articles by
Kuper (11-20), Beeri et al. (21-37), Beeri et al. (214-226),
Naughton and Sagiv (227-236), Beeri and Ramakrishnan (269-283),
Van Gelder and Topor (313-327), Ramakrishnan, Bancilhon, and Silberschatz
(328-339), Naughton (340-348), Sagiv (349-362).
13. Warren, "Efficient processing of interactive relational database
queries expressed in Prolog," 1981 VLDB Proc.
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ON REASONING, NONMONOTONIC LOGIC, CIRCUMSCRIPTION (?),
ETC. HELP FROM AI COMMUNITY NEEDED HERE.
∂24-Aug-87 1706 HABERMANN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Re: PI Meeting Invitation
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Aug 87 17:06:45 PDT
Received: ID <HABERMANN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Mon 24 Aug 87 20:06:16-EDT
Date: Mon 24 Aug 87 20:06:12-EDT
From: Nico Habermann <Nico.Habermann@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: PI Meeting Invitation
To: PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL
cc: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, rollins@C.CS.CMU.EDU, D-scott@C.CS.CMU.EDU,
ZM@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, cmp.good@R20.UTEXAS.EDU,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, lee%boulder.colorado.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
TAYLOR@ICS.UCI.EDU, DCL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
trwrb!trwspp!belz@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, despain@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
lk@CS.UCLA.EDU, jes%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, ken@RICE.EDU,
rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, Scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL
In-Reply-To: <556309660.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Message-ID: <12329157738.13.HABERMANN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Mark and Bill,
Unfortunately, I will be on the West Coast and will not be able to attend
the PI Meeting on 15-17 Sept. Would it be all right to send my project
leader instead?
-- Nico
-------
∂24-Aug-87 2318 DEK
To: LES, JMC
∂24-Aug-87 2103 LES SAIL future
As I mentioned to you awhile ago, a possibility that we should plan for
is the demise of SAIL. It appears that if CSD-CF is to buy a DEC 8700,
it will need more customers in order to avoid losing money. SAIL costs
a bit over $200k/year to run and has a modest and dwindling population.
As things stand, the operating costs, which are fixed, must be carried
by this group, which means increasing rates.
If we planned to shut it down, say, a year from now, do you think that
would leave you enough time to make a graceful transition? If not,
what time frame would be acceptable?
*** I discussed this with JMC and the two of us agreed that
a two year period would be best for a "graceful transition". I would
like to (strongly) suggest December 1989 as the shutdown date.
One year from now would give me serious problems, seriously.
But I will be able to wean myself away, and still pay for use of
SAIL until December 1989. Several projects still pending can only
be done well on SAIL. These will be finished in two years for sure.
(Unless the UDPs don't come up soon! Several things are hanging in
midair because of that...)
I think a one-year shutdown is much much earlier than anything John
and I discussed, and the two of us were in total agreement as I recall.
The only problem is if people gracefully leave in such a way that
they do almost nothing with the machine during its last month...
Some kind of special deal could be worked out, however, I think,
so that the machine is utilized till the last minute.
∂25-Aug-87 0936 MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU check
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 87 09:36:54 PDT
Date: Tue 25 Aug 87 09:29:43-PDT
From: Richard Marty <MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: check
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12329336781.17.MARTY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There is a check for you at the reception desk, MJH
-------
∂25-Aug-87 1608 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Area X
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 87 16:07:59 PDT
Date: Tue 25 Aug 87 15:58:20-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Area X
To: ullman@Navajo.Stanford.EDU
cc: ark@Sail.Stanford.EDU, genesereth@Score.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, val@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, winslett@Score.Stanford.EDU,
NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>" of Mon 24 Aug 87 22:32:02-PDT
Message-ID: <12329407525.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Jeff, I'll try to respond to your request for suggestions about AI
articles relevant to area x---but I won't be able to get to it
'til next week. Can you give me some idea of approximately how many
such articles would be appropriate for the purposes of the syllabus?
2 or 3? 7 to 10? 20-ish? -Nils
-------
∂25-Aug-87 1744 rc@icst-cmr.arpa More PI meeting info
Received: from ICST-CMR.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 87 17:44:18 PDT
Received: by icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA (5.51/4.7)
id AA03434; Tue, 25 Aug 87 15:14:05 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 87 15:14:05 EDT
From: Robert Carpenter <rc@icst-cmr.arpa>
Message-Id: <8708251914.AA03434@icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA>
To: BURDVAX!MG333@SEISMO.CSS.GOV, Balzer@vaxa.isi.edu, Walker@A.ISI.EDU,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,
mld@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu,
Chuck@VLSI.CALTECH.EDU, lk@cs.ucla.edu, DCL@sail.stanford.edu,
Les@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu,
rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu, D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu,
Rick.Rashid@a.cs.cmu.edu, rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu,
Marvin%Godot.THink.Com@THink.Com, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
Sal@CS.Columbia.edu, Green@Kestrel.ARPA, Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
jlh@score.stanford.edu, ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu,
cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu, taylor@ics.uci.edu,
despain@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, Despain@JI.BERKELEY.EDU,
hector@princeton.ARPA, jes%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu,
lyon@icst-cmr.ARPA, dardy@nrl-acoustics.ARPA, pullen@vax.darpa.mil,
trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: More PI meeting info
Cc: rc@icst-cmr.arpa
In response to numerous requests....
You may send your $100 registration checks for the DARPA PI meeting,
made out to:-
DARPA-NBS Principal Investigators Meeting
to the following mail address:-
John W. Roberts
DARPA PI Meeting
Bldg 223, Room B364
National Bureau of Standards
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Please allow a week for the mail to reach us, or wait and pay at the
meeting.
Thanks,
Bob Carpenter <pimeet@icst-cmr.arpa>
∂27-Aug-87 1115 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Grade in CS399
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Aug 87 11:15:34 PDT
Date: Thu 27 Aug 87 11:08:13-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Grade in CS399
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12329879000.22.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I talked with Richard Maldinato in the Registrar's office. He said under the
circumstances it would be appropriate to record a '*' (no grade) and fill it in
after I complete the work. If you agree, it sounds right to me.
Hope your trip to Russia was enjoyable and fruitful.
By copy to Vladimir I'm asking for logistical help should you be unavailable:
how do we handle the grade in that case? And I'm also letting him know that
I'm going to have a vacation day per week to work on the project, plus evenings
and weekends, starting after next Monday. He should be hearing from me soon.
Thanks for everything, and enjoy Texas.
..Ed
-------
∂27-Aug-87 1209 JDP Parallel Polynomial Manipulation
To: rhh@VX.LCS.MIT.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JSW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
IGS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JDP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We are beginning development of a small computer algebra system
for QLISP. Igor Rivin said that you may have already developed
some Multi-lisp code for manipulating polynomials, and may be
willing to share it.
If so, could you tell me what files to retrieve?
Thanks, Dan Pehoushek
∂27-Aug-87 1526 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF REPORT
Received: from CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Aug 87 15:26:22 PDT
Received: from gvax.cs.cornell.edu by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA20420; Thu, 27 Aug 87 16:36:21 EDT
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 87 16:37:11 EDT
From: patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Donna Patteson)
Message-Id: <8708272037.AA02212@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA02212; Thu, 27 Aug 87 16:37:11 EDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: NSF REPORT
John Hopcroft asked me to contact you for
your response to the NSF Report that was mailed out
in mid-July.
John is hoping that you can give your
unofficial approval on it, taking into account
that it will be revised further by an editor.
Would you feel comfortable with him presenting it
to the Advisory Board? Also, have you had a
chance to reconsider putting your name in the
contributors' section?
John appreciates all the work you have
put into the report, and he asked me to relay
his thanks to you.
Donna Patteson
∂30-Aug-87 1542 ME (on TTY62, at TV-62 1542)
You'll be in no-edit mode. Hope you've used that
(↑P means CONTROL, ↑W means CONTROL-META). This is for TTY VT102.
∂30-Aug-87 1620 GGOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Passing Years
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Aug 87 16:20:12 PDT
Date: Sun 30 Aug 87 16:12:49-PDT
From: Gene H. Golub <GGOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Passing Years
To: eustis@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
cc: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Phone: 415/723-3124
Message-ID: <12330720884.11.GGOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Bob,
It probably went unnoticed in your office but I just celebrated my
25th year at Stanford (as did John McCarthy). One of my colleagues
mentioned that the School of Engineering gives some wine on such
occaisions. Am I eligible, even though I have been in H&S most of
these years?
Regards,
Gene
-------
∂31-Aug-87 1021 SMC Texas #s
All listed people notified.
∂31-Aug-87 1021 VAL Ed Brink
Have you replied to Ed's messages about his "logistical problems"? Is there
anything I should do here in connection with them?
Also, it occurred to me that maybe we should tell Ed who's going to write (sign)
a letter for him if he completes the project successfully, you or I. He may be
disappointed if, having gone through all this trouble, he still doesn't get your
recommendation.
∂31-Aug-87 1038 SMC house payment
You have one more salary check coming which will go in Sept. 7. I gather that is
sufficient for your house payments.
∂31-Aug-87 1056 VAL Alex Gorbis
To: genesereth@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Mike,
John talked with Minc in Moscow about admitting Alex Gorbis at the PhD program
and decided he wants to take him. I hope it's not too late. Please let me know
if I can be of any help.
Vladimir
∂31-Aug-87 1236 SMC expenses
John here are my estimated expenses. They may of course require adjustment.
There also could be things which I have not anticipated, but I have tried to allow
for that, hence the misc entries. The initial list has an alarmingly high but
realistic estimate of costs. Keep in mind that includes 1st and last months rent
$200.00 deposit($100.00 is dog deposit), fees, books, glasses, and vaccinations
(The rabies series is $130.00) Send me mail if you have futher questions. I have
also paid Caspian's Kentucky vet bill and he is in California.
I will be moving to Davis around the 19th.
I will need to reimbursed after taking your car to Gary also.
One major expense which could rear its ugly head but which I will try to cover
myself, is possible new clutch and synchro for car. If it really needs both
I may be in trouble
Immediate expenses
date
9-01 -first and last months rent and deposit on housing $800.00
9-23 -U.C. Davis fees for Fall quarter $474.50
9-22 -books and equipment(U.C.D. financial aid says $850/yr) $450.00 + aprox
9-22 -vaccinatons-rabies, rubella, TB test $175.00
9-07 -balance of money for glasses $130.00
-desk, chair(random used) $100.00
9-15 -misc household items(phone, shelving, misc) $100.00 + aprox
9-15 -misc fees-parking permit, bike licence etc $ 80.00
-misc? $150.00 aprox
-living expenses after 9/18 $200.00
---------
$2659.50
---------
* * * * * * * * * *
Regular expenses.Per month.
-rent $300.00
-food $150.00
-gas & oil $ 50.00
-phone $ 60.00 +
-school supplies $ 25.00
-utiities $ 35.00
-clothes $ 35.00
-misc $120.00 +
-Caspian(normal maintainance,not incl. any major vet) $ 25.00
---------
$800.00/mo
---------
Horse expenses. To be paid back to you during summers and after graduation.
I will establish a separate bank account and separate these funds.
-board $160.00
-shoes $ 30.00
-vet expenses $ 20.00
-misc $ 20.00
---------
(all but shoes will be higher in March and April) $230.00/mo
---------
* * * * * * * * * *
Regular Major expenses.(Not included in monthly est)
-Fees $474.50/qtr
-Books $850.00/yr
-car insurance $165.00/6 mos.
-car maintainance unkn.
∂31-Aug-87 1529 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU QLISP status
Received: from Gang-Of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Aug 87 15:28:54 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Mon, 31 Aug 87 15:27:08 pdt
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 87 15:27:08 pdt
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: air@sail, weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail,
pehoushek@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: QLISP status
Halstead sent us his polynomial manipulation code. With very minor
modification, it runs in serial Common Lisp. It is not immediately
apparent how to speed the serial version up with QLET T. Also, it
does alot of consing, so to get nice speed-up the serial cons that
currently exists in qlisp will have to go away. Something like a
parallel mapcar may also be nice for derivatives and integrals.
Halstead was very prompt in replying, and this code will save us a
fair amount of design time. We owe him a favor. Arkady and I will
try to parallelize some of the functions in this code. In case anyone
is interested, the code is in /user/pehoushe/polynom.lisp, and the
test function is (test-fg n), which performs various polynomial
operations on 0 through nth degree multivariable polys.
On the LUCID front, Joe and I are going to visit Ron at LUCID tomorrow.
We are going to see what the status is on QLISP development, complain
a little about well known misfeatures, and ask about priorities on new
features. It has been quite some time since they released the initial
version of QLISP, so we sort of expect to get a new one with many more
features soon. That's all for now. -dan
∂01-Sep-87 0015 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 September 1987
Previous Balance 13.85
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.14
Current Charges 1.00 (bicycle lockers)
0.25 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 15.24
THE BIKE LOCKERS WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR ABOUT 60 DAYS BEGINNING 10 AUG 1987.
Please remove the bike from your locker before that date. The lockers
will be moved to a temporary site where they will remain until
reconstruction is completed in the back patio area. The lockers will not
be anchored down in this period and, consequently, will not be very secure
-- it will be possible to (awkwardly) lift the entire structure and steal
any bikes that are inside. In view of this, the Pony will not charge rent
for the lockers until they are re-secured and, if you use them during this
period, YOU DO SO AT YOUR OWN RISK. If you have questions regarding this
temporary inconvenience, please contact Les Earnest at 723-9729.
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 4/30/87.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂01-Sep-87 0128 ME Prancing Pony Bill (corrected)
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 September 1987
Previous Balance 13.85
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.14
Current Charges 0.25 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 14.24
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 4/30/87.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂01-Sep-87 0921 SMC score
I am not sure how to go about notifying the staff of score. Phone number?
∂01-Sep-87 0939 ME noedit chars
Here is a table from E.ALS[up,doc]/21P with the names of all the special
SAIL characters (ASCII control chars). To enter any of these from a no-edit
display, you just quote it with ↑Q. (To enter one with CONTROL BIT added,
use ↑P instead; similarly, CONTROL-META comes via ↑W (double bucky), and
META via ↑V.) READ NOEDIT for more details.
There are handier tables than this, but they probably won't help you unless
you can actually see the SAIL character set. (Do you have your printer with
you? You could print NOEKEY.ARK[UP,DOC]. Or have it printed and mailed to you.)
(This table contains the actual printing special SAIL characters.)
000 null
001 down arrow ↓ <ctr>A
002 alpha α <ctr>B
003 beta β <ctr>C
004 logical and ∧ <ctr>D
005 logical not ¬ <ctr>E
006 epsilon ε <ctr>F
007 pi π <ctr>G
010 lambda λ <ctr>H
011 TAB
012 LF
013 VT
014 FF
015 CR
016 infinity ∞ <ctr>N
017 delta ∂ <ctr>O
020 containment ⊂ <ctr>P
021 implication ⊃ <ctr>Q
022 intersection ∩ <ctr>R
023 union ∪ <ctr>S
024 for all ∀ <ctr>T
025 there exists ∃ <ctr>U
026 circle times ⊗ <ctr>V
027 double-arrow ↔ <ctr>W
030 underbar _ <ctr>X
031 right-arrow → <ctr>Y
032 tilde ~ <ctr>Z
033 not equal ≠ <ctr>[
034 less or equal ≤ <ctr>\
035 greater or eq ≥ <ctr>]
036 equivalence ≡ <ctr>↑
037 logical or ∨ <ctr>←
Note: To get tilde, just type tilde (which in ASCII is 176).
To get underbar, just type underbar (137 in ASCII).
To get left-arrow, type ↑Q↑X.
To get non-equals, type ↑Q↑Z.
To get Altmode, type ESC.
To get ESCAPE, type ↑@ (null).
To get BREAK, type ↑@ and then "-" (minus sign).
∂01-Sep-87 1219 VAL re: Grade in CS399
To: brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU sent Thu 27 Aug 87 11:08:13-PDT.]
We agree with your plan to record a '*' and fill it in after you complete the
work. If you need John's signature, check with the Registrar's office how this
can be handled. Maybe an electronic message from him would be enough.
Vladimir
∂01-Sep-87 1301 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU PI meeting
Received: from Gang-Of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Sep 87 13:01:01 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Tue, 1 Sep 87 12:59:16 pdt
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 87 12:59:16 pdt
From: Igor Rivin <rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: PI meeting
Cc: rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
What is the latest on my being there? (The dates are drawing nigh...)
∂01-Sep-87 1715 JSW Qlisp meeting
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Qlisp Meeting
Date: Thursday, September 10
Time: 2:30 p.m.
Place: MJH 352
Igor will tell us about all the things he has seen at MIT, BBN and
elsewhere around Cambridge. And we can discuss the current state of
Qlisp projects and plans for the fall.
∂02-Sep-87 1044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Grade in CS399
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 10:39:42 PDT
Date: Wed 2 Sep 87 10:38:23-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Grade in CS399
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 2 Sep 87 10:23:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12331446432.22.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The Registrar's office already has an asterisk recorded; apparently it's the
default, and it will stay until the real thing comes along.
Vladimir, I now have Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays to work on the project,
starting tomorrow. I'd like to get a few examples to work by hand, as you
suggested earlier. I can make some up, but if you have specific ideas I'll be
glad to come by and talk.
..Ed
-------
∂02-Sep-87 1218 VAL Problem
Did you see this simplified version of Mr. S and Mr. P in the last AIList?
A door-to-door vacuum cleaner sales person tries his pitch to
this uncompassionate mother-at-home-with-kids-screaming-behind
and after two minutes, the following dialog ensues
mother: Before you go any further, I just want to see if you are really
as much >mister-smart< as you pretend. Let's see.
My husband noticed a while ago that since the last birthday,
the product of the ages of my three daughters is exactly
the number on our house. If I add that the sum of their ages
is 13, can you figure out how old they are?
(Note:
integer ages;
integer house-numbers;)
salesman (after thinking for a while):
Well, I think I'm sorry I can't
mother: OK, you're right, I made it tough on you, but I have to go
now and drive my oldest daughter to her piano lesson.
salesman:
Your oldest daughter? Well then, I think I know the answer now:
their ages are >CENSORED<, >CENSORED< and >CENSORED<.
mother: Now I'm impressed! I'll get a dozen of those cleaners of yours.
Well, reader, can you figure it out now? Of course you don't even
know the number on the house, but who said this was going to be easy?
∂02-Sep-87 1335 ME character macros
∂02-Sep-87 1038 JMC one last (maybe) question
Can I use my character macros? <ctrl>@ followed by the macro number
doesn't seem to work.
ME - Yup, they should work. You have to follow the macro number with a
carriage return, however, e.g., <null>14<cr>.
Also, on a NoEdit display, you can define single character macros using
any of the ASCII control characters listed below with an asterisk (*).
(The right hand column is the "normal" noedit meaning of these chars.)
The CHRMAC program can be used to define such macros (but only on a
noedit display).
(One other note: The DELETE key (rubout) backs up, deleting the character,
whereas ↑H backs up without deleting. Of course, you can redefine some
character below to do these sorts of things, e.g., if you don't have a
DELETE key.)
↑@ * ESCAPE ESC
↑A beginning of line αFORM
↑B backward search αB
↑C CALL CALL
↑D delete forward αD
↑E enter insert mode αI
↑F forward cursor αSPACE
↑G HOLD αBREAK
↑H * backward cursor αBS
↑I * tab TAB
↑J * linefeed LF
↑K * vertical tab VT
↑L * formfeed FORM
↑M carriage return RETURN
↑N numeric arg (see below) --
↑O recall old line αRETURN
↑P quote with CONTROL (see below) --
↑Q * quote without buckies (") --
↑R repeat search or kill αR
↑S * search αS
↑T transpose αT
↑U CLEAR CLEAR
↑V quote with META (see below) --
↑W quote with CONTROL-META (") --
↑X kill (eXpunge) αK
↑Y backward kill αL
↑Z end of line αTAB
↑[ * altmode ALT
↑\ * flush output queues --
↑] * undefined
↑↑ * undefined
↑← * undefined
∂02-Sep-87 1502 ME ctrl-@
∂02-Sep-87 1408 JMC chrmac
When I tell the system
<ctrl>@5<return>
which should put me at the last page of my message file, it replies
DSK:5.FAI[1,JMC] Error 0: File not found
Use what filename instead?
ME - OK, what's happening is the "ctrl" isn't working so you're getting
the system program "@" (atsign), which prints that message (after not
finding that file).
So you're not succeeding in typing a null (ctrl-@) for some reason.
Are you really holding down ctrl while typing "@"?
∂02-Sep-87 1544 VAL Summer School in Bulgaria
I am invited to give a lecture at the Summer School on Logic in Bulgaria
next September. They promise to cover my expenses in Bulgaria, but not
the travel expenses. Do you think we'll have funds to pay for the travel?
∂02-Sep-87 1627 ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET China
Received: from UUNET.UU.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 16:27:29 PDT
Received: from unido.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA11169; Wed, 2 Sep 87 19:27:39 EDT
Received: by unido.uucp with uucp;
Thu, 3 Sep 87 01:09:00 +0100
Received: from ubc-vision.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA04254; Wed, 2 Sep 87 14:38:24 EDT
Received: from ubc-vision.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA05698; Wed, 2 Sep 87 14:34:36 EDT
Received: from ubc-vision.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA04171; Wed, 2 Sep 87 14:29:29 EDT
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 87 11:25:53 pdt
From: "Wolfgang Bibel" <unido!ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET>
Message-Id: <8709021825.AA00387@ubc-vision.UUCP>
Received: by ubc-vision.UUCP id AA00387; Wed, 2 Sep 87 11:25:53 pdt
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: China
Cc: ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET
John,
In my new role as IJCAI-89 conference chair I am trying to put together
an advisory committee. I thought of the possibility of a Chinese member.
As far as I know you had been in China.
1. Do you think it makes sense to have someone join from China, i.e. is there
enough substance in AI research there?
2. Could you recommend someone who seems to be an accepted representative for
the Chinese AI community (if there exists such a thing)?
Wolfgang
∂02-Sep-87 1637 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: prize
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 16:37:16 PDT
Date: Wed 2 Sep 87 16:37:28-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: prize
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 2 Sep 87 15:19:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12331511802.34.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
OK, will do.
By the way: One of my students has been looking at generating
model kripke structures on which to perform computations in
lieu of inference procedures in a modal logic in order to reason
about beliefs. I seem to recall that you once looked at explicitly
represented sets of possible worlds for the S&P problem. Does that
ring a bell? Any pointers to papers or memos? -Nils
-------
∂02-Sep-87 1657 ME sending nulls to SAIL
∂02-Sep-87 1648 JMC re: ctrl-@
[In reply to message rcvd 02-Sep-87 15:02-PT.]
I really was holding down both ctrl and shift while typing the key
with 2 and @ on it. Maybe the right thing wasn't being transmitted
because of some problem with the terminal [ATT 4425] or with telnet.
ME - It's also possible that the terminal might explicitly prevent
you from typing CTRL with @ (to get null), but that seems unlikely.
It is also possible that the telnet program on your end is doing something
with the nulls. Try typing a few in a row (especially in the test below).
Try the following:
--Telnet to SAIL and log in.
--Give the command "A TTY T"
--Say RUN CHROUT[1,ME]
--Then type nulls via ctrl-shift-2 or however else you think you might
be able to get a null. The CHROUT program will tell you exactly what
characters SAIL is seeing, including any nulls, by typing out their
values in octal (null=0).
--To exit from CHROUT, type an "X". (There's no other way out, since
it is trapping everything you type, including ↑C.)
∂02-Sep-87 1713 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Program Revision Form
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 17:13:32 PDT
Date: Wed 2 Sep 87 17:11:00-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Program Revision Form
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12331517905.20.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
In re: "Name your poison and I'll endorse it":
I'm going to try to make some room in my schedule for the project and just
generally to avoid more work/school conflict by satisfying the Operating System
course requirement based on experience. I was there when we built OS/360, for
example. I will admit it was breaking new ground which has since been rather
more smoothly paved by others; but I do know what an OS is and how at least one
was built and why.
I've got plenty of units without it.
I'll try to see you tomorrow if, as I suspect, you are actually here. If not
I'll try to get Nils' signature first and then mail it. He may want to wait
for you, and I can understand that, but it's worth a try to expedite it.
..Ed
-------
∂02-Sep-87 2029 ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET re: China
Received: from UUNET.UU.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 20:29:49 PDT
Received: from unido.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA18185; Wed, 2 Sep 87 23:29:58 EDT
Received: by unido.uucp with uucp;
Thu, 3 Sep 87 04:47:50 +0100
Received: from ubc-vision.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA16733; Wed, 2 Sep 87 22:16:56 EDT
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 87 18:33:39 pdt
From: "Wolfgang Bibel" <unido!ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET>
Message-Id: <8709030133.AA02650@ubc-vision.UUCP>
Received: by ubc-vision.UUCP id AA02650; Wed, 2 Sep 87 18:33:39 pdt
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: China
Cc: ubc-vision!bibel@uunet.UU.NET
John,
Thank you very much for this suggestion. Do you happen to
have a more precise address of Ma Xiwen? What is his own field of
expertise within AI?
Wolfgang
∂02-Sep-87 2220 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of August computer charges.
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 87 22:20:47 PDT
Date: Wed 2 Sep 87 22:17:06-PDT
From: Billing Editor <BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summary of August computer charges.
To: MCCARTHY@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12331573629.9.BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Mr. McCarthy,
Following is a summary of your computer charges for August.
Account System Billed Pct Cpu Job Disk Print Adj Total
JMC SAIL 2-DMA480 100 168.50 145.21 ***.** 11.72 5.00 2505.84
MCCARTHY SCORE 2-DMA480 100 .11 .07 6.49 .00 5.00 11.67
MCCARTHY SUSHI SUSHI 100 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
Total: 168.61 145.28 ***.** 11.72 10.00 2517.51
University budget accounts billed above include the following.
Account Principal Investigator Title
2-DMA480 McCarthy DCR 84-14393
In future, each computer user will receive a monthly electronic statement
summarizing their computer usage. This statement is a condensed version of
the detailed summary sheets sent monthly to departments.
Please verify each month that the proper university budget accounts are paying
for your computer usage. Please also check the list of account numbers below
the numeric totals. If the organizations/people associated with that account
number should NOT be paying for your computer time, send mail to BEDIT@SCORE.
Note: the "percent" column following the university budget account numbers
indicates what percent of your computer charges were billed to that account.
This statement is sent to the preferred EMAIL address listed in the PEDIT
database on SCORE. If no address is specified in PEDIT, this statement
is sent one of the listed computer accounts.
Please direct questions/comments to BEDIT@SCORE.
-------
∂03-Sep-87 0515 pullen@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting Update
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 87 05:15:35 PDT
Posted-Date: Thu 3 Sep 87 08:12:36-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA14042; Thu, 3 Sep 87 08:12:40 EDT
Date: Thu 3 Sep 87 08:12:36-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: PI Meeting Update
To: BALZER@vaxa.isi.edu, GREEN@kestrel.arpa, mld@mc.lcs.mit.edu,
Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu, JMC@sail.stanford.edu,
Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu, D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu,
ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu, cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@relay.cs.net,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, TAYLOR@ics.uci.edu,
DCL@sail.stanford.edu, trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
despain@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, lk@cs.ucla.edu,
jes%cs.brown.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu, rich@ai.ai.mit.edu
Cc: pimeet@icst-cmr.arpa
Message-Id: <557669556.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
1. This provides further details about the DARPA/ISTO Architecture and
Software PI Meeting, 15-17 Sep 87, and revises the requirement for
the documents to be submitted for distribution to attendees.
2. Quarter chart and briefing: We reiterate that each project is
expected to present a mangement overview (with extremely limited
technical content). The sole presentation aid will be a "quarter
chart", which is really a composite of four slides (that you can show
separately): symbolic icon, challenges/results, expected impact, and
technical plan/schedule. You will have not more than ten minutes to
make your briefing -- it's looking more like five right now -- so MAKE IT
BRIEF! (Beulah the Buzzer will be on hand to help you.) The effect we
are striving for is a management briefing of the entire program, with
each project presented by those who know it best. We are also very
unabashedly getting you to help us prepare for future briefings of our
own by creating these standardized slides.
3. Revised submission requirement for documents: Rather than bring
200 copies of your document (quarter chart, personnel list, subsystem
breakout, recent paper, and reference list), you are to send two
copies to DARPA/ISTO, ATTN: Denise Wade, 1400 Wilson Blvd, Arlington,
VA 22209-2308, to arrive not later than 11 September.
Denise will acknowledge receipt of your package by netmail; we
suggest you send it early to allow for followup, because NO PROJECT
WILL BE BRIEFED AT THE PI MEETING IF THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE
NOT RECEIVED BY 11 SEP!!!! This is a FIRM RULE!!! We will have
two bound documents assembled from your submissions: a book of
quarter charts, available 15 Sep for note-taking, and a "Proceedings"
of all materials, to be mailed to you later.
4. The problem areas for the working groups on the 16th are:
-- Teraop Technology Base
-- Software Design
-- Parallel Software
-- Hardware Prototyping
The concept here is to get your active participation in directing our
research programs for the best effect over the next few years.
Attendees will be assigned to groups by some as-yet unspecified process
(which may appear to be random) -- no volunteers yet, please.
5. Please make a maximum effort to attend the entire meeting. Here
is our TENTATIVE agenda:
15 Sep 0900 Welcome and Introduction
0930 Software Session 1
1045 Break
1100 Architecture Session 1
1215 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Saul Amarel
1330 Software Session 2
1445 Break
1500 Architecture Session 2
1615 Break
1630 Software Session 3
1745 Warm-Up Problem Sets
1800 Break
1900 Dinner, Speaker: Gordon Bell
16 Sep 0830 Definitions of Problem Areas by Squires, Pullen, Scherlis
and Toole
0930 Area Group meetings to refine problem statements and
organize teams(subgroups)
1030 Team meetings -- get acquainted, analyze problems
1200 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Craig Fields
1315 Elaboration of assignment by Squires
1330 Team meetings -- work on new assignments
1600 Group meetings to integrate work of teams and prepare for
group reports
1800 Break
2000 Panel: Program Management Styles (How might the DARPA/ISTO
style be improved?)
17 Sep 0800 Group Report
0845 Unifying Platform: X-Windows
0915 Break
0930 Group Report
1015 Break
1030 Group Report
1115 Unifying Platform: CAD Tools
1145 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Jack Schwartz
1315 Group report
1400 Unifying Platform: Mach
1430 Break
1445 Panel: FCCSET Computing/Networking Initiative
1545 Wrap-Up
1600 End of Meeting
6. Please acknowledge receipt of this message to Wade@VAX.DARPA.MIL.
7. See you at the meeting!
-------
∂03-Sep-87 0835 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: prize
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 87 08:35:30 PDT
Date: Thu 3 Sep 87 08:35:44-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: prize
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 2 Sep 87 17:01:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12331686250.22.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Yes, it is propositional, and I've also encouraged her to use
sentences that describe Kripke structures instead of Kripke
structures themselves. So, I also told her to see if Moore's
encoding of Kripke semantics in f.o.l. would be more useful
way to proceed. So maybe your work might be interesting to
her after all.
-------
∂03-Sep-87 0857 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Program Revision Form
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 87 08:57:32 PDT
Date: Thu 3 Sep 87 08:57:43-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Program Revision Form
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 2 Sep 87 17:19:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12331690252.10.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
OK. I doubt I will get to Austin any time soon. Enjoy your stay. I'll get to
work.
..Ed
-------
∂03-Sep-87 1518 SMC Bibel
What would Bibels email address be. I know I should understand the from line
but in this case I am a bit confused.
∂03-Sep-87 1554 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Program Revision
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 87 15:54:20 PDT
Date: Thu 3 Sep 87 15:54:30-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Program Revision
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12331766123.17.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I just saw Dr Oliger. He says the 2-quarter OS sequence is being cut to 1 for
core purposes. In that case I can probably make it as is; so I'm putting the
revision on the back burner for a while. With any luck I can do all the odds
and ends at once in the last quarter.
Thanks for your help.
..Ed
-------
∂03-Sep-87 1855 RWF fixed point theory
It is well known that recursive definitions a la LISP have least
fixed points when the defining ops are monotone and continuous.
Is there a published source for the proof that only monotonicity
is required? I have a fairly simple proof adapted from the Tarski-
Knaster theorem, And I want to find out if it is novel. Tarski-
Knaster doesn't apply because the set of partial functions is not a
lattice. Any monotone functional on partial functions can be embedded
in a monotone functional on relations. Its fixed point is a partial
function. Details on request.
Algorithm for living in Texas
1. Get sixpack of long-neck Lone Star.
2. Drink it in pickup truck.
3. Throw bottles out of window, e.g. at hippies.
4. Go to 1.
∂04-Sep-87 1308 SMC hp 28c
One HP 28C is on its way to you. Total $190.10. From Service Merchandise. In
case it fails to show up in 7-10 working days, the order # is 36813.
∂04-Sep-87 2233 kuo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu Happy Birthday
Received: from LINC.CIS.UPENN.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Sep 87 22:33:00 PDT
Received: by linc.cis.upenn.edu
id AA20644; Fri, 4 Sep 87 13:07:01 EDT
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 87 13:06:03 edt
From: kuo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Victor Kuo)
Posted-Date: Fri, 4 Sep 87 13:06:03 edt
Message-Id: <8709041706.AA23167@eniac.seas.upenn.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Happy Birthday
Happy birthday, John!
Victor
∂05-Sep-87 1201 JSW Special characters
Here's a list of most of the special characters. You can use Symbol-Help
to get a similar list online, though it covers up your screen while it is
being displayed.
Control and Meta also work. One thing that isn't documented is that when
you do Control or Meta with a lowercase letter, it sends the corresponding
uppercase letter with the control/meta bits added. It usually doesn't make
a difference, but if you need to have a lowercase letter with control/meta
bits, you have to hold down Shift as well.
↑ Symbol-'
↓ Symbol-h
α Symbol-shift-A
β Symbol-shift-B
∧ Symbol-q
¬ Symbol--
ε Symbol-shift-E
π Symbol-shift-P
λ Symbol-shift-L
∞ Symbol-i
∂ Symbol-p
⊂ Symbol-t
⊃ Symbol-y
∩ Symbol-e
∪ Symbol-r
∀ Symbol-u
∃ Symbol-o
⊗ Symbol-*
↔ Symbol-l
← Symbol-j
→ Symbol-k
≠ Symbol-=
≤ Symbol-,
≥ Symbol-.
≡ Symbol-`
∨ Symbol-w
∂05-Sep-87 2157 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Sep-87 12:37-PT.]
The IJCAI Proc. was 40 doll., I already got reimbursement from Sarah.
Look at Brewka's paper in vol. 1.
∂06-Sep-87 1615 JSW SAIL characters on Lisp machine
The list I sent you yesterday had a mistake: it should say
Symbol-' <null>
Symbol-g ↑
Without changing anything, you can get some of the SAIL special keys
as follows:
[ESCAPE] Symbol-'
[BREAK] Symbol-' - or Suspend
[CALL] Abort
[CLEAR] Clear-Input
[FORM] Page or Refresh
[ALT] Escape or Complete
The [VT] key seems to be impossible to type with the default mappings,
however. There are two tables that can be altered to change what the
keys do: the mapping from keys to characters (which affects their use
in all windows), and the mapping from (non-graphic) characters to SUPDUP
functions, which only has effect in the terminal window.
The second of these is easiest, and I'm using the following in my
lispm-init.lisp file:
(defun set-supdup-key (char code)
(setf (aref telnet:*supdup-keys*
(- (char-code char) #o200))
code))
(set-supdup-key #\Escape #o4101) ;Escape
(set-supdup-key #\Refresh #o4102) ;Break
(set-supdup-key #\Complete #o13) ;VT
(set-supdup-key #\Scroll #o33) ;Alt
Changing the keyboard-to-character mapping is also not hard, but I've
decided that I don't like it because I haven't internalized the SAIL
keyboard enough to type the special characters without seeing them on the
keys. Also, not all of the standard characters are in the same places in
the two keyboards (the digits, "+", "-" and ":" in particular), which
makes it hard to decide where to put some of the special characters.
The following will make Symbol (or Shift-Symbol, in most cases) act like
SAIL's Top key for letters, but it leaves some of the special characters
undefined.
(defun set-kbd-hardware-table (hardware-character software-character)
"Change HARDWARE-CHARACTER to generate SOFTWARE-CHARACTER. Unfortunately, you
have to know the index into the hardware kbd array; this is kbd-specific (sorry!).
SOFTWARE-CHARACTER can be either a single character or a list of the
symbol-shift permutations.
This transformation can be undone via (SETQ KBD-NEW-TABLE (KBD-MAKE-NEW-TABLE))"
;; Bugs to Gumby@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
(dotimes (shift 4)
(setf (aref si:kbd-new-table shift hardware-character)
(typecase software-character
(character (char-int software-character))
(list (if (nth shift software-character)
(char-int (nth shift software-character))
#o140000))
(integer software-character) ; mainly for shifts
(t (error "Can't make keyboard entry for ~S" software-character))))))
(defun sail-keyboard ()
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o20 '(#\z #\Z #\Alpha #\Alpha))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o21 '(#\c #\C #\Epsilon #\Epsilon))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o22 '(#\b #\B #\Pi #\Pi))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o23 '(#\m #\M #\Exists #\Exists))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o31 '(#\x #\X #\Beta #\Beta))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o32 '(#\v #\V #\Lambda #\Lambda))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o33 '(#\n #\N #\All #\All))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o41 '(#\s #\S #\Greater-Or-Equal #\Greater-Or-Equal))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o42 '(#\f #\F #\> #\>))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o43 '(#\h #\H #\= #\=))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o44 '(#\k #\K #\Right-Arrow #\Right-Arrow))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o45 '(#\; #\: #\Up-Arrow #\Down-Arrow))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o51 '(#\a #\A #\Less-Or-Equal #\Less-Or-Equal))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o52 '(#\d #\D #\< #\<))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o53 '(#\g #\G #\Not-Equal #\Not-Equal))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o54 '(#\j #\J #\Left-Arrow #\Left-Arrow))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o55 '(#\l #\L #\Double-Arrow #\Double-Arrow))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o61 '(#\w #\W #\Or #\Or))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o62 '(#\r #\R #\# #\#))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o63 '(#\y #\Y #\" #\"))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o64 '(#\i #\I #\' #\'))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o65 '(#\p #\P #\} #\}))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o71 '(#\q #\Q #\And #\And))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o72 '(#\e #\E #\@ #\@))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o73 '(#\t #\T #\& #\&))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o74 '(#\u #\U #\` #\`))
(set-kbd-hardware-table #o75 '(#\o #\O #\{ #\{))
)
∂07-Sep-87 1237 RPG Plots
I am, at this moment, composing a 2-page summary of my proposal (plot) for
Gibbons. I talked with Chailloux in Paris while there and he mentioned
that as INRIA funding was possible for it. He also asked to be invited for
a year starting next september. Nils will talk to Losleben (sp?) soon
about the CIS angle. With a reasonable understanding of the control
issues, this solution is acceptable to me.
-rpg-
∂07-Sep-87 1415 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU AI Quals
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Sep 87 14:15:29 PDT
Date: Mon 7 Sep 87 14:15:01-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: AI Quals
To: phd@Score.Stanford.EDU, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, BINFORD@Whitney.Stanford.EDU,
Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU,
latombe@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12332796591.15.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Paul Rosenbloom had volunteered to organize an AI Qual exam for
December, 1987. Since he will be leaving Stanford before then, I agreed
to take on this organizational chore. I would like the Dec. Qual to be
on Monday and Tuesday, December 7 and 8, 1987. (Depending on how many
students sign up, we might not have to go for all of both days, but
please mark your calendars and hold these dates just in case.)
At the last AI quals in May, we had several outside-of-Stanford
examiners and not so many inside-of-Stanford examiners. I'd like
to reverse this trend, so (to those non-sabbaticalizing faculty),
please confirm that you will be available on those dates. (I'll ask
Anne Richardson to follow up on this.)
To the students: Please answer this message by 1 November 1987 letting
me know if you expect to take the AI quals this December. I'll then
organize the examining groups. (No need to wait until 1 Nov if you
know before then whether or not you will take the quals.)
The syllabus will be the famous Subramanian/Buchanan reading list.
(Copies available through the CSD Publications office.) Students will
be expected to have a reasonably adequate grasp of the topics covered in
that list. The format of the 2 1/2 hour exam will be as follows:
1) General questions about the material in the syllabus (1 hour)
2) Specific questions about a "depth area." We encourage students to
volunteer when they answer this msg what their depth area will be:
(examples: natural language processing, vision, planning, expert
systems, nonmonotonic reasoning, learning, etc.) If we think the depth
area you have selected is too narrow (for example, we would regard
"pointwise circumscription" as too narrow), I will discuss this with the
student and arrange for a mutually satisfactory depth area. (45 mins.)
3) Examiners caucus without examinee
4) Wrap-up questions (giving the examiners a chance to question in areas
they think need it---either syllabus material or depth material)
(45 minutes).
I am open to suggestions about the format from faculty and students and
will let everyone know if there are any changes.
-Nils
-------
∂07-Sep-87 1633 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Sep 87 16:33:14 PDT
Date: Mon 7 Sep 87 16:33:25-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 7 Sep 87 14:20:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12332821784.12.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Paul's wife is a just-completed-her-work M.D. specializing in
intensive care. In order to continue, she must work in a hospital's
intensive care unit. (I'm not sure whether she is to begin residency
in intensive care or whether she is done and is now beginning
practice in intensive care. Either way, she needs to be in a hospital
with an intensive care unit.) The Rosenblooms have searched all over
the Bay Area looking for a job for Paul's wife. No luck. She has a
good offer in southern California somewhere so they are going to move.
Paul is going to work at USC-ISI. I encouraged him to take a leave
(instead of resigning)---hoping that maybe something will turn up
in intensive care up here in the near future.
-------
∂08-Sep-87 1644 RWF men and women
∂08-Sep-87 1510 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU men and women
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 87 15:08:52 PDT
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 8 Sep 87 15:07:46-PDT
Date: Tue 8 Sep 87 15:05:42-PDT
From: M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: men and women
To: su-etc@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12333067959.300.M.MCD@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Why is it that the most obnoxious, arrogant guys who treat women like shit
are often the most popular with women?
-erik has seen female friends fall in love with total jerks.
-------
∂08-Sep-87 1802 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: Bork nomination
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 87 18:02:49 PDT
Date: Tue 8 Sep 87 17:58:52-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Bork nomination
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 8 Sep 87 16:24:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12333099483.11.POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
I don't consider it disingenuous not to mention that Dworkin has a point of
view. That should be obvious. In this particular case, the charge of
inconsistency cuts right to the heart of the matter, since Dworkin's larger
point is that there is no known way of establishing "original intent" in
a consistent fashion. Bork's failure to do so (in Dworkin's view) is not
an idiosyncratic failure of Bork's. Indeed, I was
struck by the parallel between the problem of determining "original intent"
and the similar problems in literary criticism and in natural language
semantics. Dworkin's attack is on the legal philosophy for which Bork
is known and which the Reagan administration is trying to push. That
seems to be a head-on attack to me. What would JMC consider a head-on
attack?
As for the alleged lack of parallelism between the cases that Dworkin cites
as showing inconsistency, I didn't see it, but perhaps if JMC will cite
particular cases he can convince me.
Bill
-------
∂09-Sep-87 0317 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Did You Get the Message?
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 87 03:17:07 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 06:14:27-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA28651; Wed, 9 Sep 87 06:14:30 EDT
Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 06:14:27-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Did You Get the Message?
To: GREEN@kestrel.arpa, mld@mc.lcs.mit.edu, Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu,
JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu,
ZM@sail.stanford.edu, cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@relay.cs.net,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, TAYLOR@ics.uci.edu,
DCL@sail.stanford.edu, trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
jes%cs.brown.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu, rich@ai.ai.mit.edu
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil, Squires@vax.darpa.mil, Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <558180867.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Dear PI,
On 3 Sep I sent you a message containing critical details for
the DARPA/ISTO Architectures and Software PI Meeting. A particularly
important point contained in that message was that materials for
the Quarter Chart Book and Proceedings must be received here by
this coming Friday, 11 Sep. A copy of that message is appended below.
You were asked to acknowledge receipt of that message by reply to
WADE@VAX.DARPA.MIL. No acknowledgement has been received. Please
acknowledge TODAY, so we won't have to call you.
REMINDER: If the quarter chart and other materials aren't received
by 11 Sep, you will not be scheduled to speak at the meeting.
Mark Pullen
------------------------------------------------------------------
1. This provides further details about the DARPA/ISTO Architecture and
Software PI Meeting, 15-17 Sep 87, and revises the requirement for
the documents to be submitted for distribution to attendees.
2. Quarter chart and briefing: We reiterate that each project is
expected to present a mangement overview (with extremely limited
technical content). The sole presentation aid will be a "quarter
chart", which is really a composite of four slides (that you can show
separately): symbolic icon, challenges/results, expected impact, and
technical plan/schedule. You will have not more than ten minutes to
make your briefing -- it's looking more like five right now -- so MAKE IT
BRIEF! (Beulah the Buzzer will be on hand to help you.) The effect we
are striving for is a management briefing of the entire program, with
each project presented by those who know it best. We are also very
unabashedly getting you to help us prepare for future briefings of our
own by creating these standardized slides.
3. Revised submission requirement for documents: Rather than bring
200 copies of your document (quarter chart, personnel list, subsystem
breakout, recent paper, and reference list), you are to send two
copies to DARPA/ISTO, ATTN: Denise Wade, 1400 Wilson Blvd, Arlington,
VA 22209-2308, to arrive not later than 11 September.
Denise will acknowledge receipt of your package by netmail; we
suggest you send it early to allow for followup, because NO PROJECT
WILL BE BRIEFED AT THE PI MEETING IF THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE
NOT RECEIVED BY 11 SEP!!!! This is a FIRM RULE!!! We will have
two bound documents assembled from your submissions: a book of
quarter charts, available 15 Sep for note-taking, and a "Proceedings"
of all materials, to be mailed to you later.
4. The problem areas for the working groups on the 16th are:
-- Teraop Technology Base
-- Software Design
-- Parallel Software
-- Hardware Prototyping
The concept here is to get your active participation in directing our
research programs for the best effect over the next few years.
Attendees will be assigned to groups by some as-yet unspecified process
(which may appear to be random) -- no volunteers yet, please.
5. Please make a maximum effort to attend the entire meeting. Here
is our TENTATIVE agenda:
15 Sep 0900 Welcome and Introduction
0930 Software Session 1
1045 Break
1100 Architecture Session 1
1215 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Saul Amarel
1330 Software Session 2
1445 Break
1500 Architecture Session 2
1615 Break
1630 Software Session 3
1745 Warm-Up Problem Sets
1800 Break
1900 Dinner, Speaker: Gordon Bell
16 Sep 0830 Definitions of Problem Areas by Squires, Pullen, Scherlis
and Toole
0930 Area Group meetings to refine problem statements and
organize teams(subgroups)
1030 Team meetings -- get acquainted, analyze problems
1200 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Craig Fields
1315 Elaboration of assignment by Squires
1330 Team meetings -- work on new assignments
1600 Group meetings to integrate work of teams and prepare for
group reports
1800 Break
2000 Panel: Program Management Styles (How might the DARPA/ISTO
style be improved?)
17 Sep 0800 Group Report
0845 Unifying Platform: X-Windows
0915 Break
0930 Group Report
1015 Break
1030 Group Report
1115 Unifying Platform: CAD Tools
1145 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Jack Schwartz
1315 Group report
1400 Unifying Platform: Mach
1430 Break
1445 Panel: FCCSET Computing/Networking Initiative
1545 Wrap-Up
1600 End of Meeting
6. Please acknowledge receipt of this message to Wade@VAX.DARPA.MIL.
7. See you at the meeting!
-------
∂09-Sep-87 1145 JSW Qlisp meeting reminder
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Qlisp Meeting
Date: Thursday, September 10
Time: 2:30 p.m.
Place: MJH 352
Igor will tell us about all the things he has seen at MIT, BBN and
elsewhere around Cambridge. And we can discuss the current state of
Qlisp projects and plans for the fall.
∂09-Sep-87 1214 trwrb!trwspp!spp2!belz@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Re: Did You Get the Message?
Received: from UCBVAX.Berkeley.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 87 12:12:30 PDT
Received: by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.58/1.27)
id AA13392; Wed, 9 Sep 87 12:13:51 PDT
From: trwrb!trwspp!spp2!belz@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Frank C. Belz)
Message-Id: <8709091743.AA15857@spp2.SPP>
Received: by spp2.SPP (4.12/EASE1.0)
Date: 9 Sep 1987 1043-PDT (Wednesday)
To: Mark Pullen <trwrb!vax.darpa.mil!PULLEN>
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil, Squires@vax.darpa.mil, Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil,
GREEN@kestrel.arpa, mld@mc.lcs.mit.edu, Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu,
JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu,
ZM@sail.stanford.edu, cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@relay.cs.net,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, TAYLOR@ics.uci.edu,
DCL@sail.stanford.edu, trwrb!trwspp!belz,
jes%cs.brown.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu, rich@ai.ai.mit.edu,
boehm@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU, penedo@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU,
belz@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: Did You Get the Message?
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 9 Sep 87 06:14:27-EDT.
<558180867.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
We did NOT get the 3 Sep message, but did get this one. You should receive
two copies of our presentation tomorrow morning (Sep 10) by FEDEX. I hope
you receive this ACK.
Frank Belz
∂09-Sep-87 1221 VAL visit to Austin
Would Sep. 21, 22 be convenient dates?
∂09-Sep-87 1259 LES Forwarded Message
Pullen still doesn't have the right email list. I trust that you will
respond to this.
∂09-Sep-87 0330 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Did You Get the Message?
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 87 03:29:27 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 06:13:19-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA28650; Wed, 9 Sep 87 06:13:25 EDT
Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 06:13:19-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Did You Get the Message?
To: Marvin@godot.think.com, Rick.Rashid@pt.cs.cmu.edu,
Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, nassi@multimax.arpa, SHarvey@ibm.com,
esl!bgc@ames.arpa, BURDVAX!MG333@seismo.css.gov, gclhbx@gcuxb.att.com,
CARPENTER@icst-cmr.arpa, Les@sail.stanford.edu, GREEN@kestrel.arpa,
lyon@icst-cmr.arpa, Weems%Umass.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
CHUCK@vlsi.caltech.edu, jlh@score.stanford.edu,
dardy@nrl-acoustics.arpa, jgw@trantor.harris.com,
Cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil, Squires@vax.darpa.mil, Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <558180799.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Dear PI,
On 3 Sep I sent you a message containing critical details for
the DARPA/ISTO Architectures and Software PI Meeting. A particularly
important point contained in that message was that materials for
the Quarter Chart Book and Proceedings must be received here by
this coming Friday, 11 Sep. A copy of that message is appended below.
You were asked to acknowledge receipt of that message by reply to
WADE@VAX.DARPA.MIL. No acknowledgement has been received. Please
acknowledge TODAY, so we won't have to call you.
REMINDER: If the quarter chart and other materials aren't received
by 11 Sep, you will not be scheduled to speak at the meeting.
Mark Pullen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. This provides further details about the DARPA/ISTO Architecture and
Software PI Meeting, 15-17 Sep 87, and revises the requirement for
the documents to be submitted for distribution to attendees.
2. Quarter chart and briefing: We reiterate that each project is
expected to present a mangement overview (with extremely limited
technical content). The sole presentation aid will be a "quarter
chart", which is really a composite of four slides (that you can show
separately): symbolic icon, challenges/results, expected impact, and
technical plan/schedule. You will have not more than ten minutes to
make your briefing -- it's looking more like five right now -- so MAKE IT
BRIEF! (Beulah the Buzzer will be on hand to help you.) The effect we
are striving for is a management briefing of the entire program, with
each project presented by those who know it best. We are also very
unabashedly getting you to help us prepare for future briefings of our
own by creating these standardized slides.
3. Revised submission requirement for documents: Rather than bring
200 copies of your document (quarter chart, personnel list, subsystem
breakout, recent paper, and reference list), you are to send two
copies to DARPA/ISTO, ATTN: Denise Wade, 1400 Wilson Blvd, Arlington,
VA 22209-2308, to arrive not later than 11 September.
Denise will acknowledge receipt of your package by netmail; we
suggest you send it early to allow for followup, because NO PROJECT
WILL BE BRIEFED AT THE PI MEETING IF THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE
NOT RECEIVED BY 11 SEP!!!! This is a FIRM RULE!!! We will have
two bound documents assembled from your submissions: a book of
quarter charts, available 15 Sep for note-taking, and a "Proceedings"
of all materials, to be mailed to you later.
4. The problem areas for the working groups on the 16th are:
-- Teraop Technology Base
-- Software Design
-- Parallel Software
-- Hardware Prototyping
The concept here is to get your active participation in directing our
research programs for the best effect over the next few years.
Attendees will be assigned to groups by some as-yet unspecified process
(which may appear to be random) -- no volunteers yet, please.
5. Please make a maximum effort to attend the entire meeting. Here
is our TENTATIVE agenda:
15 Sep 0900 Welcome and Introduction
0930 Software Session 1
1045 Break
1100 Architecture Session 1
1215 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Saul Amarel
1330 Software Session 2
1445 Break
1500 Architecture Session 2
1615 Break
1630 Software Session 3
1745 Warm-Up Problem Sets
1800 Break
1900 Dinner, Speaker: Gordon Bell
16 Sep 0830 Definitions of Problem Areas by Squires, Pullen, Scherlis
and Toole
0930 Area Group meetings to refine problem statements and
organize teams(subgroups)
1030 Team meetings -- get acquainted, analyze problems
1200 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Craig Fields
1315 Elaboration of assignment by Squires
1330 Team meetings -- work on new assignments
1600 Group meetings to integrate work of teams and prepare for
group reports
1800 Break
2000 Panel: Program Management Styles (How might the DARPA/ISTO
style be improved?)
17 Sep 0800 Group Report
0845 Unifying Platform: X-Windows
0915 Break
0930 Group Report
1015 Break
1030 Group Report
1115 Unifying Platform: CAD Tools
1145 Buffet Lunch, Speaker: Jack Schwartz
1315 Group report
1400 Unifying Platform: Mach
1430 Break
1445 Panel: FCCSET Computing/Networking Initiative
1545 Wrap-Up
1600 End of Meeting
6. Please acknowledge receipt of this message to Wade@VAX.DARPA.MIL.
7. See you at the meeting!
-------
∂09-Sep-87 1300 LES And this
∂09-Sep-87 0445 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Data Needed for Program Management
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 87 04:45:06 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 07:01:58-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA28772; Wed, 9 Sep 87 07:02:28 EDT
Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 07:01:58-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Data Needed for Program Management
To: Marvin@godot.think.com, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu, Rick.Rashid@pt.cs.cmu.edu,
hector@princeton.edu, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, nassi@multimax.arpa,
SHarvey@ibm.com, Goodhue@bbn.com, esl!bgc@ames.arpa,
Arvind@xx.lcs.mit.edu, BURDVAX!MG333@seismo.css.gov,
Despain@ji.berkeley.edu, gclhbx@gcuxb.att.com, rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu,
Browne@sally.utexas.edu, CARPENTER@icst-cmr.arpa, WALKER@a.isi.edu,
Ullman@score.stanford.edu, Les@sail.stanford.edu, Sal@cs.columbia.edu,
GREEN@kestrel.arpa, lyon@icst-cmr.arpa, Weems%Umass.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
CHUCK@vlsi.caltech.edu, jlh@score.stanford.edu,
dardy@nrl-acoustics.arpa, jgw@trantor.harris.com,
Cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil, Scherlis@vax.darpa.mil, Toole@vax.darpa.mil,
Bandy@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <558183718.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
I need the following information about your project. Please
bring this to the PI meeting with you. NOTE: One paragraph
means less than half of a page. If you write anything longer,
I have to edit it for you, so please don't.
1. Project Title.
2. Institution.
3. Brief history of project: major phases, key dates (one paragraph).
4. Budget Summary:
a. Basic contract dollar amount.
b. Dollar amounts and purposes of options, if any.
c. Total spending authority received to date.
d. Total spent to date.
e. Approximate monthly expenditure rate.
f. Any major non-salary expenses planned.
g. Date next increment of funds is needed.
5. Names of Principal Investigators (up to three).
6. Technical summary (one or two paragraphs).
7. Principal expected innovations (up to one paragraph).
8. Expected product for distribution (may be technical reports only).
9. Summary of accomplishments (one paragraph per year).
10. Titles and authors of on or two principal technical reports
per year.
If Bill Bandy, John Toole, or Bill Scherlis has collected similar data
from you recently, please bear with us- there is some overlap in
what we are doing.
-------
∂09-Sep-87 1303 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU acknowledgement
Received: from Gang-Of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 87 13:02:59 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Wed, 9 Sep 87 12:59:56 pdt
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 87 12:59:56 pdt
From: Igor Rivin <rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: wade@vax.darpa.mil
Cc: rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail
Subject: acknowledgement
We (the QLISP project) have indeed received M. Pullen's Sep. 3 message re
the DARPA/ISTO Architectures and Software PI meeting. We will FedEx
the required materials on the morning of Sep. 10th, so they should be
there (at DARPA) on the 11th.
See you next week.
Igor Rivin.
∂10-Sep-87 0915 chomicki@aramis.rutgers.edu ELEPHANT
Received: from ARAMIS.RUTGERS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 09:14:50 PDT
Received: by aramis.rutgers.edu (5.54/1.14)
id AA14521; Thu, 10 Sep 87 12:14:19 EDT
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 87 12:14:19 EDT
From: chomicki@aramis.rutgers.edu (Jan Chomicki)
Message-Id: <8709101614.AA14521@aramis.rutgers.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: ELEPHANT
Dear Professor McCarthy:
In his paper presented at the 1987 Symposium on Logic Programming,
Martin Abadi referred to your unpublished work on ELEPHANT: the
language where time is represented explicitly. As I'm adopting
a similar point of view in my Ph.D. research, I'd appreciate very
much if you could send me a copy of the manuscript.
Sincerely yours,
Jan Chomicki (chomicki@aramis.rutgers.edu) Phone: (201) 932-3999
Dept.of Computer Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903
∂10-Sep-87 0953 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU LISP at Stanford
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 09:53:48 PDT
Date: Thu 10 Sep 87 09:53:48-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: LISP at Stanford
To: rpg@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12333535468.38.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Jim Gibbons is VERY enthusiastic about the prospect. He says "do it!"
I brought up the idea of a tie in with CIS---they might be able to
provide space, etc. Jim suggests a Linvill/Gabriel/Gibbons/Nilsson
meeting (with JMC too if he happens to be in town). Dick, do you
want to talk with me any more about this before I ask Anne to set up
the meeting? -Nils
-------
∂10-Sep-87 1021 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: LISP at Stanford
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 10:21:44 PDT
Date: Thu 10 Sep 87 10:21:50-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: LISP at Stanford
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: RPG@Sail.Stanford.EDU, NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 10 Sep 87 10:10:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12333540571.38.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dick, I'm available for a conference call at either of the times John
mentions. What do you say? -Nils
-------
∂10-Sep-87 1052 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): Re: Your new book]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 10:52:39 PDT
Date: Thu 10 Sep 87 10:52:45-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): Re: Your new book]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12333546201.43.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Return-Path: <ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu>
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 10 Sep 87 10:41:50-PDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.6)
id AA11980; Thu, 10 Sep 87 10:41:16 PDT
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 87 10:41:16 PDT
From: ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling)
Return-Path: <ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <8709101741.AA11980@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Ilan Vardi's message of Thu 10 Sep 87 04:02:30-PDT
Subject: Re: Your new book
Thank you for your kind comments on the book. Hitech really was a
joint project with Berliner: I knew very little about chess, he knew
very little about hardware. It is difficult to separate out the
contributions of each, which I think is a fine way to do research.
However, it is easier for people to attribute everything to the one
who knows chess.
The most recent changes to Hitech that were done just before I left
are coming along. Hitech recently beat two senior masters: I've
included a press release and one of the games with Berliner's commentary.
============================================================
HITECH Wins Pennsylvania State Chess Championship Tourney
In a tourney with 76 players including 15 masters, Hitech won the
Pennsylvania State Chess Championship. It scored 4.5 points out of 5, and
ended in a four-way tie for first place. However, the tie-breaking system
was decisively in favor of Hitech, since it had played the strongest
opponents. The tournament included three Senior Masters, one of whom (rated
2412) was beaten by Hitech. Another Senior Master was Vivek Rao, the
highest-rated player in Pennsylvania, and rated 46th Nationally. Thus, it
was a very strong event, and far and away the strongest tournament ever won
by a computer. Hitech's performance rating for the event was approximately
2550, which is a very high Senior Master rating.
Due to a specific interpretation of the rules that bar a computer from
winning money at a chess tournament, Hitech was denied not only the money
prize (which is appropriate), but also the State Title and trophy (which is
not called for by the rules which indicated the title would go to the most
highly placed state resident [maybe a machine can not be a resident?]). In
any case, the title was awarded to Mark Eidemiller of Pittsburgh. Vivek Rao
had a score of 2.5 - 1.5 after 4 rounds, and withdrew.
The game below was Hitech's best of the tourney, and represents a high-water
mark for Hitech in beating a player rated over 2400.
Pennsylvania State Championship
State College, 30 August 87
White : Allan Savage (2412)
Black : HITECH
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5 a6
4. B:c6 d:c6
5. O-O f6
6. d4 Bg4
7. c3 Bd6
8. d:e5 f:e5
9. Qb3 B:f3
10. g:f3 Ne7
11. Be3 Qd7?!
12. Q:b7 O-O
13. Qb3+ Kh8
14. Nd2 (A) R:f3!
15. Kh1! (B) Rff8
16. Rg1 Ng6
17. Qc4 Nf4
18. Rg3 a5
19. b3 (C) Be7
20. Rag1 Nh3! (D)
21. R:h3 Q:h3
22. Q:c6 Rad8! (E)
23. Rg3 Qd7
24. Q:d7 R:d7
25. Nc4 (F) Rd3!
26. N:e5 R:c3
27. Bd4 Rc2! (G)
28. Nd7 Rf7
29. Ne5 Rf4
30. Nd3 R:e4
31. B:g7+ Kg8
32. Bc3+ Kf8
33. B:a5 Ba3! (H)
34. b4 Re7!
35. Rf3+ Kg7
36. Nc5 R:a2
37. Na6 Ree2! (I)
38. N:c7 R:f2
39. Ne6+ Kg6
40. R:f2 R:f2
41. Kg1 Rb2
42. Nf4+ Kf5
43. Nd3 Rd2
44. Nf2! (J) Kf4
45. Kg2 Rb2
46. Bc7+ Kf5
47. Bd6 B:b4 (K)
48. Bg3 Bc5
49. Kf3 Rb3+
50. Kg2 Bd4
51. Bd6 Be5
52. Bc5 Rb2
53. Be3 h5
54. Bc5 Kf4
55. Ba7 Rd2! (M)
56. Bb6 Bd4
57. B:d4 (N) R:d4
58. Nh1 Rd2+
59. Nf2
resigns (O)
@end(verbatim)
(A) It is all from Encyclopedia of Chess Openings up to here, which appraises
the position as "a definite advantage for White". However, Hitech has seen
one move further!
(B) If 15. N:f3,Qg4+; 16. Kh1,Q:f3+; 17. Kg1,Qg4+; 18. Kh1,Q:e4+; 19.
Kg1,Nf5 is to Black's advantage.
(C) This seems a pointless move. Black is not threatening anything on the
Q-side. Better is 19. Rag1.
(D) A very interesting move that is difficult to meet. After 21. R1g2,g6!;
22. f3 (to meet the threat of Bh4), it is still anybody's game. Instead,
White gives up the exchange for a pawn, to reach a position where Black has
no more attack and has enough weak pawns to as make winning extremely
difficult. To me, it is amazing that Hitech is able to manage the technique
to win this very difficult-to-win position.
(E) Very precise. If now 23. Q:c7,R:d2!; 24. B:d2,R:f2; 25. Qb8+,Bf8 wins.
(F) White's position is very solid, and he is threatening Black's weak pawns.
Given that he already has a pawn for the exchange, it seems that Black
winning is almost to be ruled out. However, Hitech finds the weak spots in
White's position.
(G) With weak pawns everywhere, it is important to utilize the dynamic
possibilities in the position. For this purpose, keeping the rooks on
the board is a good idea.
(H) White's attack has led to the temporary win of another pawn, and the
reducing of Black's pawns to 2. However, now the Black pieces take charge.
The text move fixed the a-pawn in place, and prepares to defend the c-pawn
before wiping up the White Queen-side.
(I) Hitech knows about the absolute 7th rank! If now 38. Kg2,B:b4! wins.
This maneuver was not possible with the rook on e7.
(J) The knight must come to the aid of the king, else Black gets a mating
attack.
(K) Now Black's task has been simplified, although winning this position was
something that many masters in the tournament did not think was possible.
White is well advised not to exchange bishops, as this make the win much
easier. However, Hitech maneuvers so as to force this exchange.
(L) It is also possible to win with 51.-- B:f7; 52. K:f2,Kg4. However,
the text is more thematic.
(M) Again threatening to exchange bishops with Bd4.
(N) On 57. Bc7+,Ke3; 58. Bg3,Bf6; 59. h4,Be7 White is in zugzwang and must
move his king. There is a little trap worth playing for (especially against
a computer). That is 60. Kh2!. However, Hitech would just have continued
Kf3, and not allowed the drawn ending that occurs after R:f2+??
(O) After 59.-- Ra2, White is in zugzwang and must lose everything.
-------
∂10-Sep-87 1331 RPG Phone
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I will over at Stanford at 2:30 today. I can stop by Nil's office and
we can call then.
-rpg-
∂10-Sep-87 1455 LES More PI meeting info
∂25-Aug-87 1744 rc@icst-cmr.arpa More PI meeting info
Received: from ICST-CMR.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 87 17:44:18 PDT
Received: by icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA (5.51/4.7)
id AA03434; Tue, 25 Aug 87 15:14:05 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 87 15:14:05 EDT
From: Robert Carpenter <rc@icst-cmr.arpa>
Message-Id: <8708251914.AA03434@icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA>
To: BURDVAX!MG333@SEISMO.CSS.GOV, Balzer@vaxa.isi.edu, Walker@A.ISI.EDU,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,
mld@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu,
Chuck@VLSI.CALTECH.EDU, lk@cs.ucla.edu, DCL@sail.stanford.edu,
Les@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu,
rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu, D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu,
Rick.Rashid@a.cs.cmu.edu, rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu,
Marvin%Godot.THink.Com@THink.Com, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
Sal@CS.Columbia.edu, Green@Kestrel.ARPA, Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
jlh@score.stanford.edu, ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu,
cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu, taylor@ics.uci.edu,
despain@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, Despain@JI.BERKELEY.EDU,
hector@princeton.ARPA, jes%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu,
lyon@icst-cmr.ARPA, dardy@nrl-acoustics.ARPA, pullen@vax.darpa.mil,
trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: More PI meeting info
Cc: rc@icst-cmr.arpa
In response to numerous requests....
You may send your $100 registration checks for the DARPA PI meeting,
made out to:-
DARPA-NBS Principal Investigators Meeting
to the following mail address:-
John W. Roberts
DARPA PI Meeting
Bldg 223, Room B364
National Bureau of Standards
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Please allow a week for the mail to reach us, or wait and pay at the
meeting.
Thanks,
Bob Carpenter <pimeet@icst-cmr.arpa>
∂10-Sep-87 1456 LES PI Meeting Arrangements
∂20-Aug-87 0649 rc@icst-cmr.arpa PI Meeting Arrangements
Received: from ICST-CMR.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Aug 87 06:49:24 PDT
Received: by icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA (5.51/4.7)
id AA10766; Thu, 20 Aug 87 09:40:20 EDT
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 87 09:40:20 EDT
From: Robert Carpenter <rc@icst-cmr.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8708201340.AA10766@icst-cmr.arpa.ARPA>
To: Balzer@vaxa.isi.edu, Walker@A.ISI.EDU, CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, mld@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Chuck@VLSI.CALTECH.EDU,
lk@cs.ucla.edu, DCL@sail.stanford.edu, Les@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
JMC@sail.stanford.edu, Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu,
D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu, Kung@sam.cs.cmu.edu, Rick.Rashid@a.cs.cmu.edu,
rb@vlsi.cs.cmu.edu, Randy@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, Sal@CS.Columbia.edu,
Green@kestrel.ARPA, Green@Kestrel.ARPA, Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
jlh@score.stanford.edu, ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu,
cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu, taylor@ics.uci.edu,
despain@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, Despain@JI.BERKELEY.EDU,
hector@princeton.ARPA, jes%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu,
lyon@icst-cmr.ARPA, dardy@nrl-acoustics.ARPA, nassi@multimax.ARPA,
Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu, pullen@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: PI Meeting Arrangements
Cc: rc@icst-cmr.arpa
United States Department of Commerce
National Bureau of Standards
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
August 20, 1987
Dear Invitee,
The Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology of the
National Bureau of Standards is hosting the DARPA/ISTO Com-
puter Systems Principal Investigator (PI) meeting of the Ar-
chitecture Program and the Software Program on September
15-17, 1987, at the Holiday Inn in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
The meetings will follow this approximate schedule.
Monday 1900-2100 Registration
Tuesday 0730-0900 Registration
Tuesday 0900-1730 Combined sessions
Tuesday 1900- ? Dinner
Wednesday all day Simultaneous sessions
Thursday until 1600 Combined sessions
Thursday after 1600 ISAT group may meet
GETTING TO THE HOTEL
The hotel can be reached by leaving Interstate 270 at Mary-
land 124 in the direction of Montgomery Village (to the
northeast). The hotel is on the far-left corner of the in-
tersection of MD 124 and MD 355, the first major intersec-
tion off I-270.
Limo service is available from all three Washington-
Baltimore airports. You must reserve in advance.
Washington Flyer 1-800-431-5472 National and Dulles
" " (703) 685-1400 " "
Gaithersburg Limo (301) 670-1115 All three airports
BWI Limo (301) 441-2345 BWI
REGISTRATION
I am enclosing an advance registration form. Please complete
one for each attendee and send them to <pimeet@icst-
cmr.arpa> as soon as possible. This will help us better
plan for your needs and reduce the sign-in crush at the
meeting. The meeting registration fee will be $100 (check
or cash). Among other things, this will include a buffet
lunch and coffee breaks each of the three days and the Tues-
day buffet dinner.
-1-
I am also enclosing a HOTEL RESERVATION FORM. Please return
it to the hotel by AUGUST 31, 1987. Their phone number is
301-948-8900; mention the DARPA/NBS meeting.
If you have any problems contact us at NBS.
Bob Carpenter 301-975-5677 <rc@icst-cmr.arpa>
John Roberts 301-975-5683 <roberts@icst-cmr.arpa>
Gordon Lyon 301-975-5679 <lyon@icst-cmr.arpa>
I'm looking forward to seeing you all.
Robert J. Carpenter
Parallel Processing Group
Advanced Systems Division
Institute for Computer Sciences
and Technology
-2-
==========================================================
MEETING REGISTRATION FORM - DARPA PI Meeting, 15-17 Sep 87
Send to <pimeet@icst-cmr.arpa>
==========================================================
NAME:
ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
ORGANIZATION:
MAIL ADDRESS:
Staying at Holiday Inn? Yes / No
Required projection equipment (other than for overheads):
==========================================================
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM: Mail or phone directly to hotel!!
==========================================================
HOLIDAY INN OF GAITHERSBURG ARRIVAL DATE________
2 Montgomery Village Ave. NUMBER OF NIGHTS________
Gaithersburg, MD 20879 RATE: $53.00
(301) 948-8900 Attn: Sales Office
Print Name ____________________________ Phone ____________
Address __________________________________________________
City and State ________________________ ZIP ______________
GROUP NAME: DARPA/NBS Meeting -- Sept. 15-17, 1987
Please reserve (check one) SINGLE ( ) DOUBLE ( )
METHOD OF GUARANTEE:
1. Credit card and number _______________________
2. Corporate number _____________________________
3. Advance Deposit (dollar amount) ______________
4. NBS "DARPA" Conference Rate: $53.00
All night reservations will be guaranteed with the following
credit cards (American Express, Master Card, Visa, Diner's
Club), corporate number, or with an advance deposit of one
night's lodging plus 10% tax.
THIS FORM MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE HOTEL BY 31 AUG 87.
==========================================================
-3-
∂10-Sep-87 1500 LES DARPA Slide
Here is the text that we propose to put in the four quadrants of the
slide for the DARPA briefing. Please OK or grumble.
It needs to leave by Fed. Express at 5:00 PDT today.
-Les
Upper Left:
QLISP
Stanford University
Upper Right (impact):
More power for symbolic computing
Faster and better decisions in command and control systems
More complete and timely symbolic computations
in support of engineering and scientific projects
Lower Left (key technical challenges and innovative results):
Controlling parallelism
Parallel algorithms for symbolic problem domains
Usable debugging environment
Tools to measure performance of parallel lisp systems
Converging on a standard for shared-memory lisp
Lower Right:
[Tasks and milestons in Gantt chart form.]
∂10-Sep-87 1545 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil URGENT!! Report Needed...
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 15:45:20 PDT
Posted-Date: Thu 10 Sep 87 18:41:41-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA05353; Thu, 10 Sep 87 18:41:47 EDT
Date: Thu 10 Sep 87 18:41:41-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: URGENT!! Report Needed...
To: BALZER@vaxa.isi.edu, GREEN@kestrel.arpa, mld@mc.lcs.mit.edu,
Cheatham@harvard.harvard.edu, JMC@sail.stanford.edu,
Habermann@c.cs.cmu.edu, rollins@c.cs.cmu.edu, D-scott@c.cs.cmu.edu,
ZM@sail.stanford.edu, CLT@sail.stanford.edu, cmp.good@r20.utexas.edu,
CLARKE%cs.umass.edu@relay.cs.net,
lee%boulder.colorado.edu@relay.cs.net, TAYLOR@ics.uci.edu,
DCL@sail.stanford.edu, trwrb!trwspp!belz@ucbvax.berkeley.edu,
despain@ucbvax.berkeley.edu, lk@cs.ucla.edu,
jes%cs.brown.edu@relay.cs.net, ken@rice.edu, rich@ai.ai.mit.edu
Cc: wade@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <558312101.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(215)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
To all Software PIs:
I need the following information about your project. I understand
that this will take an hour or two, but we require this information
(from ALL projects funded in ISTO) to meet certain internal needs.
Please respond by computer mail BEFORE the PI meeting if at all
possible. This should take not more than an hour, and it is urgent,
so please do it now. Send the response to me at
scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL
with CC to
wade@VAX.DARPA.MIL .
If you receive no acknowledgement to your reply, please call
Denise Wade at (202-694-5800) to confirm our receipt.
NOTE: "One paragraph" (below) means less than half of a page, and
preferably less than 10 lines of text. If you write anything longer,
we have to edit it down for you, so please don't. I advise recycling
some of the prose you generated for the "incremental" reports we
solicited a few months back. This should be a simple honest technical
description.
You should send one report for each "separately funded effort." If
your work is part of a larger project sponsored by a single DARPA
Program Manager, then you might be able to file a single (short!)
report for the entire project. Specifically, each task on a tasking
contract requires a separate report. Multiple efforts under a single
umbrella contract require separate reports. Separate facets as parts
of a large effort negotiated with a single DARPA program manager are
all parts of a single effort requiring only one report. Obviously,
separate contracts require separate reports.
I apologize sincerely for the short deadline. If you have already
been solicited by Mark Pullen or others for this information, please
send me a copy anyway. There is some overlap in our efforts.
Thanks,
Bill Scherlis
________________________________________________________________
1. Project Title.
2. Institution.
3. Names of Principal Investigators (up to three).
4. Brief history of project: major phases, key dates (one paragraph).
5. Budget Summary:
a. Basic contract dollar amount.
b. Dollar amounts and purposes of options, if any.
c. Total spending authority received to date.
d. Total spent to date.
e. Approximate monthly expenditure rate.
f. Any major non-salary expenses planned.
g. Date next increment of funds is needed.
6. Technical summary (one or two paragraphs).
7. Principal expected innovations (up to one paragraph).
8. Expected product for distribution (may be technical reports only).
9. Summary of accomplishments (one paragraph per year).
10. Titles and authors of one to three principal technical reports
per year.
________________________________________________________________
-------
∂10-Sep-87 1840 LES DARPA Charts
OK, the slides are on their way to DARPA via Federal Express.
A Gantt chart, as I recall, is a set of horizontal time lines showing
the duration of various subprojects. At least, that is what we sent them.
The octapus is a great idea, but there was insufficient time to do it
before the Fed. Express deadline. I have since found an amateur artist
who will give it a try, perhaps in time for the presentation next week.
∂10-Sep-87 1923 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET conference
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 87 19:23:18 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa21809; 10 Sep 87 22:08 EDT
Received: from reiter by ai.toronto.edu via UNIX id AA11680; Thu, 10 Sep 87 22:01:09 EDT
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 87 22:01:09 EDT
From: Ray Reiter <reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
Message-Id: <8709110201.AA11680@ai.toronto.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: conference
Dear John,
As you will see from the following call for papers, Hector Levesque, Ron
Brachman and myself are organizing a conference on representation and reasoning
in AI. We intend to attract participants who are concerned with fundamental
issues of symbolic representations. With this objective in mind, we have
assembled a program committee whose current status I also enclose. The make-up
of the committee strongly reflects the scope and bias of the conference. So
far, everyone seems to think that such a conference is a good idea, and response
to our request for program committee members has been overwhelmingly positive.
No doubt you'll notice your name on the proposed committee. Can you be
persuaded?
We anticipate that each committee member will have fewer than 20 extended
abstracts to review. You will receive these papers in early November, 1988, and
have about a month to read them. It is possible, but not yet firmly decided,
that there will be a meeting of the full program committee in Toronto at the
beginning of Dec. for final approval of the papers.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes,
Ray
reiter@toronto.csnet
CALL FOR PAPERS
FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING
Royal York Hotel
Toronto, Ontario
May 15-18, 1989
The idea of explicit representations of knowledge, manipulated by
general-purpose inference algorithms, underlies much of the work in artificial
intelligence, from natural language to expert systems. A growing number of
researchers are interested in the principles governing systems based on this
idea. This conference will bring together these researchers in a more
intimate setting than that of the general AI conferences. In particular,
presentations will be of adequate length to present substantial results, and
we expect to avoid parallel sessions. Accepted papers will be collected in a
conference proceedings, to be published by Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
The conference will focus on principles of commonsense reasoning and
representation, as distinct from concerns of engineering and details of
implementation. Thus of direct interest are logical specifications of
reasoning behaviors, comparative analyses of competing algorithms and
theories, and analyses of the correctness and/or the computational complexity
of reasoning algorithms. Papers that attempt to move away from or refute the
knowledge-based paradigm in a principled way are also welcome, so long as
appropriate connections are made to the central body of work in the field.
Submissions are encouraged in at least the following topic areas:
Analogical reasoning Diagnostic reasoning
Commonsense reasoning Planning
Evidential reasoning Knowledge Representation Formalisms
Inductive reasoning Theories of the Commonsense World
Nonmonotonic reasoning Theories of Knowledge and Belief
Qualitative reasoning Belief Management and Revision
Deductive reasoning Formal Task and Domain Specifications
REVIEW OF PAPERS
The program committee will review extended abstracts (not complete papers).
In order to ensure the highest quality, each submission will be read by at
least two members of the committee and judged on clarity, significance, and
originality. An important criterion for acceptance of a paper is that it
clearly contribute to principles of representation of reasoning that are
likely to influence current and future AI practice.
Extended abstracts should contain enough information to enable the program
committee to identify the principal contribution of the research and its
importance. It should also be clear from the extended abstract how the work
compares to related work in the field, including references to relevant
literature.
Submissions must be substantively different from papers currently under review
and must not be submitted elsewhere before the author notification date.
SUBMISSION OF PAPERS
Submitted abstracts must be at most eight (8) double-spaced pages. All
abstracts must be submitted on 8-1/2" x 11" paper (or alternatively, a4),
and typed in 12-point font (pica on standard typewriter). Dot matrix
printout is not acceptable.
Abstracts must be received no later than November 1, 1988, at the address
listed immediately below. Authors will be notified of acceptance by
December 15, 1988. Final camera-ready copies of the full papers will be due
a short time later, on February 15, 1989. Final papers will be at most
twelve (12) double-column pages in the conference proceedings.
Send five (5) copies of extended abstracts to
Ron Brachman and Hector Levesque, Program Co-chairs
First International Conference on Principles of
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
c/o AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Avenue, Room 3C-439
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
USA
Inquiries of a general nature can be addressed to the Conference Chair:
Raymond Reiter, Conference Chair
First International Conference on Principles of
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
c/o Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
10 Kings College Road
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4
CANADA
Program Committee
James Allen ** accepted **
Giuseppe Attardi ** accepted **
Woody Bledsoe ** accepted **
Alan Bundy hjl
Eugene Charniak ** accepted **
Veronica Dahl ** accepted **
Koichi Furukawa ** accepted **
Johan de Kleer ** accepted **
Herve Gallaire ** accepted **
Michael Genesereth ** accepted **
Michael Georgeff ** accepted **
Joe Halpern hjl
Pat Hayes ** accepted **
Geoff Hinton ** accepted **
Bob Kowalski rr
Alan Mackworth ** accepted **
John McCarthy rr
Drew McDermott ** accepted **
Tom Mitchell ** accepted **
Robert Moore ** accepted **
Judea Pearl ** accepted **
Stan Rosenschein ** accepted **
Stuart Shapiro ** accepted **
William Woods ** accepted **
∂11-Sep-87 0503 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK new book on LCF
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 87 05:03:15 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 11 Sep 87 05:03:21-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Fri 11 Sep 87 07:57:09-EDT
Received: from Cs.Ucl.AC.UK (TCP 1600000011) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 11 Sep 87 07:54:13 EDT
Received: from computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk by nss.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa05732; 11 Sep 87 12:40 BST
Received: from cl.cam.ac.uk by Jenny.CL.Cam.AC.UK
with SMTP with TCP/IP over Ethernet id a014468;
11 Sep 87 12:37 BST
Received: by uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3)
id AA03496; Fri, 11 Sep 87 11:36:55 GMT
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 87 11:36:55 GMT
From: lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Message-Id: <8709111136.AA03496@uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: new book on LCF
LOGIC AND COMPUTATION: Interactive proof with Cambridge LCF
L. C. Paulson
(Cambridge University Press, 1987)
ISBN 0 521 34632 0
Price: 27.50 pounds
This book gives a complete account of Cambridge LCF, a theorem prover
for first-order logic with domain theory added. Cambridge LCF can be
used in proofs about denotational semantics, functional programming,
program transformations, etc. The first four chapters present
preliminary material, including proof methods for natural deduction and
an introduction to domain theory. The rest of the book describes
Cambridge LCF in detail, with many examples.
Contents:
1. Survey and History of LCF 3
2. Formal Proof in First Order Logic 13
3. A Logic of Computable Functions 53
4. Structural Induction 77
5. Syntactic Operations for PPLAMBDA 139
6. Theory Structure 163
7. Axioms and Inference Rules 181
8. Tactics and Tacticals 209
9. Rewriting and Simplification 245
10. Sample Proofs 265
Bibliography 289
Index 296
∂11-Sep-87 0812 @RELAY.CS.NET:kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Translating Your Lecture
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 87 08:12:24 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ac27039; 11 Sep 87 10:56 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ac00388; 11 Sep 87 10:48 EDT
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.2.9Junet)
id AA11759; Fri, 11 Sep 87 23:20:59 JST
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.g) with TCP; Fri, 11 Sep 87 22:33:55 jst
Received: by aoba.aoba.tohoku.junet (4.12/6.2Junet) ; Fri, 11 Sep 87 22:13:41 jst
Received: by unsun.riec.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.2Junet)
id AA01324; Fri, 11 Sep 87 22:07:41+0900
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 87 22:07:41+0900
From: Yukiyoshi Kameyama <kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Return-Path: <kam@unsun.riec.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8709111207.AA01324@unsun.riec.tohoku.junet>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%csnet-relay.csnet%u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Translating Your Lecture
Cc: kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I am Yukiyoshi Kameyama, a research associate under Prof. Masahiko Sato.
I am trying to translate your lecture given at Tohoku University last Spring.
We thank you for giving that substantial lecture, and also for sending a
corrected lecture note. My work has almost finished until now, and I found
some small mistakes in your lecture note. Please make some somments on them
if possible.
Here, I suppose you have the lecture note.
1. (Chapter 1. around the middle of the last paragraph)
the other one is that Joe is not a canary --->
the other one is that Joe is not a bird
[Because you assume that Joe is a canary, the unintended model cannot make
Canary(Joe) false.]
2. (Chapter 3. the conclusion part of the axiom (5) of the blocks world)
abaspect3(x,move(x,l),s).--->
abaspect3(x,l,s).
[According to the axiom (3), "aspect3" takes location as its second argument,
while in this axiom the second argument is an event.]
Therefore, I would appereciate if you reply to this mail as soon as possible.
Again, thank you very much for your kindness.
Sincerely,
Yukiyoshi Kameyama
Research Institute of Electrical Communication
2-1-1, Katahira, Sendai, 980, JAPAN
(e-mail address) kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@relay.cs.net
P.S. I am not sure whether this mail can safely reach you, I sent this
through two different pathes.
∂11-Sep-87 1334 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Benefits
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 87 13:29:46 PDT
Date: Fri 11 Sep 87 13:29:51-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Benefits
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12333836944.23.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, you weren't in when I called today. Here is the story.
Payroll has records of Carolyn's arrangements concerning benefits, but nothing
for you. However, given the confusion concerning the change in salaries,
etc., as of September 1, they could not check further concerning what, if
any, arrangements have been made for you. I will check back on September 23
(the day after payday) to see if Accounts Receiviable has any amounts due for
you. As soon as I have this information, I will let you know immediately of
what you have to do.
I was assured that it is o.k. to wait until after the first 87-88 payday to
take care of everything, and I will follow up.
Betty
-------
∂11-Sep-87 1556 ME break p
∂11-Sep-87 1550 JMC break p
I'm now using a Lisp machine to reach SAIL. My main remaining problem
(admittedly only with spider) is that it sometimes gets into an
unresponsive state from which I used to escape with break p. I don't
know how to transmit break, and I have been reduced to logging in on
my other terminal and killing the job. Is there a better way?
ME - Sure. BREAK is generated by typing ESCAPE and then "-" (minus sign),
where ESCAPE is generated by transmitting a NULL. So NULL - gets you BREAK.
Hence BREAK P is NULL - P (three characters).
∂11-Sep-87 2336 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF Report
Received: from CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 87 23:36:17 PDT
Received: from gvax.cs.cornell.edu by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA18047; Fri, 11 Sep 87 11:48:43 EDT
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 87 11:48:37 EDT
From: patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Donna Patteson)
Message-Id: <8709111548.AA01689@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA01689; Fri, 11 Sep 87 11:48:37 EDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: NSF Report
Professor McCarthy:
John Hopcroft asked me to check with you concerning
the NSF Report.
John hopes that you can give your unofficial
approval on it, taking into consideration that
it will be revised further by an editor.
Would you feel comfortable with him presenting
it to the Advisory Board? Also, would like
your name to be included in the "contributors
section"? Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Donna Patteson
∂12-Sep-87 0058 @RELAY.CS.NET:kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Thank you
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Sep 87 00:57:52 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa07270; 12 Sep 87 3:56 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ac18605; 12 Sep 87 3:47 EDT
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.2.9Junet)
id AA17845; Sat, 12 Sep 87 16:31:49 JST
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.g) with TCP; Sat, 12 Sep 87 14:31:27 jst
Received: by aoba.aoba.tohoku.junet (4.12/6.2Junet) ; Sat, 12 Sep 87 12:51:54 jst
Received: by unsun.riec.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.2Junet)
id AA00630; Sat, 12 Sep 87 12:49:54+0900
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 87 12:49:54+0900
From: Yukiyoshi Kameyama <kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Return-Path: <kam@unsun.riec.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8709120249.AA00630@unsun.riec.tohoku.junet>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%csnet-relay.csnet%u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Thank you
Cc: kam%unsun.riec.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Dear Prof. McCarthy,
Thank you very much for immediate reply. I understand your point that
we should separate the predicate 'ab' and the function symbol 'aspect1'.
I already find it (from your another paper), and in my translation the
translated word of 'ab' and that of 'aspect1' are separeted. So,
please don't worry.
By the way, Prof. Sato is in INRIA of France until mid-October, therefore
your mail to 'ms@sail.stanford.edu' will not reach him until then. Instead,
I'll forward your mail to him via BITNET.
(His address is "masahiko@inria.uucp".)
Sincerely,
Yukiyoshi Kemayama
∂13-Sep-87 1552 LES Project Summary
To: Rivin@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JSW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[Here are answers to the questions asked by Mark Pullen and Bill Scherlis.
Fiddle to suit your taste. -Les]
1. Project Title.
Qlisp for Parallel Processors
2. Institution.
Stanford University, Department of Computer Science
3. Brief history of project: major phases, key dates (one paragraph).
An outline of the Qlisp language appeared in a paper by Gabriel and
McCarthy at the 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional Programming.
Development of a multiprocessor implementation of Qlisp on an Alliant FX/8
multiprocessor system began in August 1986, shortly after DARPA funding
was received, with Lucid Inc. acting as subcontractor. A uniprocessor
version of Lucid Common Lisp had been ported to the FX/8 by March 1987
and a partial implementation of Qlisp, including the Qlet construct,
became available in July 1987. A Qlisp simulator running on a Symbolics
Lisp machine has been developed in parallel and is being used to test
and debug Qlisp programs.
4. Budget Summary:
a. Basic contract dollar amount.
$1,912,324.
b. Dollar amounts and purposes of options, if any.
None.
c. Total spending authority received to date.
$1,720,000.
d. Total spent to date.
$831,875 through July 1987.
e. Approximate monthly expenditure rate.
$120,000
f. Any major non-salary expenses planned.
$51,150 for computer memory and IO processors.
g. Date next increment of funds is needed.
1/1/88
5. Names of Principal Investigators (up to three).
John McCarthy
6. Technical summary (one or two paragraphs).
Qlisp is an extension of Common Lisp that allows parallel processes
to be created and controlled. It is designed to work in an environment
where each processor can address the whole of memory and a processor may
execute programs anywhere in memory on data located anywhere in memory.
When a program comes to a statement allowing parallelism and decides that
parallelism is to be invoked (according to the computed value of an
parameter in the statement), it adds a collection of tasks to a queue and
starts on the first one. When a processor completes a task, it goes to
the queue for its next task.
Basing parallelism on run-time queues means that a program isn't
written or compiled for any specific number of processors. The number
available can even change during the course of a computation. Tasks need
not be of similar length because a proessor finishing a short task merely
takes another from the queue. This is being undertaken as a step toward
the longer range goal of demonstrating symbolic computation in a parallel
computing system.
7. Principal expected innovations (up to one paragraph).
The principal things that we hope to learn and demonstrate from this
project are:
(a) how to control parallelism in symbolic computations;
(b) discovery of efficient parallel algorithms for parallel execution
in symbolic problem domains;
(c) development of a usable debugging environment for symbolic parallel
processing;
(d) development of performance measurement techniques suitable for parallel
Lisp systems;
(e) converging on a standard for shared-memory multiprocessor Lisp.
8. Expected product for distribution (may be technical reports only).
Reports on the expected findings outlined just above, a manual on Qlisp,
and complete specifications for the extensions to Common Lisp needed to
implement Qlisp.
9. Summary of accomplishments (one paragraph per year).
See paragraph 3.
10. Titles and authors of on or two principal technical reports
per year.
(a) Igor Rivin and Joe Weening, "Parallel Sorting with Qlisp," forthcoming.
(b) Igor Rivin and Joe Weening, "Qlisp Manual," forthcoming.
∂13-Sep-87 1801 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>: HITECH passes Turing Test?]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Sep 87 18:01:53 PDT
Date: Sun 13 Sep 87 17:58:40-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>: HITECH passes Turing Test?]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12334410168.11.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is a message I sent to Ebeling (his response is in the next message)
---------------
Mail-From: ILAN created at 13-Sep-87 04:17:32
Date: Sun 13 Sep 87 04:17:32-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: HITECH passes Turing Test?
To: ebeling@vlsi.cs.washington.edu
cc: ilan@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12334260685.14.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hi, I've been wondering whether HITECH can be said to have passed the
Turing Test for chess. Igor Rivin (who was at the Demo) thinks that a
human player playing Hitech a match of 20 games would drastically improve
his result by the end of the match (in any case, much more than against a
human opponent). There is something to this, e.g. in my own experience at the
demo. On the other hand, this definitely sounds like he is on the defensive
by qualifying the definition of the Turing test.
I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the matter, or whether you had
ever thought of doing a ``blind'' experiment where people had to guess
between computer and human.
-Ilan
-------
-------
∂13-Sep-87 1802 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): HITECH passes Turing Test?]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Sep 87 18:02:26 PDT
Date: Sun 13 Sep 87 17:59:13-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling): HITECH passes Turing Test?]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12334410268.11.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Return-Path: <ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu>
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Sun 13 Sep 87 10:13:17-PDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.6)
id AA09629; Sun, 13 Sep 87 10:16:38 PDT
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 87 10:16:38 PDT
From: ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu (Carl Ebeling)
Return-Path: <ebeling@june.cs.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <8709131716.AA09629@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Ilan Vardi's message of Sun 13 Sep 87 04:17:32-PDT
Subject: HITECH passes Turing Test?
I'm pretty sure that Hitech would not pass the Turing Test for chess.
However, I think it's raised the level for which it does pass the
test. I.e. it takes a much better player now to detect that there is
a computer at the other end. But even so, there are lots of times
when Hitech repeats twice before figuring out that repeating three
times would be a bad idea.
Carl
-------
∂13-Sep-87 2025 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Visiting Texas
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Sep 87 20:25:39 PDT
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1987 20:22 PDT
Message-ID: <RDZ.12334436319.BABYL@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Visiting Texas
I'll be in Austin from Sept 17 to Sept 20, visiting some of my friends
from college. If you will be in town during that period, perhaps I
should drop by to say hello.
Ramin
∂14-Sep-87 0228 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Iran - Mossadegh's Overthrow
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 02:27:55 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Sep 87 02:27:55-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Iran - Mossadegh's Overthrow
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 13 Sep 87 23:43:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12334502874.9.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
To answer Prof. McCarthy's direct questions:
``
Why does Inder give instant credulity to any TV program he hears blaming
the U.S. for something that goes wrong in the world?
....
For the time being, I'll not say what I remember about the overthrow of
Mossadegh in order to concentrate on asking Inder why it takes only a
fragment of a TV program to convince him that the U.S. acted badly.
''
First some questions *in answer* to the above questions :-)
Does Prof. McCarthy have enough information from my posting
to conclude that I `give instant credulity to any TV program he hears
blaming the U.S. for something that goes wrong in the world? ''
*Any* TV program? Necessarily only one that *blames* the U.S.?
Where did it say that my *sole* source of information was ` only
a fragment of a TV program' to *convince* me ` that the U.S. acted badly?'
I trust I've made my point about some hasty conclusions that
Prof. McCarthy may have jumped to. Yes, that particular source of
information was limited to only a few minutes in passing but I've
nowhere stated that that was the sum total of my information on the
matter. In fact, the mention of the unanimity of opinion on
who was involved in the overthrow should have given a clue about
the possibility that additional sources of information were factored
in.
--->>> But all of this in the original question from Prof. McCarthy,
and in my need to answer him, is begging the real question(s) posed.
Prof. McCarthy seems to know from *his* sources that *perhaps*
the US had *some* role in the overthrow of Mr. Mossadegh. Please to
enlighten us all, Sir :-)
If it does turn out, from sources we can all agree to trust,
that the US did have a direct role through the CIA, then maybe Prof.
McCarthy can be asked to take a stand on whether such intervention
by an agency representing the people of the United States was `OK'
in that particular case, and whether such interventions are `OK' in
the future. If `OK', what conditions would Prof. McCarthy like to
see such agencies meet before the interventions can be deemed
justifiable? Finally, for completeness, a question that Prof. McCarthy
has answered once earlier, how would he (and everyone else on the net)
feel about every other nation on the globe resorting to similar
`interventions' in US domestic political affairs on American soil?
I don't believe in America-bashing or India-bashing or
Japan-bashing or Germany-bashing or any other general purpose bashing.
Why must that be brought up as a red herring when direct attention
to the *subject matter* is all that is needed to shed light on the
matter ? (Actually, as we all know, Imperial England is to blame
for all of the world's woes since before the time of Christ - just
kidding, just kidding. Phew!)
A word about my sources: until I came to the US I did *not*
believe any of the reports that the US had been involved in any
such capers in Iran or anywhere else in the world. I know, it was
the height of ignorance! But after seeing the matters detailed
in the *US* media, the actual, believable evidence about US
`covert' actions is, in fact, appalling. I could never have
believed, until I saw the evidence available here, that a nation
whose constitutional processes and values stand for so much that
is good as an example to the rest of humanity, could stoop to
all kinds of `covert' dirty work in the name of her national
self-interest. (This, I think, is one of the major points on
which the American public can have an effect in shaping the
future of the world.)
--->>> Let's address the specific issue: those who have any
knowledge of the Mossadegh overthrow and any US involvement
in it, let's hear from you. Please state also whether you
support or oppose what was done, and why.
If it becomes necessary, I'll put up some quotes
from the book by Kwitny that I mentioned once before. Please
be forewarned that he was a Wall Street Journal reporter for
many years and the review of his book that I posted was taken
from the Harvard Business Review - neither of them especially
well known for pushing leftist, commie pinko agendas! (This
just to undercut the inevitable allegations about the sources
being leftist - I'm not myself, by the way.)
Inder
-------
∂14-Sep-87 0338 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Sampler - Kwitny on Iran
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 03:37:59 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Sep 87 03:37:51-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sampler - Kwitny on Iran
To: su-etc@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12334515605.9.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
From a chapter titled `Upsetting the Balance: Iran
and Afghanistan' in Jonathan Kwitny's book `Endless Enemies:
The Making of An Unfriendly World.'
For the purposes of the Mossadegh discussion, please
disregard the references to Afghanistan - that's a separate
matter. For now, please take from the following excerpts
whatever is relevant to the Mossadegh overthrow.
``
If Iran had a strongly nationalist government *just
like the one the CIA overthrew there in 1953*, then a Soviet
occupation of Afghanistan would have required so much greater
a commitment of force that the Soviets might never have
attempted it. The leader of the Iranian government in 1953,
Mohammed Mossadegh, had chased the Russians out of his country,
but also wanted to put some Iranian control on U.S. oil interests
there. We wanted a government in Iran that we could cow; and we
got one that was as easily cowed by the Soviets.
[p. 158]
... The U.S. had sabotaged its own cause - made itself so
great an enemy of Iran that even the Soviet Union looked
benign by comparison. With far greater efficiency and effect
than the Soviets have so far shown in Afghanistan, the U.S.
violently repressed Iranian independence for twenty-six years.
Every Iranian was aware of it. Yet despite the copious and
unmistakable evidence, most Americans still have little conception
of what happened. Nor did most Americans benefit from our Iranian
intervention; in fact, they suffered from it, first at the gas
pump, and now in their national security as well.
The best record of how this repression of Iranian
independence started comes from the pen of Kennett Love, who
was the New York Times reporter in Iran in 1953. Love's
detailed report of what happened that year was never provided
to the readers of his newspaper, however. Nor has he chosen
to publish it in the more than two decades since he left the
newspaper. The report was submitted, rather, to Allen Dulles,
who was the director of central intelligence and head of the
CIA. And the report reveals something rather startling: that
Love helped direct the revolutionary action while reporting
on it for the nation's newspaper of record, never, of course,
disclosing his activist role to his readers (or, according to
the Times, to his editors.)
[p. 160]
[The way Mr. Kwitny got his hands on the CIA
report is itself a strange story - he got the
help of John Kelly, editor of `Counterspy'
magazine! - Inder]
... the major oil companies succeessfully resolved
these [some antitrust stuff - Inder] problems when the
Eisenhower administration forced the Justice Department
to give up its case on August 6, 1953. That was exactly
ten days before the CIA's planned coup against Mossadegh
in Iran. (As it turned out, the actual coup took place
three days later than planned, on August 19.)
[p. 163]
''
And so it goes, for over twenty pages, with
full references and footnotes.
I have yet to come across a rebuttal to, or refutation
of, the factual content of Mr. Kwitny's book, which appeared
in hard-cover in 1984. I would be glad to look at any
material that Prof. McCarthy wishes to suggest that counters
the drift of Mr. Kwitny's account above.
If Prof. McCarthy finds the *facts* accurate, where
did I err in putting up my original message based on seeing
a few minutes of the PBS series? (Perchance an honest apology
forthcoming from Prof. McCarthy for his insinuations about
my motives/intent/gullibility ?)
If I remember right, the PBS series is based on the
work of possibly a British author, also available in book
form by calling their 800 number (twenty and odd bucks.)
Surely not everyone is out to blame the US for mis-deeds
the US did not commit! I know, I sure am not looking to
pin falsehoods on *any* nation's record.
Comments, anyone?
Inder
-------
∂14-Sep-87 0832 patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu re: NSF Report
Received: from CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 08:32:31 PDT
Received: from gvax.cs.cornell.edu by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA02712; Mon, 14 Sep 87 09:12:58 EDT
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 87 09:12:53 EDT
From: patteson@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Donna Patteson)
Message-Id: <8709141312.AA21515@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA21515; Mon, 14 Sep 87 09:12:53 EDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: NSF Report
Thank you for getting back to me.
We will not put your name on the AI
section, but we will acknowledge your help
with the report. Thanks, again.
Donna
patteson
∂14-Sep-87 1141 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Committees
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 11:41:28 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Sep 87 11:37:12-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Committees
To: "Committee List": ;
Message-ID: <12334602867.14.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is an updated list of the CSD committees for 1987/1988. The
chairs should confirm that their members have received this
note and are "ready to serve." (I think I asked and have confirmations
from all the consulting professors. If you, a consulting professor,
see your name on this list, and I haven't actually asked you to serve,
please consider this an invitation!)
PhD Program and Admissions: Decides which students admitted to CSD PhD
program. Recommends plans and policies for the PhD program. Supervises
Grey Tuesday/Black Friday proceedings. Arranges for ``research
mentors'' for first-year PhD students. Genesereth (Chair), Pratt,
Manna, Gupta, Gabriel (Lucid), Goldberg, McCarthy, Wiederhold,
Rosenschein (SRI), Rick Reis (consulting member---Rick coordinates PhD
recruitment in SOE).
Comprehensive Exam: Conceives, administers and grades the two Comp
Exams. Last year was too much work for a single chair, and I suggest
that we have a different chair for each exam. (These chairs need be on
the committee only for the exam they are chairing.) Also, since we have
some people on sabbatical for parts of the year, I am suggesting that
some members will be on the committee for only one of the exams. Ullman
(Chair, first exam), Cheriton (Chair, second exam), Guibas (first exam),
Shoham (first exam), McCarthy (second exam), Mitchell (second exam),
Binford, Feigenbaum, Goldberg, Hennessy, Mayr
Curriculum: Decides about CSD courses.
Manna (Chair), Reges, Pratt, Knuth
Facilities: Recommends plans and policies for CSD computer facilities.
Earnest (Chair), Dienstbier, Rindfleisch, Ball, Binford
MS Program: Decides which students admitted to MS program. Recommends
plans and policies for MS program. Advises MS students. Oliger (Chair),
Floyd, Reges, McCluskey, Dill, Latombe, Baskett (Silicon Graphics),
Rindfleisch, Jones, Keller
MSAI Program: Decides which students admitted to MSAI program. Recommends
plans and policies for MSAI program. Advises MSAI students.
Buchanan (Chair), Clancey, Binford, Feigenbaum, Genesereth, Latombe
CSD Undergraduate Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Arranges for advising students. Knuth (Chair), Reges, Jones, Rogers,
Fisher
Math/Comp. Sci. Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students.
Floyd, Herriot, Clancey, Reges
Computer Systems Engrg. Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students. Chair
Reges, Gupta
Symbolic Systems Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students.
Shoham, Mayr, Nilsson, Reges
Visiting Professors: Recommends Visiting Industrial Lectureships and
Departmental Visiting Professors.
McCarthy
Library and Publications: Recommends plans and policies for CSD library
and publication matters.
Buchanan (Chair), Scott
Fellowships: Recommends student fellowship disposition.
Tajnai (Chair), Nilsson, Scott
Computer Forum: Recommends plans and policies for the CSD/CSL industrial
affiliates program
Miller (Chair), Tajnai, Ungar, Pratt
First Year PhD Student Advisor:
Nilsson
-Nils
-------
∂14-Sep-87 1150 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Mossadegh, etc.
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 11:50:29 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Sep 87 11:50:22-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Mossadegh, etc.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 14 Sep 87 09:35:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12334605265.33.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Having answered the bit about depending too much on
fragments of TV programs, I believe I've then adequately
presented the facts of the Mossadegh case from at least
one fairly dependable perspective - that of Mr. Kwitny.
The events happened before I was born so I've had
to rely not on memory but on reading and discussion.
Prof. McCarthy says:
``The U.S. concern about Iran dates from the Soviet occupation of the northern
provinces of Iran during World War II and its continuation after the war.
The Soviets only withdrew after considerable pressure from the U.S. and
the U.N. (in which the U.S. had much more influence than it has today).''
It is noteworthy that Mr. Mossadegh was credited with being
the one who got the Soviets out of northern Iran! (Pl. see my sampler
of Kwitny quotes.) Hey, I'm glad the Soviets didn't get to stay.
`` I believe he got power at least semi-democratically.''
Coming from Prof. McCarthy's memory that is saying quite a bit,
isn't it? Remember that the events happened about 35 years ago.
`` It is possible that the CIA's role is unwarranted but Kwitny's blaming
Khomeni on it is speculation.''
I can happily accept the above statement from Prof. McCarthy.
No matter how well researched, any conjectures by Mr. Kwitny about
the future of Iran without a Mossadegh overthrow *are* still only
speculation. I'm more concerned, in this go-around, with having people
acknowledge the precise nature of US involvement in the overthrow -
that is documented well enough to be beyond mere speculation.
`` It seems much more warranted to draw
an analogy with Afghanistan and say that if the CIA hadn't been
crippled in 1977, it would have been able to prevent the communist
coup in Afghanistan that led to the Soviet takeover in 1979 and to
the death and exile of a substantial part of the Afghan population.
Perhaps the CIA actions in 1954 prevented Iran from suffering in
the 1950s what Afghanistan suffered in the 1970s and 80s. ''
This part of Prof. McCarthy's answer contains two different
categories of speculation. The first pertains to Afghanistan, which
is not the subject of discussion and which I'd asked to exclude so
as not to complicate matters further.
The second part contains speculation about the great good
that may have been done to Iran by the CIA's role in the Mossadegh
overthrow. I submit that per the ground rules on speculation agreed
to above, this speculative flight is inadmissible for serious
discussion! Sounds more like wishful thinking to me, even without
necessarily blaming the present day woes of Iran on the forces
behind the Mossadegh coup. (If anything, one could say that Iran
in the last 35 years has been *greatly* affected by the actions
of whoever played a role in the overthrow of Mossadegh.)
Finally, let me say that a meddling nation, any nation,
is only responsible for it's own role in undertaking such actions.
There is often (always?) a receptivity (vulnerability?) in the
host population for which the foreign forces *cannot* be blamed -
they've merely exploited the situation. Being exploited or taken
advantage of may justify subsequent outrage but does not automatically
bestow moral superiority or saintliness on any population.
So you won't find me trying to pin *everything* on whoever
was last seen fishing in troubled waters. To take an admittedly
unrelated example, but one that I know something about, I think
that there is only so much that the British can be blamed for
in their colonial exploitation of the Indian subcontinent. The
host population needs to take the rap as well for allowing such
events to happen. Besides, the British (and the Americans, where
applicable,) are relative newcomers to sub-continental (and world)
politics - just a couple hundred years - and the troubles of the
world pre-date that by some fair margin.
Cheers,
Inder
-------
∂14-Sep-87 1304 AI.MCCARTHY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU assignment
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 13:03:59 PDT
Date: Mon 14 Sep 87 15:04:03-CDT
From: AI.MCCARTHY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: assignment
To: atp.cohen@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12334618679.43.AI.MCCARTHY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Please ask the students to read Programs with Common Sense and
the part of Some Philosophical Problems ... covering the concept
of can by Thursday.
-------
∂14-Sep-87 1347 CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU AAS Annual Meeting
Received: from A.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 87 13:46:50 PDT
Date: 14 Sep 1987 16:45:19 EDT
Subject: AAS Annual Meeting
From: Rodger A. Cliff <CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU>
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cliff@A.ISI.EDU
John,
I am chairing a panel discussion on the interaction of Automation
and Robotics Technlology with NASA policy at the American
Astronautical Society annual meeting. Would you like to
participate? I am particularly interested in how NASA should
proceed to be able to take advantage of advances in technology over
the next 30 years in order to 1) have assured access to space, and
2) perform missions in Earth orbit, on the Moon, on Mars, and beyond.
The meeting is 2-5 Nov 87 at Hobby airport in Houston. My panel is
10am-12n on 5 Nov. I hope you can make it.
A note on what I am up to these days: I decided that managing
technology at DARPA was less to my liking than actually doing
technology, so I am now working for a small company in Maryland
called "Advanced Technology and Research, Inc." So far I've done
work on the DARPA Autonomous Air Vehicle, the NASA Space Station
Data Management System, and the NASA Flight Telerobotic Servicer.
-Rodger-
-------
∂14-Sep-87 1508 LIN A Suggestion on Circumscription
In applications of circumscription, sometimes we find that
it is too weak to circumscribe a predicate P with another predicate
Q fixed, but at the same time it is too strong to let Q vary.
So it seems we need the following form of circumscription:
circumscribing the predicate P in A(P,Q) with the predicate Q allowed
to vary but satisfies the condition B(P,Q) (B is a formula).
Let's denote this form of circumscription as Circum(A; P; Q; B).
Formally, Circum(A; P; Q; B) can be defined as follows:
A(P,Q) ∧ ∀pq.¬(A(p,q) ∧ (B(P,Q) ↔ B(p,q)) ∧ (p < P))
Intuitively, Circum(A; P; Q; B) means that in the process of minimizing
P with Q allowed vary, we can not change the truth value of B(P,Q).
This form of circumscription is very strong, it includes
Lifschitz's subdomain circumscription as special case.
It even allows only minimizing P's subdomain. For example,
in reasoning about action, we have an abnormality predicate
ab(*,s), which is a function of situation s, and we often need
to minimize the predicate ab(*,s) at some fixed situation or time s,
that is, minimizing ab's subdormain `*' while fix s.
I would like to know whether this is a new form of circumscription,
what is your opinious about this form of circumscription.
I sent an almost same mail to Vladimir Lifschitz last Thursday,
no reply yet. I think maybe he is out.
Sorry to disturb you. Fangzhen Lin
∂14-Sep-87 2047 JMC
Get new key.
∂15-Sep-87 0719 CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU re: AAS Annual Meeting
Received: from A.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 87 07:18:37 PDT
Date: 15 Sep 1987 07:16:00 PDT
Subject: re: AAS Annual Meeting
From: Rodger A. Cliff <CLIFF@A.ISI.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
cc: cliff@A.ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: (Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of 14 Sep 87 1412 PDT)
John,
Thanks for the quick reply. Sorry you can't make it. I keep hoping that
if enough of us keep after NASA, we can get them to be at least a little
more sensible about the way they do business.
Fall in Austin and teaching at UT (I assume) sounds pretty nice!
-Rodger-
-------
Thanks. Here is what to do.
∂16-Sep-87 1500 PHY
Perhaps this would be easier than trying to catch you by phone for your mail
`Science' journal
stack for return
UARCO advertising brochure - computer supplies, etc.
discard
`Computing Reviews'
stack for return
`Building Learning and Tutoring Tools for Object-Oriented Simulation Systems'
by David McArthur - published at RAND
file
Letter from Abraham Peled, IBM, Yorktown Heights - inviting you to attend
the CS Technical Symposium Nov 1 through Tues Nov 3 - in San Jose.
please reply that I can't make it because of being in Texas
`Communication, Consensus and Knowledge' by Rohit Parikh and Paul Krasucki
forward
advertising from CAE/SAR Systems - The CAE/SAR 386 personal computer is here.
discard
`TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF INFERENCE CORPORATION' Meeting on 9-16-87
in L.A.
forward if more than just announcment of meeting. If just that, discard.
request for paper you delivered at June 1987 SLA Conference in Anaheim
but does not name the paper. Give me title and I can locate it in
your files.
forward
new address of TRW Overseas, Inc. in Japan
discard
Telerobotic Technology Advisory Committee announcement scheduled
9-22-23 in Pasadena
forward
Prentice-Hall advertising
discard
Newswatch `High Frontier'
forward
∂17-Sep-87 1328 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU MSCS courses
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 87 13:28:41 PDT
Date: Thu 17 Sep 87 13:25:17-PDT
From: David Teich <TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MSCS courses
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12335408975.28.TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I'm interested in combining last year's and this year's requirements
for the masters program. I wish to substitute four courses from the new
program into the old program list. Can you, as my advisor, approve this?
If not, who do I need to talk to about petitioning the change.
thanx,
david
-------
∂17-Sep-87 1536 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: MSCS courses
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 87 15:36:10 PDT
Date: Thu 17 Sep 87 15:23:19-PDT
From: David Teich <TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: MSCS courses
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 17 Sep 87 14:49:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12335430464.38.TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Ok, I'll check with him. Enjoy Texas, I'm from Dallas.
thanx,
david
-------
∂18-Sep-87 0701 JMC
Mark and other
∂18-Sep-87 0841 VAL re: visit to Austin
[In reply to message rcvd 09-Sep-87 12:38-PT.]
I'm coming to Austin on the evening of Sept 20 for 2 days. Please ask you
sec'y to reserve a hotel for me.
Thank you,
Vladimir
∂18-Sep-87 1022 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Ershov
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 10:21:54 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA08431; Fri, 18 Sep 87 12:13:05 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA00584; Fri, 18 Sep 87 13:15:13 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 13:15:13 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709181715.AA00584@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: Ershov
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
I will mail you the list of Soviet scientists whose
human rights have been violated either at the end of the day
or over the weekend. My secretary has typed the material
into the machine, I have made corrections and she is fixing
the list.
The list is an update of the January 1985 report that I
published in the ACM. I have deleted those individuals who
I know whose rights are no longer violated, including Minc,
Rodman and Voloshin who you told me do not now wish to emi-
grate.
I have also added a number of new individuals. I have
obtained new information from people who have visited the
Soviet Union and who have informed me of these new computer
professionals and from the Washington Committee for Soviet
Jewry and other organizations with whom they work in cities
such as Boston, Chicago and Jerusalem. With each individual
on the list I have listed the source in parentheses, e.g.
(CCS) stands for the Committee of Concerned Scientists. To
find the translation, go to the ACM report. If a source is
not listed there, then it is one of the organizations listed
above or Rachele Heller, a faculty member at George Washing-
ton University. In a few cases no source is listed. I will
have to go through my files to track it down. Unless I per-
sonally believe that a source is reliable, I do not use the
information. To the best of my ability, all of the sources
cited are reliable and individuals on the list have some
relationship to computers.
I have tried to provide some information on all of the
individuals who are on the list. In almost every case I
have listed the home address of the individual.
With respect to your discussion with Ershov, I suggest
that the 5 individuals who you might cite as illustrative
are:
Aleksandr Lerner
Tatyana Velikanova
Raold Zelichonek
Leonid Volvovsky
Gregory Rozenshtein
There are about 263 people on the list. To the best of my
ability, they still have had their basic human rights
denied. I have removed from the list those who have been
told that they may emigrate. However, I would not be
surprised if there were still a few individuals in this
capacity who have not been removed from the list. I person-
ally believe that every individual on the list is important.
If a priority listing as to who will be released first is
important, then I would suggest the following order:
1. Release jailed and exiled computer professionals. Give
exit visas to those who wish to emigrate, and permit
others to work in their chosen fields.
2. Exit visas should be given to all the individuals on
the list in the order of length of time that they have
been denied exit visas. Computer professionals who are
denied exit visas because they are alleged to have
"secret information" should be released if they have
been away from classified information for 5 years.
3. Permit computer professionals whose jobs have been
taken away and who do not wish to emigrate to obtain
jobs in their fields.
I am concerned by possible tokenism. That is, the
Soviets will release a few key individuals and not the rest.
It should be made clear to Ershov (as I am sure you will),
that we are concerned not with particular computer profes-
sionals but with all computer professionals whose human
rights have been violated. Any arrangements of cooperation
should proceed in accordance with the progress the Soviets
are making in addressing the human rights problem of the
computer scientists.
I am personally pleased that you are involved in this
activity with Ershov. Keep up your good work.
I have not yet had an opportunity to contact Ambassador
Richard Schifter's office yet. His office has been tied up
with the Shevarnadze visit. I will let you know the outcome
of my discussions as soon as possible.
Please let me know that you have received this message.
Best regards,
Jack
∂18-Sep-87 1154 VAL re: Senderov interview
[In reply to message rcvd 09-Sep-87 12:42-PT.]
Of course, you're welcome to send copies of the interview to anyone who you
think can be interested. Probably, it will be published in a Russian language
newspaper. I didn't think about tranlating it into English, but if you want to
do that, I'll be glad to help you.
∂18-Sep-87 1216 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Sep-87 14:19-PT.]
Tatiana Velikanova is one of the dissidents freed recently from
labor camps. I've heard her name from Bukovsky, who spoke about her with great
respect. If you want to know more, I can easily find out.
∂18-Sep-87 1745 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Human Rights List - TROFF Format - Part 1
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 17:45:17 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA18822; Fri, 18 Sep 87 19:42:48 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01014; Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:44:39 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:44:39 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709190044.AA01014@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: Human Rights List - TROFF Format - Part 1
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate transmission I have sent you a copy of this report
in typewriter format so that you can read it easily on your terminal.
Enclosed is the troff file so that you can get a clean hard copy
if you so desire. I have had to split the report into 3 parts
as the original transmission bounced.
Please acknowledge receipt. If I do not hear from you I will send
a hard copy on Monday by Federal Express both to Stanford and
Texas to make sure that you receive it before the 23rd.
Regards,
Jack
.po 1.0i
.ls 2
.ce 6
SOVIET
.br
COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS WHOSE SCIENTIFIC FREEDOM
.br
and HUMAN RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED - 1987
.sp 3
Editor: Jack Minker, University of Maryland
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Pavel Abramovich Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Marta
.(l
Ul. Baikalskaya 30, Korp. 2, Apt.87,
Moscow 107207, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuri Akomorovsky
.sp
.(l
Ul. Ilyicha 21, Apt. 601
Adademgorodok,
Novisibirsk,
RSFSR,
USSR
.)l
.sp
(Cyberneticist)
.br
(CCSJ)
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Grigory Mendelevich Akselrod
.sp
Wife: Elena Mikhailovna
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Bela Kuna 8, Apt. 193
Leningrad 192238
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
Engineer Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Agarkov Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Budapeshtskoe Shosse 35-2-36
Leningrad 192212
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.in +3
Computer scientist.(WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Solomon Alber Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1931
.br
.(l
1st Street 16, Apt. 28,
Chernogolovka Moscow Oblast,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Irina Alieveskaya Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Husband: Igor Smirnov
.br
Born: March 22, 1948
.br
.(l
4th Sovietskaya 3-A,
Korp. 9, Apt. 34,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Anatoly Moiseevich Altshuler
.sp
Wife: Tatiana Isaakovna Katcherets
.br
Son: Igor Anatolievich
.br
Daughter: Natalia Anatolievna
.(l
.br
Bolshoi Deviatinsky Pereulok 5,
Apt. 67
Moscow 121099
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG. Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.br
First Refusal: 12/23/81
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Antonov Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
39/2 Zagrebsky Blvd., Kv. 121
Leningrad 192283
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
Computer programmer. (WCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Margarita Nikolaevna Apter
.sp
Birth: 1/01/51
.br
Husband: Semion Klementievich
.br
Son: Alexander Semionovich
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Veidenbauma 39,
Apt. 6
Riga 226001
Latvian-USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG. Computer Scientist (programming)
.in -3
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/78
.br
(AFS)
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Valery Aronov Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: one
.br
.(l
Leningradskoe Shosse 1-20-62
Moscow, 125445, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1977.(BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Atterman
.sp
Birth: 1/01/58
.br
Wife: Elena Atterman
.br
.(l
Kosinskaya St. 26/1,
Apt. 129
Moscow, RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Bachmutsky
.sp
.(l
Veshnyakovskaya 6, Korp. 5, Apt 119
Moscow 115407,
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer, engineer.
.br
(CCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vyacheslav Bakhmin Jailed
.sp
Born: September 25, 1947
.br
Wife: Tatyana Mikhailovna Khromova
.br
Son: Andrei (1972)
.br
.(l
Wife's Address:
107497 Moscow
ul. Baikalskaya, 46
korp. 2, kv. 52
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Served a 4 year sentence for defaming the Soviet state. Released
on schedule in February 1984. Could not get Moscow "propiska". Now lives
with his mother in Kalinin. He has been put under administrative surveillance. (CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuri Balovenkov Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.in +3
In mid 1982, Balovenkov was visited by his wife, Elena Balovenkov of Baltimore,
in Moscow, where he was conducting a hunger strike in hope of emigrating.
Balovenkov is a computer specialist: he has been denied an exit visa to the
United States on the grounds that he knows state secrets. (CL/TWP)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ilya Lvovitch Baron
.sp
Wife: Sima Efimovna
.br
Born: 1957
.br
.(l
Ul. Krasny Vostok 105/17
Baku 65, Azerbaidzhan
.)l
.br
Applied 1980
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
Computer engineer
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Petrovich Beliakov
.sp
Birth: 8/25/18
.br
Wife: Antonia Alexeevna
.br
Son: Oleg Mikhailovich
.br
Son: Igor Mikhailovich
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Festivalnaya 31, Apt. 20
Moscow 125915
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/76
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Grigory Irakhmilovich Belilovsky
.sp
Birth: 1/01/48
.br
Wife: Rakhilia Davidovna
.br
Daughter: Violeta Grigorievna
.br
Son: Igor Grigorievich
.sp
.(l
Ulitsa Kuibysheva 22/14,
Apt. 15
Odessa 27007
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Belkin
.sp
.(l
Leninsky Pr. 22, Apt. 46
Minsk 220030
Byel. SSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
(Computer Engineer-Architect)
.br
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Rita Nisanovna Berkovich
.sp
Birth: 5/01/44
.br
Husband: Mikhail Berkovich
.br
Son: Ladislav Mikhailovich
.br
.(l
Bulvar Sovetskoy Armii 17/1,
Apt. 40, Kishinev 270043
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 3/01/81
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Nadezhda Davidovna Beznogova
.sp
Birth 1/09/42
.br
.(l
Smolny Prospect 5, Apt. 17
Leningrad 193124
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 12/01/80
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Valery Konstantinovich Bichovsky
.sp
Birth: 1/01/37
.br
Wife: Margarita Khaimovna
.br
Son Konstantin Valerievich
.br
Son: Dmity Valerievich
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Vernaya 3/3, Apt. 299
Moscow 119501
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 11/01/80
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
(AFS/CCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Maya M. Blank Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1946
.br
Married, Two children
.(l
Ul. H. Lifshitz 27a, Apt. 10,
Kishinev 277024
Moldavian SSR, USSR
(BK)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Oleg Boichenko Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Alla
.br
Son: Oleg
.br
Daughter: Olga
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/82
.br
.(l
75 Gorky St. Apt. 4
Grodno, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Electronic enginer and computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1979.
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexsandr Bolonkin Exiled
.sp
Born: March 14, 1933
.br
Wife: Margarita
.br
Son: Vladimir
.(l
Family Address:
50 Pogonny proezd,
Korp. 2, Apt. 2
Moscow, USSR
Tel: 169 34 26
(CL/CSCE/HWC)
.)l
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Semion Borovinsky
.sp
Birth 01/01/48
.br
Wife: Natalia
.br
Daughter: Zoya
.br
Daughter: Julia
.(l
Grachesky Prospect D-15,
Apt. 19
Leningrad 1931130
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.br
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Liubov Brailian
.sp
Birth: 1/01/48
.br
Husband: David Brailian
.br
Son: Boris
.br
Son: Alexander
.br
.(l
Ulitsa 25 Oktiabria 28,
Apt. 2, Kishinev 277001
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/48
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Brodinsky
.sp
.(l
Sevanskaya 46, Apt. 269
Korp. 4
Moscow 115516
USSR
.)l
.sp
(Computer Programmer)
.br
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Budniatsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Frieda
.br
Daughter: Anna (born 1970)
.br
.(l
Sofiaskaya 32-1-288
Leningrad 192236, USSR
.)l
.in +3
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1977. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Byaly Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Birth: 1932
.br
First Refusal: 1968
.sp
.br
.(l
Ul. Butlerova 24 Korp.1,
Apt.41, Moscow
USSR
.)l
.br
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Valery Bykovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1937
.br
Wife: Margarita Bykovsky, (nee Shapiro)
.br
Children: Two sons.
.(l
Matveevskaya 3/3, Apt. 229
Moscow 119501, USSR
.)l
.in +3
.sp
Before applying for an emigration visa in December 1978 Margarita was branch
editor of a scientific journal and Valery had a prestigious position in the
Academy of Science Institute as a computer scientist.
.sp
Both he and his wife were fired from their jobs in 1979. Bykovsky earned money
by reviewing papers on computer science and by doing translations.
(CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Veniamin Charny Dismissed From Job
.sp
Married
.br
Children: one
.br
.(l
Brianskaya 12
Apt. 86
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Mathematician and computer scientist. He and his wife lost their jobs after
applying to emigrate.(BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Chernenko
.sp
.(l
Liubertsy, Panki
Posiolok VUGI 18 Apt. 17
Moscovskaya Oblast 140004
USSR
.)l
.br
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Cherkassky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
9th Proezd Marinoy Roschi 2-12
Moscow, USSR (WCSJ)
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.in +3
Computer Scientist, graduated from Moscow state University.
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Chernobilsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: April 2, 1944
.br
Wife: Elena
.br
Daughters: Anya (1971), Genya (1974)
.br
Son: Joseph
.(l
Profsyuznaiya 119-2-319
Moscow RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.sp
He was released from jail at the end of his one year sentence in December 1982
and returned to Moscow. (CCS/CL/WCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Anna Churina Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Husband: Igor Churin
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer from Moscow. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Igor Churin Stripped of Scientific Degrees
.sp
Wife: Anna Churina
.sp
.in +3
Computer scientist from Moscow. He was stripped of his scientific degress
(Ph.D.) after applying for exit visa.(BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Cirelson Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1950
.br
.sp
.(l
Petro Lavrova St. 25, Apt 9
Leningrad S-28
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Probability theory specialist, now works as programmer
.br
(CCS/CCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Zinaida Dapshiene Jailed
.br
Born: 1951
.sp
Prison Address:
.(l
235300
Lithuanian SSR
Panevicius, Uchr. och-12/5
(CL/HWC)
.)l
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Arnold Dinerstein Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Tuchkov PEr. 11/6, Apt. 8
Leningrad 199153
RSFSR USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Radio/Computer Engineer
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Donin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Gaidara 64, Apt. 22
Odessa 270078
Ukr. SSr, USSR
.)l
.sp
Engineer-cybernetics
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Victor Dorina
.sp
Birth: 1/01/53
.br
Wife: Rakhil
.br
.(l
Molostovikh 11/6, Apt. 209
Moscow
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 8/16/80
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yacov Dubin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Pr. Lenina 91, Apt. 30
Minsk 220012
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Ph.D. -Cybernetics
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Dubrovsky
.sp
Birth: 1959
.br
First Refusal: 1976
.br
.(l
Otkritoye Shosso 21 Korp. 9
Apt. 168,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Eidelman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
24 Prosveschenia St.
Korp. 2, apt. 688
Leningrad 194355
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer Programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Edel Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Chernyakhovskogo 4-47
Moscow 125319
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.in +3
Computer specialist. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gennady Estraikh Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Simferopolsky Bulvar 21-2-71
Moscow 113452, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1979. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Victor Eydus
.sp
Birth: 12/11/54
.br
.(l
Novorossiyaskaya 6, Apt. 10
Leningrad 194048
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 3/27/79
.br
First Refusal: 8/01/79
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Josef Felder Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Pokrysheva St 4, Apt. 30
Leningrad 197228
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Feldman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1951
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Isaakovich Feldman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Zhigulevskaya 12-2-43
Moscow 109443
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1980
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Eugenia Feldshtein
.sp
Birth 1/01/36
.br
Husband: Aleksandr
.br
Daughter: Alla
.br
Daughter: Natalia
.(l
60 Let Oktiabria 5/2, Apt. 87
Solntsevo, Moscow
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 6/01/80
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Henry Ferdman
.sp
Birth: 1/01/36
.br
Wife: Larisa
.br
Daughter: Nataly
.br
Daughter: Tanya
.br
.(l
Mytninskaya 31, Apt. 3
Leningrad
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ian Fishman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: November 14, 1948
.br
Wife: Yanina
.(l
Sutiste 33-86
Tallin, Estonia USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Fima Flomenblit Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1937
.br
.(l
Yablonovka, Dorozhnaya 3/1/8
Krasnodar USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Garri Frenkel
.sp
Birth: 1/01/43
.br
Wife: Bronislava
.br
Daughter: Elina
.br
Daughter: Rita
.br
.(l
Per. Kuznechny 59, Apt. 2
Kishinev 277014
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 7/01/80
.br
.in +3
SCI Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lev Friedlander Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Staropenskovsko-Rasumovsky
Pr. 6/8, Korp. 3, Apt. 50
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Felix Friedlender Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Kremenchugskaya 5, Apt 228
.br
Moscow 121352, USSR
.sp
.in +3
Computer scientist, applied to emigrate in 1979. (CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Rita Fuks
.sp
Birth: 1955
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.(l
Krasnaya 15/27,
Odessa, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Aren Futer Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1947
.br
Married: Olga
.br
Children: Daughter (1977), Son (1979)
.br
.(l
Zilniaskya 7, KV. 2, Apt. 376
Moscow, USSR
telephone: 421-4856
.)l
.br
.in +3
A computer programmer actively involved with chess playing by computers
in the Soviet Union. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Fulmakht, Victor Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.in +3
Fulmakht and his family have had their refusal for life reconfirmed
in reply to a letter he sent to Gorbachev, a copy of which reached friends
in the West.
He explains that the classified information to
which he had access from 1971 - 1972, was related to the computer
processing of seismographic data on underground nuclear explosions.
This data has now become openly available within the verification measure on
underground nuclear testing agreed upon with the United States. Activists for
years,he has been a refusenik since 1981 on the grounds of his \*(lqaccess to classified
information\*(rq.
.sp
(CCS, FSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leona Gafinskaya
.sp
.(l
Malomozkovskoya 5/103
Moscow 129164
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer-program Engineer.
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Viktor Galperin
.sp
.(l
Ul. Yaroslavskaya 1/9, Apt. 83
Moscow 129164
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer-Mathematician
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Viacheslav Garbuz
.sp
Birth: 1/01/48
.br
Wife: Elena
.br
Son: Andrei
.br
Daughter: Anna
.br
Daughter: Leah
.br
Son: Menakhem
.br
.(l
Shenkurovsky Proezd 10-V,
Apt. 10,
Moscow 12749, RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 3/01/80
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Valery Garger
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
Wife: Irina
.br
Daughter: Ada
.br
Son: Alex
.br
First Refusal: 5/01/83
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (Software Engineering)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.br
Unemployed
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Irina Garger
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
Husband: Valery
.sp
.(l
Ananievesky Per. 5, Apt. 29
Moscow 103092
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
First Refusal: 5/01/83
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (Software Engineering)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.br
Unemployed
.br
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Valery Yakovlevich Gelfer
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
Wife: Olga
.br
Daughter: Hannah/Anna
.br
Son: Stanislav
.br
.(l
Onezhskaya 57/34, Apt. 104
Moscow 125414
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.br
Recent Refusal: 7/01/85
.in +3
SCI Computer Scientist
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Geller
.sp
Wife: Svetlana
.br
Daughter: Rita
.br
Daughter: Anna
.br
.(l
Veshniakovskaya Str. 17,
Apt. 66
Moscow 111539
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.br
Formerly refused for "no reason" or insufficient kinship, but in '87
was told status changed to secrecy.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Galina Genin
.sp
.(l
Pr. Morisa Toreza 30, Apt. 17
Leningrad 194021
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Pesakh Gamburd Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1944
.br
Married with two children
.br
.(l
Prianishnikova 5,
Korp. 2, Apt. 77,
Kishinev 277028
Moldavian SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
Visa application: 1979
.br
First refusal: 1980 (BK,CCS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lev Genkin
.sp
Birth: 1959
.br
First Refusal: 1987
.br
.(l
Ul. Udalzova 16 Apt. 141,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Emanuel Gerlovin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1943
.br
.(l
Tikhoretsky Prospekt 5
Korp. 2 Apt. 37
Leningrad 194064 USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Dina Gerlovin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Poetichesky Blvd. 11-2-97
Leningrad USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.in +3
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Geyzel
.sp
Born: 1958
.br
.(l
Trudovaya 20, Apt. 4
Munino 141170
Moskovskaya oblast
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer-Mathematician
.in -3
.sp
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Natalia Gimelfarb
.sp
.(l
Ul. Miroshnichenko 15, Apt. 42
Minsk 220045
Byelorussian SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Gitlin
.sp
Birth: 1937
.br
Wife: Faina
.br
Son: Alexander
.(l
Severny PR. 77/1 Apt. 43
Leningrad, RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Anatoly Goldberg Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Sofiskoe Shosse 48-1-37
Leningrad 196236
RSFSR USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
∂18-Sep-87 1756 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 2 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 17:56:04 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA18903; Fri, 18 Sep 87 19:51:02 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01025; Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:52:57 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:52:57 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709190052.AA01025@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 2 of 3
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate transmission I have sent you a copy of this report
in typewriter format so that you can read it easily on your terminal.
Enclosed is the troff file so that you can get a clean hard copy
if you so desire. Here is part 2 of 3. The original transmission
was too long.
Please acknowledge receipt. If I do not hear from you I will send
a hard copy on Monday by Federal Express both to Stanford and
Texas to make sure that you receive it before the 23rd.
Regards,
Jack
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Gofshtein
.sp
Birth: 1/01/50
.br
Wife: Elena
.br
Daughter: Dina
.br
.(l
Yanvarskovo Vosstaniya 9,
Apt. 40
Kiev 252010
Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 12/12/79
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (Programming)
.br
Aunt outside USSR is related to wife, Elena.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Igor Goldenberg
.sp
.(l
Mikrorayon 8A
Korpus 6, Apt. 62
Tyopli Stan
Moscow 117133
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer Programmer
.in -3
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Larisa Goldenberg
.sp
Birth: 1/01/36
.br
Husband: Igor Abkevich
.br
Daughter: Marina
.br
Son: Viktor
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Rusiaveli St. 3/2,
Apt. 29
Moscow 127254
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 11/01/81
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Levitan Goodman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Prospekt Budennogo 11/1/41
Moscow 105118, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gorbman, Emil
.sp
.(l
630090 Novosibirsk, 90,
Tzvetnoy Prospect 17, apt 18
USSR
.)l
.in +3
A graduate of Novosibirsk University,
A programmer by education but is employed as a worker.
.sp
(RH)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gorenshtein, Nina
.sp
.ls 1
.in +3
USSR
630090, Novosibirski,
90 Chemchugnaya, 30, apt7
.in -3
.sp
.in +2
A graduate of Novosobirsk University with degrees in mathematics and
biology. Had been working as a computer scientist and programmer.
Currently working in a job that does not require any education.
.sp
(RH)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lev Gorodetsky
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
Wife: Ekaterina
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (Programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS/SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ekaterina Veselova (Gorodetsky)
.sp
Husband: Lev
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
David Gorokhov
.sp
Birth: 1947
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.(l
Ul. Burakova 11-1-69
Bldg. Code 263
Moscow 117296
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computers
.in -3
.sp
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Asya Gorokhov
.sp
Birth: 1946
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.(l
Uk. Burakova 11 Korp.1
Apt.78, Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Govberg
.sp
Birth: 1935
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.(l
1 Pavlovsky Per. 5 Apt.128
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Eugene Grechanovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: July 9, 1947
.br
.(l
Moscow 107370
Otkrytoe sh. 2-6-102
USSR Moscow
tel: 16 89 659
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Mr. Grechanovsky was studying for a Ph.D but since applying for a visa to Israel
he lost his job in the Institute in which he was working and was not permitted
to continue his studies.
(CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Girgoriy Grinberg
.sp
Birth: 1948
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.(l
Ul. Utkina 39, Apt. 15
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Grinberg
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
Wife: Basia
.br
Daughter: diana
.br
Son: Lev
.br
.(l
Kirovogradskaya 24/1,
Apt. 361, Moscow 113519
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS/SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Reuben Gurevic Dismissed From Job
.sp
Age: 32
.(l
Maurice Thorez 33,
Apt. 205,
Leningrad 194223
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Reuben Gurevic works as a programmer and holds an MA from Leningrad University
in logic.
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Aron Gurevich
.sp
Birth: 1/03/38
.br
Wife: Galina
.br
Daughter: Elena
.br
Son: David
.br
Son: Reuven
.br
Daughter: Geula
.br
.(l
Boitsovaya 22/6, Apt. 7
Moscow 107150
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/74
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (Repairman)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Gutkin
.sp
Birth: 1957
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Kashirskoye Ghosse 94 Korp.2
Apt. 32,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Hanna Haskina
.sp
.(l
Mayakovskaya 2, apt. 13
Leningrad, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Studying computers
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Hurgun
.sp
.(l
Kosmonotov 18, Korp.2, Kv. 40
Leningrad, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Studies computers.
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Ioffe
.sp
.(l
Profsoyuznaya 97-1-203
Moscow 117279, USSR
.)l
.in +3
On 8 January 1987 Moscow Jewish refusenik Alexander Ioffe began a
hunger strike, seeking permission for himself and his family to emigrate
to Israel.
.sp
(CL)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lubov Kaminsky
.sp
.(l
D. Korotchenko 35B, Apt. 48
Kiev 252086
USSR
.)l
.in +3
Computer Operator
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Kantor
.sp
Birth: 1/01/38
.br
Wife: Maira
.br
Son: Yakov
.br
Daughter: Julia
.br
.(l
Sharikopodshipnikovaya 2,
Apt. 194
Moscow 109088
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 12/08/81
.br
First Refusal: 3/01/83
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.br
Demotion at work
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Reuven Kaplan (Roman)
.sp
.(l
Ul. Kazanets 15-1-61
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ilya M. Karshtedt Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1945
.br
.(l
Ul. Tvardovskogo, 13-2-121
Moscow,
RSFSR, USSR
(EV)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Katz
.sp
Birth: 1/01/52
.br
Wife: Irina
.br
Daughter: Larisa
.br
Daughter: Anna
.br
.(l
Shirokaya St. 117, Apt. 87
Novosibirsk 630096
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/83
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Kazarinaova
.sp
Birth: 1/01/47
.br
Son: Evgeny
.br
.(l
Serebristy Boulevard 24/4
Apt. 140
Leningrad 197341
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Keiss-Kuna
.sp
Husband: George
.br
Son: Andree
.br
Applied: 1974
.br
.(l
Ul. Plehanova 26-27-48
Leningrad 190000
USSR
.)l
.sp
(WCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Natalia Khasina
.sp
Birth: 8/20/40
.br
Husband: Gennady
.br
Daughter: Helen/Elena (emigrated 1984)
.br
Daughter: Yehudit
.br
.(l
Shosseinaya 40/1,
Apt. 74
Moscow 109388
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist Programming
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yulian Khasin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Victoria
.br
.(l
26 Bakinskikh Komissarov 11 Apt. 19,
Moscow, USSR
Tel: 434-02-85
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhel Kilberg Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Alleya Kotelnikova 5-128
Leningrad
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.in +3
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Natanovich Kimelfeld Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1943
.br
.(l
Konakovsky proezd 15, Apt. 23
Moscow 125565 USSR
(CCS/EV/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Khinich
.sp
Birth: 1956
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.(l
Pr. Vernadskogo 123-232
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Kholmiansky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Generala Belova 33-19-96
Moscow 115563
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.in +3
Computer scientist. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Liudmila Klich-Godina
.sp
Birth: 9/25/53
.br
Son: Vadim
.br
.(l
O. Dundich St. 10, Apt.260
Leningrad 196283
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
EGN Computer Specialist (Programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Knokh
.sp
Applied: 1975
.(l
Vavilovyh St. 4-1-48
Leningrad 195257
USSR
.)l
.sp
(WCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Kobrinsky
.br
Birth: 1940
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Ul. Rokotova 8 Korp. 2 Apt.272
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Samuil Kofman
.sp
Birth: 1/01/51
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Aleshina 2/1, Apt.32
Kishinev 277035
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Naum Kogan Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.in +3
Electronic engineer from Moscow. Expert in computer design. Applied to
emigrate in 1977. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Kogan
.sp
Birth: 1/01/53
.br
.(l
Karla Marksa St. 22, Apt. 83
Kishinev 35
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist - Programming
.sp
11/86: Alexander will not work on Shabbat.
12/86: Fired - 1
month to appeal. Asked to take Saturday off with loss of pay or work
extra hours. Denied redress.
.sp
(AFS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Kazarinova Koifman
.sp
.(l
Serebristry Bulvar 24/4, apt. 140
Leningrad 197341
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Zinaida Koitun
.sp
Birth: 1/01/52
.br
Husband: Anatoly
.br
Son: Alexander
.br
.(l
Dreizera St. 16, Apt. 91
Kiev 252217
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 9/01/80
.in +3
OTH Computer Specialist (Technician)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Rita Kolontyrskaya
.sp
.(l
Ul. Butchmi 3, Apt. 91
Kiev 152, Ukrainian, SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Electronic computer engineer.
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Konson
.sp
Birth: 1/01/47
.br
Wife: Serafima/Sima
.br
Daughter: Dina
.br
.(l
Kosmonavtov 29/3, Apt. 51
Leningrad 196211
RSRSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 11/01/77
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Larisa V. Kopchenova Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1938
.br
Son: Mikhail (1965)
.br
.(l
Vitebskaya 8, Apt. 98,
Moscow 121354, USSR
(EV)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Naum Korenfeld
.sp
Birth: 1941
.br
Wife: Elvira
.br
Daughter: Lilia
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Ul. Tchertanovskaya 3 Korp.1
Apt. 108,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS/SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Korsunsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: September 26, 1945
.br
.(l
Voroshilova 3/102,
Kiev 252166,
Ukranian SSR, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuli Kosharovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Irina, four children
.(l
Gerasima Kurina 4/3, Apt. 52,
Moscow 121108, USSR
(WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Naum Kosiansky
.sp
Birth: 1/01/81
.br
.(l
Vetluzhskaya 10, Apt 3
Novosibirsk 630056
RSFSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ada Kotliar
.sp
Husband: Efim Rozenknit
.br
Son: Vladimir
.br
.(l
Mendeleevo Institutskaya 19,
Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky 141570
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/78
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Natalya Kotliar
.sp
Husband: Yefim Rosenkvit
.br
.(l
Institutskaya 19, Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky Rayon
Moscow Oblast 141570 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Pavel Krivonos
.sp
Birth: 1930
.br
First Refusal: 1974
.br
.(l
Ul. Krasnykazanets 19 Korp. 1
Apt. 43, Moscow
USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Maria Kromchenko
.sp
Husband: Pavel
.br
.(l
Chicherina St. 65 Apt. 20
Odessa Ukr. SSR
USSR
.)l
.in +3
Computer Operator
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Pavel Kromchenko
.sp
Wife: Maria
.sp
.(l
Chicherina St. 65, Apt. 20
Odessa Ukr. SSR,
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer mechanic
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Sofija Kuliev
.sp
.(l
Pervomaiskaja 115, Apt. 8
Baku 370009
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer-MS in Physics
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Kuravsky
.sp
Birth: 1/01/49
.br
Wife: Irina
.br
Son: David
.br
Child:
.br
.(l
Sholkovskoye Shosse 89/3,
Apt. 708
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Kuznetsov
.sp
Birth: 1/01/47
.br
Wife: Tsiala
.br
Daughter: Polina
.br
.(l
Laevastiku 8, Apt. 7
Tallin 20003
Estonian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.in +3
SCI Computer Scientist (candidate for Ph.D degree)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Aleksander Lavut Exiled
.sp
Wife: Sima Mostinskaya
.br
Daughter: Tatiana
.br
.(l
129050 Moscow
2nd Troitsky Per., 6
Apt. 16
tel: 2843693
.)l
.in +3
He has been sent into exile in Chumikan, Tunguro Chumikan district,
Khabarovsky Territory. (CL)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Tatiana Leibovich
.sp
Husband: Dmitry Novik
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Vernosti 10/4/142
Leningrad 195256
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Systems analyst & programmer.
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Lerman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: November 28, 1946
.br
.(l
Serebristy Bulvar 16,
Korp. 1-237
Leningrad 197227, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Aleksandr Lerner Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Dmitriya Ulyanova 4/2/322
Moscow 117333, RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Internationally known in the field of cybernetics, was the first
scientist of his caliber to apply for permission to emigrate from the
USSR in 1971. As a result of requesting permission to emigrate,
Lerner was dismissed from his academic, research, and editorial posts.
(CL, CCS, TWP, NYT, NSN)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Lerner Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1951
.(l
Dimitriya Ulyanova 4/2/322,
Moscow 117333, USSR
.sp
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Grigory Levin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1951
.br
.(l
Primorskoe Shosse 336, Apt. 34,
Sestrorestk USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.ls 2
.b
Lev Lifshits Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Anna
.br
Son: Boris (born 12/14/67)
.br
Daughter: Maria (born 3/1/75)
.(l
Kirovsky Pr. 64-5-139
Leningrad 197022, USSR
.)l
.in +3
Systems programmer from Kharkov. He has been denied an exit
visa since 1978. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Igor Lifshits
.sp
Birth: 1/01/54
.br
Wife: Dora
.br
.(l
Ploschad Narodnaya,
Guardiya, Apt. 4
Lvov 290006
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 4/01/77
.in +3
ENG. Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Victor Linetz Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Birth: 1943
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.(l
U. Molodyogenaja 3, Apt. 52
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Candidate of Technical Sciences Cybernetics
.in -3
.sp
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Emilia Linkova
.sp
Birth: 9/12/47
.br
Husband: Gennady Grubman
.br
Daughter: Irina
.br
.(l
Gvardeitsev Shironintsev 13,
Apt. 85
Kharkov 310153
Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal 10/22/79
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Larisa Lokhvitskaya Jailed
.sp
Born:1954
.br
.(l
Ukranian SSR, Kharkov-129,
Uchr. YuZh-313/54-8,
USSR
(CL)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Felix Luboshitz
.sp
Birth: 1/01/41
.br
Wife: Larisa
.br
Daughter: Irene
.br
Son: Ilya
.br
.(l
Ryazansky 87/1, Apt. 54
Moscow 109542
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 8/01/80
.br
First Refusal: 8/01/81
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Srogey Lugovskoy
.sp
Birth: 1955
.br
First Refusal: 1980
.br
.(l
Ul. Yunykh Lenintzov 78
Apt. 48,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS/SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Nellie Maizlin
.sp
Birth: 1/26/49
.br
Husband: Isaak
.br
Son: Dmitry
.br
Daughter: Dina
.br
.(l
26-TI Bakinskikh Komissarov St. 7/4
Apt. 73
Moscow 117571
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Albert Makovoz
.sp
.(l
Umanskaya 51/69
Minsk Byelorussian SSR,
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Cyberneticist
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vadim Maler Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Vitebsky Avenue 31-4, Apt. 66,
Leningrad USSR
(SB)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lilia Marinova Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1947
.br
.(l
Bolotnikovskaya 49/80,
Moscow 113209, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Miroslav Marinovich Jailed
.sp
Prison Address:
.(l
P/YA 5110/1UE,
Moscow, USSR
(CL)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Stella Markel
.sp
Birth: 1/01/36
.br
Husband: Leonid
.br
Daughter: Katz
.br
.(l
23-G Augusta St. 62,
Apt. 57
Kharkov 72, Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Medvedovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Marina
.br
Children: three born 1978, 1982, and 1984
.br
.(l
Ul. Akademika Yangelya 14-7-24
Moscow 113534
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Leonid is a mathematician and computer programmer. He Applied to emigrate
in 1979 and in 1981. Each time they were refused because "Marina's father has
a classified job" (he is not trying to emigrate however).
.in -3
.sp
(CCS/AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Oscar Mendeleev Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1928
.br
.(l
Rainisa Blvd 14/2/6,
Moscow 123459, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Applied for an exit visa in 1970.
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir (Zeev) Meshkov
.sp
Born: 1952
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.(l
Ul. Rayasansky 83
Korp. 1, Apt. 76
Moscow
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer specialist
.in -3
.sp
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
.)b
∂18-Sep-87 1804 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 3 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 18:04:01 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA18933; Fri, 18 Sep 87 19:54:51 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01032; Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:56:39 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:56:39 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709190056.AA01032@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TROFF FORMAT - PART 3 of 3
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate transmission I have sent you a copy of this report
in typewriter format so that you can read it easily on your terminal.
Enclosed is the troff file so that you can get a clean hard copy
if you so desire. The original transmission bounced. Here is
Part 3 of 3. The last part.
Please acknowledge receipt. If I do not hear from you I will send
a hard copy on Monday by Federal Express both to Stanford and
Texas to make sure that you receive it before the 23rd.
Regards,
Jack
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexandr Messerman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Ul. Udaltsova 4, Apt. 55
Moscow 117415, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Mathematician and computer scientist. Applied to emigrate in 1978. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Dmitri Meta
.sp
.(l
Krasnogornaya 18/1/65
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Stanislav Mezhemovsky First Refusal: 3/01/78
.sp
Wife: Natalia Leonidovna Zaltsman
.br
.(l
Kosmonatov St. 19/4/96
Leningrad 196211
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(AFS/CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
David Mikhalev Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: one
.br
.(l
Ul. Bolshaia Cherkizovskaia 6-4-105
Moscow B-61, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer scientist. Applied to emigrate in 1978. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Mikhlin
.sp
Birth: 1/01/50
.br
Wife: Evgenia
.br
Daughter: Alla
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Marshala Malinovskovo 11,
Apt. 51
Kiev 212
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal 2/01/80
.in +3
SCI Computer Specialist
.sp
.in +3
In 3/85, his apartment was searched & over 50 books confiscated - mainly
religious or Jewish content. Fired from job. Does translation work.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexandra Mirman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Husband: Mikhail
.br
Children: one
.br
Applied for exit visa: 1983
.br
.(l
Lenina 74
Apt 5
Riga USSR
.)l
.in +3
Mathematician and computer programmer. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Mirman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Alexandra
.br
Children: one
.br
Applied for exit visa: 1983
.br
.(l
Lenina 74
Apt. 5
Rega USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Mathematician and computer programmer. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Modilevsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1946
.br
.(l
Stadionny Pr 8-4, Apt. 64,
Kharkov 310091,
Ukrainian SSR, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Maya Morozovich
.sp
Birth: 1/14/59
.br
Husband: Mikhail
.br
Daughter: Alla
.br
.(l
Tikotskovo 2, Apt. 77
Minsk 119
Byelorussian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 5/01/79
.br
First Refusal: 8/01/79
.in +3
PRO Computer Specialist (Technician)
.sp
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Moshkov
.sp
Birth: 1952
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Pyazansky Pr. 83/2/ Korp.1
Apt.76,
Moscow, USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Robert Nasarian Jailed
.sp
Prison Address:
.(l
P/Ya 5110/1-Zhkh,
Moscow, USSR
(CL)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ida Nudel
.sp
.(l
Ul. Sovietskaya 67/2
Bendery 278100
Moldavia SSR,
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Economist/ Programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Odessky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: two
.br
.(l
5-th mikroraion
Ul. Yaseneva 67-5-190
Moscow 117463, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Mathematician and computer scientist. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Tamara Okun
.sp
.(l
Pr. Slava 16, Apt. 266
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Economist & computer systems.
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Olchovich
.sp
.(l
Sevastyanova St. 4, apt. 148
Leningrad
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
trained as computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Semyon Okunev Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Garmatnaya 40, Apt. 14
Kiev 67
Ukranian SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
.sp
.in +3
Seymon is a 48 year old computer engineer.
Family applied for exit visas in April 1979.
The Okunev's relatives live in Israel. (HRCC/CCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Marat Osnis Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: January 1, 1947
.br
.(l
Ordzhonikidze 11/5,
Chernovtsy, Ukrainian SSR,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Margaret Pelakh
.sp
.(l
Dimitrov 16, Kp. 4, Apt. 15
Kishinev, Moldavian SSR,
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Chemical cybernetic engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alla Pilatovskaya
.sp
.in +3
Dr. Alla Pilatovskaya is an applied mathematician and designer of software.
Until June 1986, she was employed by INFORMELECTRO
(Institute for Information Processing in Electrotechnical Industry),
Moscow. She was fired for being "ideologically unfit for her position."
.sp
(CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Adelina Podgorny
.sp
Birth: 4/05/48
.br
Husband: Gennady
.br
Daughter: Elena
.br
Daughter: Natalia
.br
.(l
Ploshchad Lypneva 10, Apt.4
Lvov 290018
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 12/01/79
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Podgoetski
.sp
.(l
Dobrolubova St.
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Engineer, now computer operator
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuli Prage
.sp
.(l
Ulica Fornichevvy
Dom 8, korp. 2, apt. 241
Moscow 12481
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Prestin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: December 13, 1934
.br
.(l
Uralskaya 6/4/11
Moscow USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Polina Pruss
.sp
Birth: 1/01/49
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Gonty 6, Apt. 2
Chernovtsy,
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 3/01/80
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.sp
Parents were granted exit visas in '80, but refused to leave daughter,
Polina, behind. Polina was refused an exit visa because she worked in Kazan.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Roman Pyatigorsky
.sp
Birth: 1947
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Ul. Akademika Skryabina 28/1
Apt. 175,
Moscow, USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.sp
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Rabinovitch
.sp
Birth: 9/30/47
.br
Wife: Galina
.br
Son: Leonid
.br
.(l
Ul. Smolnaya 23, Korp. 2, Apt.220
Moscow
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 9/15/79
.br
First Refusal: 5/01/81
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(AFS, CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Liudmila Rabinovich
.sp
Birth: 1/01/46
.br
.(l
Malaya Tulskaya 2/1/4, Apt. 254
Moscow 113191
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Iosif Radomiselsky
.sp
.(l
Kubinskaya 10/61
Leningrad 196128 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yulia Ratinov
.sp
.(l
Chernyshevskogo 7/1, Pat. 124
Moscow 101000
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Liudmila Razbaeva
.sp
Birth: 4/25/55
.br
Husband: Igor
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Marshall Zaherov 27/3,
Apt. 62
Leningrad 198328
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 8/01/80
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mark Reznik Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1939
.(l
Basseinaya 37.84,
Leningrad 196070, USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gennady Reznikov
.sp
Birth: 1/01/37
.br
Wife: Sulamif
.br
Son: Sergei
.br
Son: Vladimir
.br
Son: Michael
.br
.(l
Butlerov St. 10, Apt. 258
Moscow, B-485 USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 1/01/79
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/80
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.sp
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ilya Reznikov
.sp
Wife:
.br
Son: Il'ich
.br
.(l
Butlerova St. 26/1,
Apt. 10
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Boris Roberman
.sp
Birth: 10/27/40
.br
Wife: Sofia
.br
Daughter: Maria
.br
.(l
Warshavskaya St. 69,
Apt. 133
Leningrad 196240
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 3/01/80
.br
First Refusal: 6/01/80
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (MS degree)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Robinson
.sp
Birth: 1/01/61
.br
.(l
Prospect Marshala Zhukova 60/2,
Apt. 224
Leningrad 198261
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Rodin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Husband: Yuri
.br
Daughter: Natasha
.br
.(l
6 Institute Prospect 79
Chernogolovka
Moscovskaya Oblast 142432
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer. (WCSJ/AFS)
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yury Rodny Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1944
.(l
Marshala Vasilevskogo 1,
Korp. 2, KV.73,
Moscow 123098, USSR
(CL)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Daniel Romanovsky
.sp
.(l
Morisatereza Pr. 5, Apt. 14
Leningrad, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Natalya Kotliar
.sp
Husband: Yefim Rosenkvit
.sp
.(l
Institutskaya 19, Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky Rayon
Moscow Oblast 141570 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Rosenthal
.sp
.(l
Applied Mathematician, Hydromechanic
Lermontovsky Prospect 10-53
Apt. 62
Leningrad 190008 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer, economist, applied mathematician, hydromechanic
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gregory Rosenshtein Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: June 15, 1939
.br
.(l
Butlerova 2/1/69
Moscow 117485, USSR
.sp
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Rosenzweig
.sp
Birth: 1/01/54
.br
Wife: Katherine
.br
Son: Alexander
.br
Son: Maxim
.br
.(l
Kalinin Prospect 37/12,
Apt. 50
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 1/01/80
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/84
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Viacheslav Royak Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: April 30, 1946
.(l
Dzerzhinskogo 57,
Apt. 1
Bendery, Moldavian SSR,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ/AFS)
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 5/01/77
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Nekhemya Rozengauz Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Chilanzar 12
Kvartal 50, Apt. 30
Tashkent, Uzbek SSR USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 5/01/77
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Gregory Rosenshtein Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: June 15, 1939
.(l
Butlerova 2/1/69,
Moscow 117485, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Rozental
.sp
Born: 1954
.br
First Refusal: 1981
.br
.(l
Ul. Bolshaya Cherklzovskaya 3 Korp. 3
Apt. 79
Moscow, USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Rozin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: one
.br
.(l
Anadyrsky Proezd 61, Apt. 11
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Electronic engineer and computer programmer. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lena Schupak
.sp
.(l
Karolinishku St. 3,
Apt. 69
Vilnius 232044
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/81
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Anatoly Schvartzman
.sp
.(l
Ryazanskaya Pr. 87/1, Apt. 71
Moscow RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Candidate of Electronics Cyberneticist
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yevgeny Shahnovitch
.sp
.(l
2 Dinitrov 22/1/apt. 101
Leningrad 192286
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alex Shainsky
.sp
.(l
Konjushenny Lane, kv. 1/56
Apt. 48
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
System programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yevgeny Shaknovich Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1948
.(l
Dmitrova 22,
Korp. 1, Apt. 101,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Michael Shapiro
.sp
.(l
Leningrad
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lev Shapiro Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: January 6, 1940
.(l
Kanal Griboyedova 80, Apt. 13,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Grigory Shapiro
.sp
Birth: 1/01/47
.br
Wife: Zemfira
.br
Daughter: Yulia
.br
.(l
Kupchinskaya 29/1,
Apt. 225
Leningrad, RSFSR USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 6/01/80
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Sheiba
.sp
Birth: 7/08/61
.br
.(l
Moskovsky Prospect 165,
Apt. 105
Leningrad 196070
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 4/21/80
.br
First Refusal: 8/01/80
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.sp
On 5/18/87, Leonid entered a military hospital in Leningrad. Last applied to
emigrate, 3/87 - told not to reapply till 1990. He has a wife who is an
American.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexandr Shifrin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Korablestroitelei 46-1-235
Leningrad 199155, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer Programmer. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Arkady Shifrin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
Korablestroitelei 46-1-255
Leningrad 199155 USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuri Shikhevorich Arrested
.sp
Born: April 9, 1933
.br
Wife: Alevtina Plusuina
.br
.(l
Moscow Mishina fsr.
12, apt. 100
.)l
.sp
ARRESTED: November 1983
.br
CHARGE: Anti-Soviet agitation under the investigation in KE13 prison in Moscow
.sp
Mathematician, also spent one and half years, from 1972-1974, in a psychiatric
hospital on political reasons.
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Igor Shmuilovich
.sp
Birth: 3/02/48
.br
Wife: Kira
.br
Son: Leonid
.br
.(l
Dekabristov St. 26,
Apt. 104
Moscow 127273
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 4/01/79
.br
First Refusal: 2/01/81
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Samuel Shmulitch
.sp
.(l
.Ul. Marshalzakharova 35/1, Apt, 186
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexandr Shustorovich Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: two
.sp
.(l
Profsoiuznaya 116-3-74
Moscow 117437, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Mathematician and Computer scientist. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Sindler
.sp
Birth: 1/17/53
.br
Wife: Liubov
.br
.(l
Ushinskovo 39/3,
Apt. 237
Leningrad 195268
USSR
.)l
First Refusal: 10/01/78
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
.sp
Formerly held classified job, but never worked on classified
projects - left job in '76. Now works as janitor, watchman,
after being fired from his job or forced to resign.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Dina Iosifovna Sivoshinskaya Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1947
.br
Husband: Emanuel Gerlovin
.br
Son: Lev (1976)
.br
.(l
Tikhoretzky Prospect 5,
Korp 2, Apt. 37,
Leningrad 194064, USSR
(WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vadim Slavin
.sp
.(l
6-oi Novopodmoskovny per. 6
apt. 31
Moscow 125130
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Slepak
.sp
.(l
ul. Vesnena 8-10-51
Moscow 121002, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Vladimir and Maria Slepak broke their three-and-a half-year "silence"
in September with a letter to Gorbachev, appealing once again to the Soviet
leader to allow them to join their children and mother in the West.
The Slepaks have been awaiting exit visas for almost 17 years.
.sp
(SJR/CCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Evgenia Smorodinskaya
.sp
Birth: 1/01/41
.br
Husband: Eduard
.br
Daughter: Yanina
.br
Son: Ilya
.br
.(l
Karla Marksa St. 10,
Apt. 12
KIEV 260001
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/79
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexandr Solomadin Dismissed From Job
.sp
Married
.br
Children: three
.sp
.(l
Miklukho-Maklaya 51-1-19
Moscow USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer. He lost his job, and he is now working as a night watchman
in a church. (BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Efrem Sorkin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
ul. Serdicha 11-31
Minsk 220082
Byelorussian SSR, USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1977
.br
.in +3
Computer scientist. (WCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Oleg Spinner Denied Exit Visa
.sp
.(l
51 G, Kv 84,
Kharkov 310120 Ukr.,
SSR USSR
(WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Stolin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: two
.sp
.(l
Ul. Zhaibo 3, Apt. 198
Vilnius, Luthuanian SSR
232050 USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Mathematician and computer programmer.
(BK)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Stolyar
.sp
Birth: 1959
.br
First Refusal: 1983
.br
.(l
Studencheskaya Ul.19 Apt.100
Moscow, USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Strizhevsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1937
.br
.(l
Sumskoi Pr. 12-4, Apt. 1,
Moscow 113208,
USSR
Tel: 3110617
Wife: Ludmilla (nee Bulgotova), born 1948
Daughter: Dina born 1979
Refusal: January 1982
Date of First Application: 1978
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Received a PhD in Statistics. Leonid and wife have been unable to work
professionally since applying for exit visas. (IPCSJ)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Ilya Sukhodolsky
.sp
.(l
Rossozhansky Proezd 4, Korp. 3
Apt. 73
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.in +3
computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Elena Sverdlova
.sp
Husband: Alexander
.br
Daughter: Exaterina/Yanna
.br
Daughter: Alexandrovna
.br
.(l
Borodinskaya 13
Apt. 63
Leningrad
USSR
.)
.br
First Refusal: 2/01/78
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.br
Unemployed
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Aba Taratuta Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: September 6, 1930
.br
.(l
Prospekt Kosmonavtov
27-1, Apt. 171,
Leningrad 196211 USSR
(SB/CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Igor Tchorny
.sp
.(l
Luzhnetsky Pr. 1, apt. 10
Moscow 119048
.)l
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Umansky Warned
.sp
.(l
Leon Paegle 19, Apt. 6,
Riga USSR
.)l
.br
Born: 1940
.sp
.in +3
Computer engineer from Riga, has received a "Warning under the Decreee
of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet" of 25 December
1972 in connection with his alleged Zionist Activities. (CCS)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
Lydia Vainshtein
.sp
Birth: 1/01/50
.br
Husband: Alexander Mironovich Turetsky
.br
Daughter: Anna
.br
.(l
Geodezicheskaya 15/1,
Apt. 6
Novosibirsk 630107 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 3/21/80
.br
First Refusal: 5/07/80
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Evgeny Vaisblit
.sp
Birth: 7/08/57
.br
.(l
Prospect Vernadskovo 11/19.
Apt. 282
Moscow 117311 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 2/15/74
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Valdman
.sp
Birth: 1/01/36
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Udaltsova 10,
Apt. 199
Moscow 117415 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Vorobeyv
.sp
Birth: 1/01/59
.br
Wife: Marina
.br
Son: Dmitri
.br
.(l
Ulitsa Profoyuznaya 101/3
Apt. 200
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.br
First Applied: 1/01/85
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist (programming
.br
Fired from work or forced to resign
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Evgeny Yuriev
.sp
Birth: 1/01/49
.br
Wife: Liudmila
.br
Son: Yuri
.br
.(l
Gasheka St. 2,
Apt. 551
Leningrad 192281
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/80
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yakov Valdman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Birth: 1936
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Ul. Vdaltzova 10 Apt. 199
Moscow, USSR
.)l
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Varvak Warned
.sp
.(l
Bulvar Liesi Ukrainki 15a,
Apt. 9
Kiev - 193
USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
He was arrested in April 1983, sentenced to 11 days for hooliganism and
threatened with a lengthy term in the Gulag if there was further offense on
his part.
(CCS,CL)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Anatoly Vasilevsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: July 10,1931
.br
Wife: Natalya
.(l
3 Vladimirskaya 26,
Korp. 1, Apt. 6,
Moscow 111401 USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Natalya Vasilevskaya Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: February 4, 1949
.br
Husband: Anatoly
.br
.(l
3 Vladimirskaya 26,
Korp. 1, Apt. 6,
Moscow 111401 USSR
(BK/CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Evgenia Vasserman
.sp
.(l
Pr. Kultury 27/1, Apt. 89
Leningrad 195278
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimit Veitsel Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Married
.br
Children: three
.br
.(l
5-ya Sovetskaya 71, Apt 8
Leningrad 193130, USSR
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Computer programmer, applied to emigrate in 1981. (CL)
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Tatyana Velikanova
.sp
Born: February 3, 1942
.br
.(l
Son: Fedor
117218 Moscow
Krasikova fsr. 19, apt 86
tel: 1256546
.)l
.br
.(l
466100 Kaz. SSR,
Mangyshlakskaya oblast,
Lennailinsky r-n
Mengyshlak
.)l
.br
ARRESTED: 1979
.br
SENTENCE: 4 years strict regime camp plus five years exile. Was
released from exile in 1987.
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Volvovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: May 11, 1942
.br
Wife: Ludmilla
.br
Daughter: Kira
.(l
Krilova Ulitsa 14a, Apt. 115,
Gorky USSR
(CCS/CL/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Rima Yakir
.sp
.(l
96 Profsoyuznaya 5, Apt. 35
Moscow 117485
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer engineer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Mikhail Yakobson
.sp
.(l
Namyotkina 19/2, Apt. 24
Moscow 117420 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
Computer Programmer
.in -3
.sp
(CCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vadim Yankov Jailed
.sp
Born: January 31, 1935
.br
Wife Natalia
.br
.(l
Moscovskoe Shosse 57/1/6,
Dolgoprudnoe,
Moscow Oblast 141700,
USSR
tel: 4080539
.)l
.sp
SENTENCE: 4 years of camp and 3 years of exile for anti-Soviet agitation.
.sp
(CCS/BK
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yosef Yanovsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1944
.(l
Narodnaya 8, Apt. 13,
Angarsk USSR
(CCS)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Lev Yakobson
.sp
Birth: 1933
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Ul. Miklukho-Maklaya 76
Korp.3 Apt. 76, Moscow
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Jacob Yoffe Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1937
.(l
Svetlanovsky Pr. 113,
Korp. 1, Apt. 97,
Leningrad USSR
.)l
.sp
First Refusal: 1975
.sp
(CCS/WCSJ/SJEIC)
.br
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Irina Yorovitsky
.sp
Born: 3/02/50
.br
Husband: Victor
.br
First Refusal: 6/01/79
.(l
Novoysenevsky Pr. 5/1 Apt. 364
Moscow 117588 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.in +3
Computer Specialist (programming)
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Evgeny Yuriev
.sp
Born: 1/01/49
.br
Wife: Liudmila Vladimirovich
.br
.(l
Gasheka St. 2, Apt. 551
Leningrad 192281 RSFSR
USSR
.)l
.sp
First Refusal: 1/01/80
.sp
.in +3
Computer Specialist
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Victor Yurovitzky
.sp
Birth: 1950
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.(l
Novoyasenevsky Pr. 5 Korp.1
Apt. 364,
Moscow, USSR
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Leonid Yuzefovich
.sp
Birth: 1949
.br
First Refusal: 1978
.br
.(l
Bratskaya Ul. 25 Apt.2,
Apt. 133,
Moscow, USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Zaidman, Ilya
.sp
.ls 1
.in +7
630090 Novosibirsk
.br
90 Tereshkova 4
.br
apt 65
.in -7
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Pavel Zaslavsky Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1947
.br
Daughter: Lina (1975)
.br
.(l
Dubinskaya 2,5,25
Moscow 127540 USSR
(WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Roald Isaakovich Zelichenock Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: September 29, 1936
.br
Wife: Galina
.br
.(l
Nab. Karpovky 19, Apt. 56,
Leningrad 197022,
USSR
.)l
First Refusal: 1978
sp
(WCSJ)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Yuri Zieman Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1938
.(l
Maria Uljanova Str. 19, Apt. 98,
Moscow 117331, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Zikerman
.sp
Wife: Viktoria
.br
Son: Daniel
.br
.(l
Greceskij Prospect
Leningrad, USSR
.)l
.br
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
.sp
Alexander works in spare time making wedding hats.
Was student of Vladimir Lifshitz.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Miron Zilberbrand
.sp
Birth: 1945
.br
First Refusal: 1979
.br
.(l
Sul. Sokolinoy Gory 12-A
Apt. 13, Moscow
USSR
.)l
.sp
(SJEIC)
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Vladimir Zininberg Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Born: 1954
.br
.(l
Nevsky Prospekt 140, Apt. 17,
Leningrad 193036
USSR
(WCSJ)
.)l
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
.b
Alexander Leontievich Zosin Denied Exit Visa
.sp
Wife: Nina
.br
Son: Leonid age 15
.br
Mother: Hana
.br
.(l
USSR, Ukraine SSR,
Kiev - 33,
Saksaganskogo str., 27, Apt. 13
.)l
.sp
.in +3
Graduated from Kiev State University, and worked at Kiev Institute of
Cybernetics as a hardware designer. Refused an exit visa in 1980 and has
had to work as a construction laborer since. (SB
.sp
.in -3
.)b
.sp 2
.(b
Alexei Zubkov
.sp
Birth: 1/01/56
.br
Wife: Liudmila
.br
.(l
3-Y Mikhalovsky Per. 20/3
Apt. 41
Moscow A-239
USSR
.)l
.br
First Refusal: 1/01/80
.sp
.in +3
ENG Computer Scientist
.sp
Refused for father's military service.
.in -3
.sp
(AFS)
.)b
∂18-Sep-87 1819 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 1 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 18:19:25 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA19262; Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:09:07 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01044; Fri, 18 Sep 87 21:11:03 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 21:11:03 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709190111.AA01044@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 1 of 3
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate message I am sending you a troff format of the
same file. I counted the list and there should be 264 entries.
My original transmission bounced. I am cutting this into
three parts. This is PART 1 of 3.
Please let me know that you have received it. If not, I will
mail you a hard copy of the output.
Regards,
Jack
SOVIET
COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS WHOSE SCIENTIFIC FREEDOM
and HUMAN RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED - 1987
Editor: Jack Minker, University of Maryland
Pavel Abramovich Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Marta
Ul. Baikalskaya 30, Korp. 2, Apt.87,
Moscow 107207, USSR
(CCS)
Yuri Akomorovsky
Ul. Ilyicha 21, Apt. 601
Adademgorodok,
Novisibirsk,
RSFSR,
USSR
(Cyberneticist)
(CCSJ)
Grigory Mendelevich Akselrod
Wife: Elena Mikhailovna
Ulitsa Bela Kuna 8, Apt. 193
Leningrad 192238
RSFSR, USSR
Engineer Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Boris Agarkov Denied Exit Visa
Budapeshtskoe Shosse 35-2-36
Leningrad 192212
USSR
First Refusal: 1979
Computer scientist.(WCSJ)
Solomon Alber Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1931
1st Street 16, Apt. 28,
Chernogolovka Moscow Oblast,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Irina Alieveskaya Denied Exit Visa
Husband: Igor Smirnov
Born: March 22, 1948
4th Sovietskaya 3-A,
Korp. 9, Apt. 34,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Anatoly Moiseevich Altshuler
Wife: Tatiana Isaakovna Katcherets
Son: Igor Anatolievich
Daughter: Natalia Anatolievna
Bolshoi Deviatinsky Pereulok 5,
Apt. 67
Moscow 121099
RSFSR, USSR
ENG. Computer Scientist
(AFS)
First Refusal: 12/23/81
Alexander Antonov Denied Exit Visa
39/2 Zagrebsky Blvd., Kv. 121
Leningrad 192283
USSR
First Refusal: 1979
Computer programmer. (WCSJ)
Margarita Nikolaevna Apter
Birth: 1/01/51
Husband: Semion Klementievich
Son: Alexander Semionovich
Ulitsa Veidenbauma 39,
Apt. 6
Riga 226001
Latvian-USSR
ENG. Computer Scientist (programming)
First Refusal: 1/01/78
(AFS)
Valery Aronov Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: one
Leningradskoe Shosse 1-20-62
Moscow, 125445, USSR
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1977.(BK)
Alexander Atterman
Birth: 1/01/58
Wife: Elena Atterman
Kosinskaya St. 26/1,
Apt. 129
Moscow, RSFSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Mikhail Bachmutsky
Veshnyakovskaya 6, Korp. 5, Apt 119
Moscow 115407,
USSR
Computer programmer, engineer.
(CCSJ)
Vyacheslav Bakhmin Jailed
Born: September 25, 1947
Wife: Tatyana Mikhailovna Khromova
Son: Andrei (1972)
Wife's Address:
107497 Moscow
ul. Baikalskaya, 46
korp. 2, kv. 52
USSR
Served a 4 year sentence for defaming the Soviet state. Released
on schedule in February 1984. Could not get Moscow "propiska". Now lives
with his mother in Kalinin. He has been put under administrative surveillance. (CCS)
Yuri Balovenkov Denied Exit Visa
In mid 1982, Balovenkov was visited by his wife, Elena Balovenkov of Baltimore,
in Moscow, where he was conducting a hunger strike in hope of emigrating.
Balovenkov is a computer specialist: he has been denied an exit visa to the
United States on the grounds that he knows state secrets. (CL/TWP)
Ilya Lvovitch Baron
Wife: Sima Efimovna
Born: 1957
Ul. Krasny Vostok 105/17
Baku 65, Azerbaidzhan
Applied 1980
First Refusal: 1981
Computer engineer
Mikhail Petrovich Beliakov
Birth: 8/25/18
Wife: Antonia Alexeevna
Son: Oleg Mikhailovich
Son: Igor Mikhailovich
Ulitsa Festivalnaya 31, Apt. 20
Moscow 125915
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/76
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Grigory Irakhmilovich Belilovsky
Birth: 1/01/48
Wife: Rakhilia Davidovna
Daughter: Violeta Grigorievna
Son: Igor Grigorievich
Ulitsa Kuibysheva 22/14,
Apt. 15
Odessa 27007
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Vladimir Belkin
Leninsky Pr. 22, Apt. 46
Minsk 220030
Byel. SSR
USSR
(Computer Engineer-Architect)
(CCSJ)
Rita Nisanovna Berkovich
Birth: 5/01/44
Husband: Mikhail Berkovich
Son: Ladislav Mikhailovich
Bulvar Sovetskoy Armii 17/1,
Apt. 40, Kishinev 270043
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 3/01/81
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Nadezhda Davidovna Beznogova
Birth 1/09/42
Smolny Prospect 5, Apt. 17
Leningrad 193124
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 12/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Valery Konstantinovich Bichovsky
Birth: 1/01/37
Wife: Margarita Khaimovna
Son Konstantin Valerievich
Son: Dmity Valerievich
Ulitsa Vernaya 3/3, Apt. 299
Moscow 119501
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 11/01/80
Fired from work or forced to resign
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS/CCSJ)
Maya M. Blank Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1946
Married, Two children
Ul. H. Lifshitz 27a, Apt. 10,
Kishinev 277024
Moldavian SSR, USSR
(BK)
Oleg Boichenko Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Alla
Son: Oleg
Daughter: Olga
First Refusal: 1/01/82
75 Gorky St. Apt. 4
Grodno, USSR
Electronic enginer and computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1979.
(AFS)
Alexsandr Bolonkin Exiled
Born: March 14, 1933
Wife: Margarita
Son: Vladimir
Family Address:
50 Pogonny proezd,
Korp. 2, Apt. 2
Moscow, USSR
Tel: 169 34 26
(CL/CSCE/HWC)
Semion Borovinsky
Birth 01/01/48
Wife: Natalia
Daughter: Zoya
Daughter: Julia
Grachesky Prospect D-15,
Apt. 19
Leningrad 1931130
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
(AFS)
Liubov Brailian
Birth: 1/01/48
Husband: David Brailian
Son: Boris
Son: Alexander
Ulitsa 25 Oktiabria 28,
Apt. 2, Kishinev 277001
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/48
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Mikhail Brodinsky
Sevanskaya 46, Apt. 269
Korp. 4
Moscow 115516
USSR
(Computer Programmer)
(CCSJ)
Mark Budniatsky Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Frieda
Daughter: Anna (born 1970)
Sofiaskaya 32-1-288
Leningrad 192236, USSR
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1977. (BK)
Leonid Byaly Denied Exit Visa
Birth: 1932
First Refusal: 1968
Ul. Butlerova 24 Korp.1,
Apt.41, Moscow
USSR
(SJEIC)
Valery Bykovsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1937
Wife: Margarita Bykovsky, (nee Shapiro)
Children: Two sons.
Matveevskaya 3/3, Apt. 229
Moscow 119501, USSR
Before applying for an emigration visa in December 1978 Margarita was branch
editor of a scientific journal and Valery had a prestigious position in the
Academy of Science Institute as a computer scientist.
Both he and his wife were fired from their jobs in 1979. Bykovsky earned money
by reviewing papers on computer science and by doing translations.
(CCS)
Veniamin Charny Dismissed From Job
Married
Children: one
Brianskaya 12
Apt. 86
Moscow, USSR
Mathematician and computer scientist. He and his wife lost their jobs after
applying to emigrate.(BK)
Alexander Chernenko
Liubertsy, Panki
Posiolok VUGI 18 Apt. 17
Moscovskaya Oblast 140004
USSR
(CCSJ)
Vladimir Cherkassky Denied Exit Visa
9th Proezd Marinoy Roschi 2-12
Moscow, USSR (WCSJ)
First Refusal: 1979
Computer Scientist, graduated from Moscow state University.
Boris Chernobilsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: April 2, 1944
Wife: Elena
Daughters: Anya (1971), Genya (1974)
Son: Joseph
Profsyuznaiya 119-2-319
Moscow RSFSR, USSR
He was released from jail at the end of his one year sentence in December 1982
and returned to Moscow. (CCS/CL/WCSJ)
Anna Churina Denied Exit Visa
Husband: Igor Churin
Computer programmer from Moscow. (BK)
Igor Churin Stripped of Scientific Degrees
Wife: Anna Churina
Computer scientist from Moscow. He was stripped of his scientific degress
(Ph.D.) after applying for exit visa.(BK)
Boris Cirelson Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1950
Petro Lavrova St. 25, Apt 9
Leningrad S-28
USSR
Probability theory specialist, now works as programmer
(CCS/CCSJ)
Zinaida Dapshiene Jailed
Born: 1951
Prison Address:
235300
Lithuanian SSR
Panevicius, Uchr. och-12/5
(CL/HWC)
Arnold Dinerstein Denied Exit Visa
Tuchkov PEr. 11/6, Apt. 8
Leningrad 199153
RSFSR USSR
Radio/Computer Engineer
Alexander Donin Denied Exit Visa
Gaidara 64, Apt. 22
Odessa 270078
Ukr. SSr, USSR
Engineer-cybernetics
Victor Dorina
Birth: 1/01/53
Wife: Rakhil
Molostovikh 11/6, Apt. 209
Moscow
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 8/16/80
ENG Computer Scientist
Yacov Dubin Denied Exit Visa
Pr. Lenina 91, Apt. 30
Minsk 220012
USSR
Ph.D. -Cybernetics
(CCSJ)
Boris Dubrovsky
Birth: 1959
First Refusal: 1976
Otkritoye Shosso 21 Korp. 9
Apt. 168,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Boris Eidelman Denied Exit Visa
24 Prosveschenia St.
Korp. 2, apt. 688
Leningrad 194355
USSR
Computer Programmer
(CCSJ)
Elena Edel Denied Exit Visa
Chernyakhovskogo 4-47
Moscow 125319
USSR
First Refusal: 1978
Computer specialist. (WCSJ)
Gennady Estraikh Denied Exit Visa
Simferopolsky Bulvar 21-2-71
Moscow 113452, USSR
Computer programmer. Applied to emigrate in 1979. (BK)
Victor Eydus
Birth: 12/11/54
Novorossiyaskaya 6, Apt. 10
Leningrad 194048
RSFSR, USSR
First Applied: 3/27/79
First Refusal: 8/01/79
ENG Computer Scientist
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Josef Felder Denied Exit Visa
Pokrysheva St 4, Apt. 30
Leningrad 197228
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Mark Feldman Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1951
Alexander Isaakovich Feldman Denied Exit Visa
Zhigulevskaya 12-2-43
Moscow 109443
USSR
First Refusal: 1980
Computer programmer. (WCSJ)
Eugenia Feldshtein
Birth 1/01/36
Husband: Aleksandr
Daughter: Alla
Daughter: Natalia
60 Let Oktiabria 5/2, Apt. 87
Solntsevo, Moscow
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 6/01/80
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Henry Ferdman
Birth: 1/01/36
Wife: Larisa
Daughter: Nataly
Daughter: Tanya
Mytninskaya 31, Apt. 3
Leningrad
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
ENG Computer Scientist
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Ian Fishman Denied Exit Visa
Born: November 14, 1948
Wife: Yanina
Sutiste 33-86
Tallin, Estonia USSR
(CCS)
Fima Flomenblit Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1937
Yablonovka, Dorozhnaya 3/1/8
Krasnodar USSR
(CCS)
Garri Frenkel
Birth: 1/01/43
Wife: Bronislava
Daughter: Elina
Daughter: Rita
Per. Kuznechny 59, Apt. 2
Kishinev 277014
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 7/01/80
SCI Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Lev Friedlander Denied Exit Visa
Staropenskovsko-Rasumovsky
Pr. 6/8, Korp. 3, Apt. 50
Moscow, USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Felix Friedlender Denied Exit Visa
Kremenchugskaya 5, Apt 228
Moscow 121352, USSR
Computer scientist, applied to emigrate in 1979. (CCS)
Rita Fuks
Birth: 1955
First Refusal: 1981
Krasnaya 15/27,
Odessa, USSR
(SJEIC)
Aren Futer Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1947
Married: Olga
Children: Daughter (1977), Son (1979)
Zilniaskya 7, KV. 2, Apt. 376
Moscow, USSR
telephone: 421-4856
A computer programmer actively involved with chess playing by computers
in the Soviet Union. (WCSJ)
Fulmakht, Victor Denied Exit Visa
Fulmakht and his family have had their refusal for life reconfirmed
in reply to a letter he sent to Gorbachev, a copy of which reached friends
in the West.
He explains that the classified information to
which he had access from 1971 - 1972, was related to the computer
processing of seismographic data on underground nuclear explosions.
This data has now become openly available within the verification measure on
underground nuclear testing agreed upon with the United States. Activists for
years,he has been a refusenik since 1981 on the grounds of his "access to classified
information".
(CCS, FSJ)
Leona Gafinskaya
Malomozkovskoya 5/103
Moscow 129164
USSR
Computer-program Engineer.
(CCSJ)
Viktor Galperin
Ul. Yaroslavskaya 1/9, Apt. 83
Moscow 129164
USSR
Computer programmer-Mathematician
(CCSJ)
Viacheslav Garbuz
Birth: 1/01/48
Wife: Elena
Son: Andrei
Daughter: Anna
Daughter: Leah
Son: Menakhem
Shenkurovsky Proezd 10-V,
Apt. 10,
Moscow 12749, RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 3/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Valery Garger
Birth: 1/01/46
Wife: Irina
Daughter: Ada
Son: Alex
First Refusal: 5/01/83
ENG Computer Scientist (Software Engineering)
Fired from work or forced to resign
Unemployed
(AFS)
Irina Garger
Birth: 1/01/46
Husband: Valery
Ananievesky Per. 5, Apt. 29
Moscow 103092
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 5/01/83
ENG Computer Specialist (Software Engineering)
Fired from work or forced to resign
Unemployed
(AFS)
Valery Yakovlevich Gelfer
Birth: 1/01/46
Wife: Olga
Daughter: Hannah/Anna
Son: Stanislav
Onezhskaya 57/34, Apt. 104
Moscow 125414
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
Recent Refusal: 7/01/85
SCI Computer Scientist
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Boris Geller
Wife: Svetlana
Daughter: Rita
Daughter: Anna
Veshniakovskaya Str. 17,
Apt. 66
Moscow 111539
RSFSR, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
Fired from work or forced to resign
Formerly refused for "no reason" or insufficient kinship, but in '87
was told status changed to secrecy.
(AFS)
Galina Genin
Pr. Morisa Toreza 30, Apt. 17
Leningrad 194021
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Pesakh Gamburd Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1944
Married with two children
Prianishnikova 5,
Korp. 2, Apt. 77,
Kishinev 277028
Moldavian SSR, USSR
Visa application: 1979
First refusal: 1980 (BK,CCS)
Lev Genkin
Birth: 1959
First Refusal: 1987
Ul. Udalzova 16 Apt. 141,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Emanuel Gerlovin Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1943
Tikhoretsky Prospekt 5
Korp. 2 Apt. 37
Leningrad 194064 USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Dina Gerlovin Denied Exit Visa
Poetichesky Blvd. 11-2-97
Leningrad USSR
First Refusal: 1979
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
Vladimir Geyzel
Born: 1958
Trudovaya 20, Apt. 4
Munino 141170
Moskovskaya oblast
USSR
Computer programmer-Mathematician
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
Natalia Gimelfarb
Ul. Miroshnichenko 15, Apt. 42
Minsk 220045
Byelorussian SSR
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Leonid Gitlin
Birth: 1937
Wife: Faina
Son: Alexander
Severny PR. 77/1 Apt. 43
Leningrad, RSFSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Anatoly Goldberg Denied Exit Visa
Sofiskoe Shosse 48-1-37
Leningrad 196236
RSFSR USSR
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
∂18-Sep-87 1847 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITTEN OUTPUT - PART 3 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 87 18:47:11 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA19600; Fri, 18 Sep 87 20:38:42 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01071; Fri, 18 Sep 87 21:40:21 EDT
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 21:40:21 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709190140.AA01071@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITTEN OUTPUT - PART 3 of 3
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate message I am sending you a troff format of the
same file. I counted the list and there should be 264 entries.
The original transmission bounced. Here is PART 3 of 3.
Please let me know that you have received it. If not, I will
mail you a hard copy of the output.
Regards,
Jack
Alexandr Messerman Denied Exit Visa
Ul. Udaltsova 4, Apt. 55
Moscow 117415, USSR
Mathematician and computer scientist. Applied to emigrate in 1978. (BK)
Dmitri Meta
Krasnogornaya 18/1/65
Moscow, USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Stanislav Mezhemovsky First Refusal: 3/01/78
Wife: Natalia Leonidovna Zaltsman
Kosmonatov St. 19/4/96
Leningrad 196211
USSR
Computer programmer
(AFS/CCSJ)
David Mikhalev Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: one
Ul. Bolshaia Cherkizovskaia 6-4-105
Moscow B-61, USSR
Computer scientist. Applied to emigrate in 1978. (BK)
Mark Mikhlin
Birth: 1/01/50
Wife: Evgenia
Daughter: Alla
Ulitsa Marshala Malinovskovo 11,
Apt. 51
Kiev 212
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal 2/01/80
SCI Computer Specialist
In 3/85, his apartment was searched & over 50 books confiscated - mainly
religious or Jewish content. Fired from job. Does translation work.
(AFS)
Alexandra Mirman Denied Exit Visa
Husband: Mikhail
Children: one
Applied for exit visa: 1983
Lenina 74
Apt 5
Riga USSR
Mathematician and computer programmer. (BK)
Mikhail Mirman Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Alexandra
Children: one
Applied for exit visa: 1983
Lenina 74
Apt. 5
Rega USSR
Mathematician and computer programmer. (BK)
Vladimir Modilevsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1946
Stadionny Pr 8-4, Apt. 64,
Kharkov 310091,
Ukrainian SSR, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Maya Morozovich
Birth: 1/14/59
Husband: Mikhail
Daughter: Alla
Tikotskovo 2, Apt. 77
Minsk 119
Byelorussian-SSR, USSR
First Applied: 5/01/79
First Refusal: 8/01/79
PRO Computer Specialist (Technician)
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Vladimir Moshkov
Birth: 1952
First Refusal: 1979
Pyazansky Pr. 83/2/ Korp.1
Apt.76,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Robert Nasarian Jailed
Prison Address:
P/Ya 5110/1-Zhkh,
Moscow, USSR
(CL)
Ida Nudel
Ul. Sovietskaya 67/2
Bendery 278100
Moldavia SSR,
USSR
Economist/ Programmer
(CCSJ)
Boris Odessky Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: two
5-th mikroraion
Ul. Yaseneva 67-5-190
Moscow 117463, USSR
Mathematician and computer scientist. (BK)
Tamara Okun
Pr. Slava 16, Apt. 266
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
Economist & computer systems.
(CCSJ)
Mark Olchovich
Sevastyanova St. 4, apt. 148
Leningrad
USSR
trained as computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Semyon Okunev Denied Exit Visa
Garmatnaya 40, Apt. 14
Kiev 67
Ukranian SSR, USSR
Seymon is a 48 year old computer engineer.
Family applied for exit visas in April 1979.
The Okunev's relatives live in Israel. (HRCC/CCSJ)
Marat Osnis Denied Exit Visa
Born: January 1, 1947
Ordzhonikidze 11/5,
Chernovtsy, Ukrainian SSR,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Margaret Pelakh
Dimitrov 16, Kp. 4, Apt. 15
Kishinev, Moldavian SSR,
USSR
Chemical cybernetic engineer
(CCSJ)
Alla Pilatovskaya
Dr. Alla Pilatovskaya is an applied mathematician and designer of software.
Until June 1986, she was employed by INFORMELECTRO
(Institute for Information Processing in Electrotechnical Industry),
Moscow. She was fired for being "ideologically unfit for her position."
(CCS)
Adelina Podgorny
Birth: 4/05/48
Husband: Gennady
Daughter: Elena
Daughter: Natalia
Ploshchad Lypneva 10, Apt.4
Lvov 290018
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 12/01/79
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Mark Podgoetski
Dobrolubova St.
Moscow, USSR
Engineer, now computer operator
(CCSJ)
Yuli Prage
Ulica Fornichevvy
Dom 8, korp. 2, apt. 241
Moscow 12481
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Vladimir Prestin Denied Exit Visa
Born: December 13, 1934
Uralskaya 6/4/11
Moscow USSR
(CCS)
Polina Pruss
Birth: 1/01/49
Ulitsa Gonty 6, Apt. 2
Chernovtsy,
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 3/01/80
ENG Computer Specialist
Parents were granted exit visas in '80, but refused to leave daughter,
Polina, behind. Polina was refused an exit visa because she worked in Kazan.
(AFS)
Roman Pyatigorsky
Birth: 1947
First Refusal: 1979
Ul. Akademika Skryabina 28/1
Apt. 175,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Vladimir Rabinovitch
Birth: 9/30/47
Wife: Galina
Son: Leonid
Ul. Smolnaya 23, Korp. 2, Apt.220
Moscow
USSR
First Applied: 9/15/79
First Refusal: 5/01/81
Computer programmer
(AFS, CCSJ)
Liudmila Rabinovich
Birth: 1/01/46
Malaya Tulskaya 2/1/4, Apt. 254
Moscow 113191
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Iosif Radomiselsky
Kubinskaya 10/61
Leningrad 196128 RSFSR
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Yulia Ratinov
Chernyshevskogo 7/1, Pat. 124
Moscow 101000
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Liudmila Razbaeva
Birth: 4/25/55
Husband: Igor
Ulitsa Marshall Zaherov 27/3,
Apt. 62
Leningrad 198328
USSR
First Refusal: 8/01/80
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Mark Reznik Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1939
Basseinaya 37.84,
Leningrad 196070, USSR
(CCS)
Gennady Reznikov
Birth: 1/01/37
Wife: Sulamif
Son: Sergei
Son: Vladimir
Son: Michael
Butlerov St. 10, Apt. 258
Moscow, B-485 USSR
First Applied: 1/01/79
First Refusal: 1/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Ilya Reznikov
Wife:
Son: Il'ich
Butlerova St. 26/1,
Apt. 10
Moscow, USSR
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
(AFS)
Boris Roberman
Birth: 10/27/40
Wife: Sofia
Daughter: Maria
Warshavskaya St. 69,
Apt. 133
Leningrad 196240
USSR
First Applied: 3/01/80
First Refusal: 6/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist (MS degree)
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Leonid Robinson
Birth: 1/01/61
Prospect Marshala Zhukova 60/2,
Apt. 224
Leningrad 198261
USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Elena Rodin Denied Exit Visa
Husband: Yuri
Daughter: Natasha
6 Institute Prospect 79
Chernogolovka
Moscovskaya Oblast 142432
USSR
First Refusal: 1981
Computer programmer. (WCSJ/AFS)
Fired from work or forced to resign
Yury Rodny Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1944
Marshala Vasilevskogo 1,
Korp. 2, KV.73,
Moscow 123098, USSR
(CL)
Daniel Romanovsky
Morisatereza Pr. 5, Apt. 14
Leningrad, USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Natalya Kotliar
Husband: Yefim Rosenkvit
Institutskaya 19, Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky Rayon
Moscow Oblast 141570 RSFSR
USSR
Computer programmer
Vladimir Rosenthal
Applied Mathematician, Hydromechanic
Lermontovsky Prospect 10-53
Apt. 62
Leningrad 190008 RSFSR
USSR
Computer programmer, economist, applied mathematician, hydromechanic
(CCSJ)
Gregory Rosenshtein Denied Exit Visa
Born: June 15, 1939
Butlerova 2/1/69
Moscow 117485, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Vladimir Rosenzweig
Birth: 1/01/54
Wife: Katherine
Son: Alexander
Son: Maxim
Kalinin Prospect 37/12,
Apt. 50
Moscow, USSR
First Applied: 1/01/80
First Refusal: 1/01/84
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
(AFS)
Viacheslav Royak Denied Exit Visa
Born: April 30, 1946
Dzerzhinskogo 57,
Apt. 1
Bendery, Moldavian SSR,
USSR
(CCS/WCSJ/AFS)
First Refusal: 5/01/77
ENG Computer Scientist
Nekhemya Rozengauz Denied Exit Visa
Chilanzar 12
Kvartal 50, Apt. 30
Tashkent, Uzbek SSR USSR
(CCS)
First Refusal: 5/01/77
Gregory Rosenshtein Denied Exit Visa
Born: June 15, 1939
Butlerova 2/1/69,
Moscow 117485, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Alexander Rozental
Born: 1954
First Refusal: 1981
Ul. Bolshaya Cherklzovskaya 3 Korp. 3
Apt. 79
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Vladimir Rozin Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: one
Anadyrsky Proezd 61, Apt. 11
Moscow, USSR
Electronic engineer and computer programmer. (BK)
Lena Schupak
Karolinishku St. 3,
Apt. 69
Vilnius 232044
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Anatoly Schvartzman
Ryazanskaya Pr. 87/1, Apt. 71
Moscow RSFSR
USSR
Candidate of Electronics Cyberneticist
(CCSJ)
Yevgeny Shahnovitch
2 Dinitrov 22/1/apt. 101
Leningrad 192286
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Alex Shainsky
Konjushenny Lane, kv. 1/56
Apt. 48
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
System programmer
(CCSJ)
Yevgeny Shaknovich Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1948
Dmitrova 22,
Korp. 1, Apt. 101,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Michael Shapiro
Leningrad
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Lev Shapiro Denied Exit Visa
Born: January 6, 1940
Kanal Griboyedova 80, Apt. 13,
Leningrad USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Grigory Shapiro
Birth: 1/01/47
Wife: Zemfira
Daughter: Yulia
Kupchinskaya 29/1,
Apt. 225
Leningrad, RSFSR USSR
First Refusal: 6/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Leonid Sheiba
Birth: 7/08/61
Moskovsky Prospect 165,
Apt. 105
Leningrad 196070
USSR
First Applied: 4/21/80
First Refusal: 8/01/80
ENG Computer Specialist
On 5/18/87, Leonid entered a military hospital in Leningrad. Last applied to
emigrate, 3/87 - told not to reapply till 1990. He has a wife who is an
American.
(AFS)
Alexandr Shifrin Denied Exit Visa
Korablestroitelei 46-1-235
Leningrad 199155, USSR
Computer Programmer. (BK)
Arkady Shifrin Denied Exit Visa
Korablestroitelei 46-1-255
Leningrad 199155 USSR
Computer programmer. (BK)
Yuri Shikhevorich Arrested
Born: April 9, 1933
Wife: Alevtina Plusuina
Moscow Mishina fsr.
12, apt. 100
ARRESTED: November 1983
CHARGE: Anti-Soviet agitation under the investigation in KE13 prison in Moscow
Mathematician, also spent one and half years, from 1972-1974, in a psychiatric
hospital on political reasons.
Igor Shmuilovich
Birth: 3/02/48
Wife: Kira
Son: Leonid
Dekabristov St. 26,
Apt. 104
Moscow 127273
USSR
First Applied: 4/01/79
First Refusal: 2/01/81
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Samuel Shmulitch
Leningrad RSFSR
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Alexandr Shustorovich Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: two
Profsoiuznaya 116-3-74
Moscow 117437, USSR
Mathematician and Computer scientist. (BK)
Mikhail Sindler
Birth: 1/17/53
Wife: Liubov
Ushinskovo 39/3,
Apt. 237
Leningrad 195268
USSR
First Refusal: 10/01/78
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
Formerly held classified job, but never worked on classified
projects - left job in '76. Now works as janitor, watchman,
after being fired from his job or forced to resign.
(AFS)
Dina Iosifovna Sivoshinskaya Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1947
Husband: Emanuel Gerlovin
Son: Lev (1976)
Tikhoretzky Prospect 5,
Korp 2, Apt. 37,
Leningrad 194064, USSR
(WCSJ)
Vadim Slavin
6-oi Novopodmoskovny per. 6
apt. 31
Moscow 125130
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Vladimir Slepak
ul. Vesnena 8-10-51
Moscow 121002, USSR
Vladimir and Maria Slepak broke their three-and-a half-year "silence"
in September with a letter to Gorbachev, appealing once again to the Soviet
leader to allow them to join their children and mother in the West.
The Slepaks have been awaiting exit visas for almost 17 years.
(SJR/CCSJ)
Evgenia Smorodinskaya
Birth: 1/01/41
Husband: Eduard
Daughter: Yanina
Son: Ilya
Karla Marksa St. 10,
Apt. 12
KIEV 260001
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
(AFS)
Alexandr Solomadin Dismissed From Job
Married
Children: three
Miklukho-Maklaya 51-1-19
Moscow USSR
Computer programmer. He lost his job, and he is now working as a night watchman
in a church. (BK)
Efrem Sorkin Denied Exit Visa
ul. Serdicha 11-31
Minsk 220082
Byelorussian SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1977
Computer scientist. (WCSJ)
Oleg Spinner Denied Exit Visa
51 G, Kv 84,
Kharkov 310120 Ukr.,
SSR USSR
(WCSJ)
Yakov Stolin Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: two
Ul. Zhaibo 3, Apt. 198
Vilnius, Luthuanian SSR
232050 USSR
Mathematician and computer programmer.
(BK)
Mikhail Stolyar
Birth: 1959
First Refusal: 1983
Studencheskaya Ul.19 Apt.100
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Leonid Strizhevsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1937
Sumskoi Pr. 12-4, Apt. 1,
Moscow 113208,
USSR
Tel: 3110617
Wife: Ludmilla (nee Bulgotova), born 1948
Daughter: Dina born 1979
Refusal: January 1982
Date of First Application: 1978
Received a PhD in Statistics. Leonid and wife have been unable to work
professionally since applying for exit visas. (IPCSJ)
Ilya Sukhodolsky
Rossozhansky Proezd 4, Korp. 3
Apt. 73
Moscow, USSR
computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Elena Sverdlova
Husband: Alexander
Daughter: Exaterina/Yanna
Daughter: Alexandrovna
Borodinskaya 13
Apt. 63
Leningrad
USSR
First Refusal: 2/01/78
ENG Computer Specialist
Unemployed
(AFS)
Aba Taratuta Denied Exit Visa
Born: September 6, 1930
Prospekt Kosmonavtov
27-1, Apt. 171,
Leningrad 196211 USSR
(SB/CCS)
Igor Tchorny
Luzhnetsky Pr. 1, apt. 10
Moscow 119048
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Leonid Umansky Warned
Leon Paegle 19, Apt. 6,
Riga USSR
Born: 1940
Computer engineer from Riga, has received a "Warning under the Decreee
of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet" of 25 December
1972 in connection with his alleged Zionist Activities. (CCS)
Lydia Vainshtein
Birth: 1/01/50
Husband: Alexander Mironovich Turetsky
Daughter: Anna
Geodezicheskaya 15/1,
Apt. 6
Novosibirsk 630107 RSFSR
USSR
First Applied: 3/21/80
First Refusal: 5/07/80
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Evgeny Vaisblit
Birth: 7/08/57
Prospect Vernadskovo 11/19.
Apt. 282
Moscow 117311 RSFSR
USSR
First Refusal: 2/15/74
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Yakov Valdman
Birth: 1/01/36
Ulitsa Udaltsova 10,
Apt. 199
Moscow 117415 RSFSR
USSR
First Refusal
ENG Computer Specialist
Alexander Vorobeyv
Birth: 1/01/59
Wife: Marina
Son: Dmitri
Ulitsa Profoyuznaya 101/3
Apt. 200
Moscow, USSR
First Applied: 1/01/85
ENG Computer Specialist (programming
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Evgeny Yuriev
Birth: 1/01/49
Wife: Liudmila
Son: Yuri
Gasheka St. 2,
Apt. 551
Leningrad 192281
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/80
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Yakov Valdman Denied Exit Visa
Birth: 1936
First Refusal: 1979
Ul. Vdaltzova 10 Apt. 199
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Leonid Varvak Warned
Bulvar Liesi Ukrainki 15a,
Apt. 9
Kiev - 193
USSR
He was arrested in April 1983, sentenced to 11 days for hooliganism and
threatened with a lengthy term in the Gulag if there was further offense on
his part.
(CCS,CL)
Anatoly Vasilevsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: July 10,1931
Wife: Natalya
3 Vladimirskaya 26,
Korp. 1, Apt. 6,
Moscow 111401 USSR
(CCS)
Natalya Vasilevskaya Denied Exit Visa
Born: February 4, 1949
Husband: Anatoly
3 Vladimirskaya 26,
Korp. 1, Apt. 6,
Moscow 111401 USSR
(BK/CCS)
Evgenia Vasserman
Pr. Kultury 27/1, Apt. 89
Leningrad 195278
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Vladimit Veitsel Denied Exit Visa
Married
Children: three
5-ya Sovetskaya 71, Apt 8
Leningrad 193130, USSR
Computer programmer, applied to emigrate in 1981. (CL)
Tatyana Velikanova
Born: February 3, 1942
Son: Fedor
117218 Moscow
Krasikova fsr. 19, apt 86
tel: 1256546
466100 Kaz. SSR,
Mangyshlakskaya oblast,
Lennailinsky r-n
Mengyshlak
ARRESTED: 1979
SENTENCE: 4 years strict regime camp plus five years exile. Was
released from exile in 1987.
Leonid Volvovsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: May 11, 1942
Wife: Ludmilla
Daughter: Kira
Krilova Ulitsa 14a, Apt. 115,
Gorky USSR
(CCS/CL/WCSJ)
Rima Yakir
96 Profsoyuznaya 5, Apt. 35
Moscow 117485
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Mikhail Yakobson
Namyotkina 19/2, Apt. 24
Moscow 117420 RSFSR
USSR
Computer Programmer
(CCSJ)
Vadim Yankov Jailed
Born: January 31, 1935
Wife Natalia
Moscovskoe Shosse 57/1/6,
Dolgoprudnoe,
Moscow Oblast 141700,
USSR
tel: 4080539
SENTENCE: 4 years of camp and 3 years of exile for anti-Soviet agitation.
(CCS/BK
Yosef Yanovsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1944
Narodnaya 8, Apt. 13,
Angarsk USSR
(CCS)
Lev Yakobson
Birth: 1933
First Refusal: 1979
Ul. Miklukho-Maklaya 76
Korp.3 Apt. 76, Moscow
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Jacob Yoffe Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1937
Svetlanovsky Pr. 113,
Korp. 1, Apt. 97,
Leningrad USSR
First Refusal: 1975
(CCS/WCSJ/SJEIC)
Irina Yorovitsky
Born: 3/02/50
Husband: Victor
First Refusal: 6/01/79
Novoysenevsky Pr. 5/1 Apt. 364
Moscow 117588 RSFSR
USSR
Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Evgeny Yuriev
Born: 1/01/49
Wife: Liudmila Vladimirovich
Gasheka St. 2, Apt. 551
Leningrad 192281 RSFSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/80
Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Victor Yurovitzky
Birth: 1950
First Refusal: 1978
Novoyasenevsky Pr. 5 Korp.1
Apt. 364,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Leonid Yuzefovich
Birth: 1949
First Refusal: 1978
Bratskaya Ul. 25 Apt.2,
Apt. 133,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Zaidman, Ilya
630090 Novosibirsk
90 Tereshkova 4
apt 65
Pavel Zaslavsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1947
Daughter: Lina (1975)
Dubinskaya 2,5,25
Moscow 127540 USSR
(WCSJ)
Roald Isaakovich Zelichenock Denied Exit Visa
Born: September 29, 1936
Wife: Galina
Nab. Karpovky 19, Apt. 56,
Leningrad 197022,
USSR
First Refusal: 1978
sp
(WCSJ)
Yuri Zieman Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1938
Maria Uljanova Str. 19, Apt. 98,
Moscow 117331, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Alexander Zikerman
Wife: Viktoria
Son: Daniel
Greceskij Prospect
Leningrad, USSR
ENG Computer Scientist (programming)
Alexander works in spare time making wedding hats.
Was student of Vladimir Lifshitz.
(AFS)
Miron Zilberbrand
Birth: 1945
First Refusal: 1979
Sul. Sokolinoy Gory 12-A
Apt. 13, Moscow
USSR
(SJEIC)
Vladimir Zininberg Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1954
Nevsky Prospekt 140, Apt. 17,
Leningrad 193036
USSR
(WCSJ)
Alexander Leontievich Zosin Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Nina
Son: Leonid age 15
Mother: Hana
USSR, Ukraine SSR,
Kiev - 33,
Saksaganskogo str., 27, Apt. 13
Graduated from Kiev State University, and worked at Kiev Institute of
Cybernetics as a hardware designer. Refused an exit visa in 1980 and has
had to work as a construction laborer since. (SB
Alexei Zubkov
Birth: 1/01/56
Wife: Liudmila
3-Y Mikhalovsky Per. 20/3
Apt. 41
Moscow A-239
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/80
ENG Computer Scientist
Refused for father's military service.
(AFS)
∂20-Sep-87 1645 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Lerner Phone Conversation
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 16:45:03 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA21523; Sun, 20 Sep 87 10:45:14 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01936; Sun, 20 Sep 87 11:47:27 EDT
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 87 11:47:27 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709201547.AA01936@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: Lerner Phone Conversation
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
I spoke with Aleksandr Lerner this morning. I usually
phone him twice a year, once around the Jewish New Year
and once around Passover. He had just returned from
vacation.
Without mentioning your name, or Ershov's, I told him
about the contact originated by Ershov with you. He
was very pleased to hear about this and especially that
you (the U.S. computer scientist) had raised his name
with the Soviet scientist. I mentioned that the Soviet
scientist was going to contact Akademician Velikov.
Lerner said that he had contacted Akademician Scriabin
a few months ago and that Scriabin was favorable towards
him. You might be able to use this information when you
speak to Ershov.
In general Lerner felt that the climate was ripe for an
initiative as the Soviets, he believes, are interested
in better relations with the U.S. in computer technology.
As usual, I have taped my conversation with him. If you
want to hear the tape, phone me and I will be pleased to
play it for you. Lerner also said that Viktor Brailovsky,
who had received an exit visa after many years, will be
leaving the Soviet Union in three days. Brailovsky is
flying to Bucharest and then directly to Israel.
With respect to the list that I sent you, one name should
be deleted, Abba Taratuta. I read yesterday (after I
mailed you my list) that Taratuta had been released. For
your information, there is also an interesting article on
the front page of today's New York Times about Ambassador
Schifter's discussions with the Soviets on human rights
and possible changes in the Soviet policy towards liberalization.
I expect to phone Schifter's office this week to discuss
your conversation with Ershov.
Jack
∂20-Sep-87 1647 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 16:46:58 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA01265; Sat, 19 Sep 87 10:55:03 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA01240; Sat, 19 Sep 87 11:56:55 EDT
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 87 11:56:55 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709191556.AA01240@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, mccarthy@R20.utexas.edu
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Cc: simons@ibm.com
Dear John,
In a separate message I am sending you a troff format of the
same file. I counted the list and there should be 264 entries.
The original transmission bounced. Here is Part 2 of 3.
Please let me know that you have received it. If not, I will
mail you a hard copy of the output.
Regards,
Jack
Yakov Gofshtein
Birth: 1/01/50
Wife: Elena
Daughter: Dina
Yanvarskovo Vosstaniya 9,
Apt. 40
Kiev 252010
Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 12/12/79
ENG Computer Scientist (Programming)
Aunt outside USSR is related to wife, Elena.
(AFS)
Igor Goldenberg
Mikrorayon 8A
Korpus 6, Apt. 62
Tyopli Stan
Moscow 117133
USSR
Computer Programmer
(CCSJ)
Larisa Goldenberg
Birth: 1/01/36
Husband: Igor Abkevich
Daughter: Marina
Son: Viktor
Ulitsa Rusiaveli St. 3/2,
Apt. 29
Moscow 127254
USSR
First Refusal: 11/01/81
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Levitan Goodman Denied Exit Visa
Prospekt Budennogo 11/1/41
Moscow 105118, USSR
(CCS)
Gorbman, Emil
630090 Novosibirsk, 90,
Tzvetnoy Prospect 17, apt 18
USSR
A graduate of Novosibirsk University,
A programmer by education but is employed as a worker.
(RH)
Gorenshtein, Nina
USSR
630090, Novosibirski,
90 Chemchugnaya, 30, apt7
A graduate of Novosobirsk University with degrees in mathematics and
biology. Had been working as a computer scientist and programmer.
Currently working in a job that does not require any education.
(RH)
Lev Gorodetsky
Birth: 1/01/46
Wife: Ekaterina
ENG Computer Scientist (Programming)
(AFS/SJEIC)
Ekaterina Veselova (Gorodetsky)
Husband: Lev
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
David Gorokhov
Birth: 1947
First Refusal: 1981
Ul. Burakova 11-1-69
Bldg. Code 263
Moscow 117296
USSR
Computers
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
Asya Gorokhov
Birth: 1946
First Refusal: 1981
Uk. Burakova 11 Korp.1
Apt.78, Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Alexander Govberg
Birth: 1935
First Refusal: 1978
1 Pavlovsky Per. 5 Apt.128
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Eugene Grechanovsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: July 9, 1947
Moscow 107370
Otkrytoe sh. 2-6-102
USSR Moscow
tel: 16 89 659
Mr. Grechanovsky was studying for a Ph.D but since applying for a visa to Israel
he lost his job in the Institute in which he was working and was not permitted
to continue his studies.
(CCS)
Girgoriy Grinberg
Birth: 1948
First Refusal: 1981
Ul. Utkina 39, Apt. 15
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Yakov Grinberg
Birth: 1/01/46
Wife: Basia
Daughter: diana
Son: Lev
Kirovogradskaya 24/1,
Apt. 361, Moscow 113519
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
(AFS/SJEIC)
Reuben Gurevic Dismissed From Job
Age: 32
Maurice Thorez 33,
Apt. 205,
Leningrad 194223
USSR
Reuben Gurevic works as a programmer and holds an MA from Leningrad University
in logic.
Aron Gurevich
Birth: 1/03/38
Wife: Galina
Daughter: Elena
Son: David
Son: Reuven
Daughter: Geula
Boitsovaya 22/6, Apt. 7
Moscow 107150
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/74
ENG Computer Specialist (Repairman)
(AFS)
Alexander Gutkin
Birth: 1957
First Refusal: 1979
Kashirskoye Ghosse 94 Korp.2
Apt. 32,
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Hanna Haskina
Mayakovskaya 2, apt. 13
Leningrad, USSR
Studying computers
(CCSJ)
Boris Hurgun
Kosmonotov 18, Korp.2, Kv. 40
Leningrad, USSR
Studies computers.
(CCSJ)
Alexander Ioffe
Profsoyuznaya 97-1-203
Moscow 117279, USSR
On 8 January 1987 Moscow Jewish refusenik Alexander Ioffe began a
hunger strike, seeking permission for himself and his family to emigrate
to Israel.
(CL)
Lubov Kaminsky
D. Korotchenko 35B, Apt. 48
Kiev 252086
USSR
Computer Operator
(CCSJ)
Mark Kantor
Birth: 1/01/38
Wife: Maira
Son: Yakov
Daughter: Julia
Sharikopodshipnikovaya 2,
Apt. 194
Moscow 109088
RSFSR, USSR
First Applied: 12/08/81
First Refusal: 3/01/83
ENG Computer Scientist
Demotion at work
(AFS)
Reuven Kaplan (Roman)
Ul. Kazanets 15-1-61
Moscow, USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Ilya M. Karshtedt Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1945
Ul. Tvardovskogo, 13-2-121
Moscow,
RSFSR, USSR
(EV)
Yakov Katz
Birth: 1/01/52
Wife: Irina
Daughter: Larisa
Daughter: Anna
Shirokaya St. 117, Apt. 87
Novosibirsk 630096
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/83
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Elena Kazarinaova
Birth: 1/01/47
Son: Evgeny
Serebristy Boulevard 24/4
Apt. 140
Leningrad 197341
RSFSR, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Elena Keiss-Kuna
Husband: George
Son: Andree
Applied: 1974
Ul. Plehanova 26-27-48
Leningrad 190000
USSR
(WCSJ)
Natalia Khasina
Birth: 8/20/40
Husband: Gennady
Daughter: Helen/Elena (emigrated 1984)
Daughter: Yehudit
Shosseinaya 40/1,
Apt. 74
Moscow 109388
RSFSR, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist Programming
(AFS)
Yulian Khasin Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Victoria
26 Bakinskikh Komissarov 11 Apt. 19,
Moscow, USSR
Tel: 434-02-85
(CCS)
Mikhel Kilberg Denied Exit Visa
Alleya Kotelnikova 5-128
Leningrad
USSR
First Refusal: 1979
Computer engineer. (WCSJ)
Boris Natanovich Kimelfeld Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1943
Konakovsky proezd 15, Apt. 23
Moscow 125565 USSR
(CCS/EV/WCSJ)
Vladimir Khinich
Birth: 1956
First Refusal: 1981
Pr. Vernadskogo 123-232
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Alexander Kholmiansky Denied Exit Visa
Generala Belova 33-19-96
Moscow 115563
USSR
First Refusal: 1978
Computer scientist. (WCSJ)
Liudmila Klich-Godina
Birth: 9/25/53
Son: Vadim
O. Dundich St. 10, Apt.260
Leningrad 196283
RSFSR, USSR
EGN Computer Specialist (Programming)
(AFS)
Vladimir Knokh
Applied: 1975
Vavilovyh St. 4-1-48
Leningrad 195257
USSR
(WCSJ)
Yakov Kobrinsky
Birth: 1940
First Refusal: 1979
Ul. Rokotova 8 Korp. 2 Apt.272
Moscow, USSR
(SJEIC)
Samuil Kofman
Birth: 1/01/51
Ulitsa Aleshina 2/1, Apt.32
Kishinev 277035
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Naum Kogan Denied Exit Visa
Electronic engineer from Moscow. Expert in computer design. Applied to
emigrate in 1977. (BK)
Alexander Kogan
Birth: 1/01/53
Karla Marksa St. 22, Apt. 83
Kishinev 35
Moldavian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
ENG Computer Specialist - Programming
11/86: Alexander will not work on Shabbat.
12/86: Fired - 1
month to appeal. Asked to take Saturday off with loss of pay or work
extra hours. Denied redress.
(AFS)
Elena Kazarinova Koifman
Serebristry Bulvar 24/4, apt. 140
Leningrad 197341
USSR
Computer engineer
(CCSJ)
Zinaida Koitun
Birth: 1/01/52
Husband: Anatoly
Son: Alexander
Dreizera St. 16, Apt. 91
Kiev 252217
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 9/01/80
OTH Computer Specialist (Technician)
(AFS)
Rita Kolontyrskaya
Ul. Butchmi 3, Apt. 91
Kiev 152, Ukrainian, SSR
USSR
Electronic computer engineer.
(CCSJ)
Mikhail Konson
Birth: 1/01/47
Wife: Serafima/Sima
Daughter: Dina
Kosmonavtov 29/3, Apt. 51
Leningrad 196211
RSRSR, USSR
First Refusal: 11/01/77
ENG Computer Scientist
(AFS)
Larisa V. Kopchenova Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1938
Son: Mikhail (1965)
Vitebskaya 8, Apt. 98,
Moscow 121354, USSR
(EV)
Naum Korenfeld
Birth: 1941
Wife: Elvira
Daughter: Lilia
First Refusal: 1979
Ul. Tchertanovskaya 3 Korp.1
Apt. 108,
Moscow, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS/SJEIC)
Leonid Korsunsky Denied Exit Visa
Born: September 26, 1945
Voroshilova 3/102,
Kiev 252166,
Ukranian SSR, USSR
(CCS/WCSJ)
Yuli Kosharovsky Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Irina, four children
Gerasima Kurina 4/3, Apt. 52,
Moscow 121108, USSR
(WCSJ)
Naum Kosiansky
Birth: 1/01/81
Vetluzhskaya 10, Apt 3
Novosibirsk 630056
RSFSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Specialist (Programming)
(AFS)
Ada Kotliar
Husband: Efim Rozenknit
Son: Vladimir
Mendeleevo Institutskaya 19,
Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky 141570
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/78
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Natalya Kotliar
Husband: Yefim Rosenkvit
Institutskaya 19, Apt. 85
Solnechnogorsky Rayon
Moscow Oblast 141570 RSFSR
USSR
Computer programmer
(CCSJ)
Pavel Krivonos
Birth: 1930
First Refusal: 1974
Ul. Krasnykazanets 19 Korp. 1
Apt. 43, Moscow
USSR
(SJEIC)
Maria Kromchenko
Husband: Pavel
Chicherina St. 65 Apt. 20
Odessa Ukr. SSR
USSR
Computer Operator
(CCSJ)
Pavel Kromchenko
Wife: Maria
Chicherina St. 65, Apt. 20
Odessa Ukr. SSR,
USSR
Computer mechanic
(CCSJ)
Sofija Kuliev
Pervomaiskaja 115, Apt. 8
Baku 370009
USSR
Computer programmer-MS in Physics
(CCSJ)
Vladimir Kuravsky
Birth: 1/01/49
Wife: Irina
Son: David
Child:
Sholkovskoye Shosse 89/3,
Apt. 708
Moscow, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Vladimir Kuznetsov
Birth: 1/01/47
Wife: Tsiala
Daughter: Polina
Laevastiku 8, Apt. 7
Tallin 20003
Estonian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/79
SCI Computer Scientist (candidate for Ph.D degree)
(AFS)
Aleksander Lavut Exiled
Wife: Sima Mostinskaya
Daughter: Tatiana
129050 Moscow
2nd Troitsky Per., 6
Apt. 16
tel: 2843693
He has been sent into exile in Chumikan, Tunguro Chumikan district,
Khabarovsky Territory. (CL)
Tatiana Leibovich
Husband: Dmitry Novik
Ulitsa Vernosti 10/4/142
Leningrad 195256
USSR
Systems analyst & programmer.
(CCSJ)
Mikhail Lerman Denied Exit Visa
Born: November 28, 1946
Serebristy Bulvar 16,
Korp. 1-237
Leningrad 197227, USSR
(CCS)
Aleksandr Lerner Denied Exit Visa
Dmitriya Ulyanova 4/2/322
Moscow 117333, RSFSR
USSR
Internationally known in the field of cybernetics, was the first
scientist of his caliber to apply for permission to emigrate from the
USSR in 1971. As a result of requesting permission to emigrate,
Lerner was dismissed from his academic, research, and editorial posts.
(CL, CCS, TWP, NYT, NSN)
Vladimir Lerner Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1951
Dimitriya Ulyanova 4/2/322,
Moscow 117333, USSR
(CCS)
Grigory Levin Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1951
Primorskoe Shosse 336, Apt. 34,
Sestrorestk USSR
(CCS)
Lev Lifshits Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Anna
Son: Boris (born 12/14/67)
Daughter: Maria (born 3/1/75)
Kirovsky Pr. 64-5-139
Leningrad 197022, USSR
Systems programmer from Kharkov. He has been denied an exit
visa since 1978. (BK)
Igor Lifshits
Birth: 1/01/54
Wife: Dora
Ploschad Narodnaya,
Guardiya, Apt. 4
Lvov 290006
Ukrainian-SSR, USSR
First Refusal: 4/01/77
ENG. Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Victor Linetz Denied Exit Visa
Birth: 1943
First Refusal: 1978
U. Molodyogenaja 3, Apt. 52
Moscow, USSR
Candidate of Technical Sciences Cybernetics
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
Emilia Linkova
Birth: 9/12/47
Husband: Gennady Grubman
Daughter: Irina
Gvardeitsev Shironintsev 13,
Apt. 85
Kharkov 310153
Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal 10/22/79
ENG Computer Specialist
Fired from work or forced to resign
(AFS)
Larisa Lokhvitskaya Jailed
Born:1954
Ukranian SSR, Kharkov-129,
Uchr. YuZh-313/54-8,
USSR
(CL)
Felix Luboshitz
Birth: 1/01/41
Wife: Larisa
Daughter: Irene
Son: Ilya
Ryazansky 87/1, Apt. 54
Moscow 109542
USSR
First Applied: 8/01/80
First Refusal: 8/01/81
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Srogey Lugovskoy
Birth: 1955
First Refusal: 1980
Ul. Yunykh Lenintzov 78
Apt. 48,
Moscow, USSR
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS/SJEIC)
Nellie Maizlin
Birth: 1/26/49
Husband: Isaak
Son: Dmitry
Daughter: Dina
26-TI Bakinskikh Komissarov St. 7/4
Apt. 73
Moscow 117571
USSR
ENG Computer Specialist (programming)
(AFS)
Albert Makovoz
Umanskaya 51/69
Minsk Byelorussian SSR,
USSR
Cyberneticist
(CCSJ)
Vadim Maler Denied Exit Visa
Vitebsky Avenue 31-4, Apt. 66,
Leningrad USSR
(SB)
Lilia Marinova Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1947
Bolotnikovskaya 49/80,
Moscow 113209, USSR
(CCS)
Miroslav Marinovich Jailed
Prison Address:
P/YA 5110/1UE,
Moscow, USSR
(CL)
Stella Markel
Birth: 1/01/36
Husband: Leonid
Daughter: Katz
23-G Augusta St. 62,
Apt. 57
Kharkov 72, Ukrainian-SSR
USSR
First Refusal: 1/01/81
ENG Computer Specialist
(AFS)
Leonid Medvedovsky Denied Exit Visa
Wife: Marina
Children: three born 1978, 1982, and 1984
Ul. Akademika Yangelya 14-7-24
Moscow 113534
USSR
Leonid is a mathematician and computer programmer. He Applied to emigrate
in 1979 and in 1981. Each time they were refused because "Marina's father has
a classified job" (he is not trying to emigrate however).
(CCS/AFS)
Oscar Mendeleev Denied Exit Visa
Born: 1928
Rainisa Blvd 14/2/6,
Moscow 123459, USSR
(CCS)
Applied for an exit visa in 1970.
Vladimir (Zeev) Meshkov
Born: 1952
First Refusal: 1978
Ul. Rayasansky 83
Korp. 1, Apt. 76
Moscow
USSR
Computer specialist
(SJEIC/CCSJ)
∂20-Sep-87 1723 JSW R20.UTEXAS.EDU
R20.UTEXAS.EDU isn't accepting any mail from SAIL, or probably from
anywhere else. Do you know if there is a problem of some sort?
∂20-Sep-87 1727 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET 1st IWoLES (continued)
Received: from UUNET.UU.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 17:27:01 PDT
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA19254; Sun, 20 Sep 87 16:37:04 EDT
Received: by mcvax.cwi.nl; Sun, 20 Sep 87 22:11:07 +0200 (MET)
Received: by inria.inria.fr; Sun, 20 Sep 87 21:26:26 +0200 (MET)
From: mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET (Christian Queinnec)
Date: 20 Sep 1987 20:22-EST
Subject: 1st IWoLES (continued)
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <559164131/queinnec@inria>
I omit to let you know that you are, naturally, invited for
the invited lecture. Your travel and your stay will be endorsed
by IWoLES. Best regards
Christian Queinnec
∂20-Sep-87 1741 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET 1st IWoLES
Received: from UUNET.UU.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 17:41:36 PDT
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA18765; Sun, 20 Sep 87 15:21:01 EDT
Received: by mcvax.cwi.nl; Sun, 20 Sep 87 21:13:51 +0200 (MET)
Received: by inria.inria.fr; Sun, 20 Sep 87 21:00:11 +0200 (MET)
From: mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET (Christian Queinnec)
Date: 20 Sep 1987 19:57-EST
Subject: 1st IWoLES
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <559162677/queinnec@inria>
Dear Professor McCarthy,
You are well aware of the standardization process about Lisp.
Jerome Chailloux and I are organizing the First International
Workshop on Lisp Evolution and Standardization (1rst IWoLES)
which will be held in Paris on 1988, February 22-23, just before
(and in the same place) the first meeting of ISO working Group
on Lisp.
We invite you to deliver a lecture on a topic related to this
workshop as mentionned in the following project of agenda
(see later). Except the invited lecture, each session will
be held by at least two lecturers from various countries.
You will have to debate with the other(s) in order to combine
your interventions.
We would be pleased to give you more details and hope for an answer
before end of September. If you cannot deliver this lecture then
can you suggest us another name ?
Best regards
Christian Queinnec Jerome Chailloux
INTERNET: queinnec@inria.inria.fr INTERNET: chailloux@inria.inria.fr
USENET: seismo!mcvax!inria!litp!queinnec USENET: seismo!mcvax!inria!chailloux
-------------------------------------------------------
First International Workshop on
Lisp Evolution and Standardization
1st IWoLES
Christian Queinnec --- J\'er\↑ome Chailloux
February, 22--23 1988
Paris -- France
The First International Workshop on Lisp Evolution and
Standardization will present the state of the art in
standardization process and progress altogether with
future evolutions of Lisp and associated dialects.
The language, its environments and associated hardwares
will be covered. The Workshop will take place
just before the first official ISO meeting of the Lisp working
group where will be debated standardization issues.
This workshop will be organized by
AFCET (Association Fran\,caise des Sciences et Techniques de
l'Information, de l'Organisation et des Syst\`emes)
AFNOR (Association Fran\,caise de NORmalisation) ,
INRIA (Institut National de Recherches en Informatique et Automatique)
and LITP (Laboratoire d'Informatique Th\'eorique et de Programmation).
Each lecture will present various points of view expressed by
people from various countries. Open debate will close each day
and is intended to provide answers to the audience.
The audience will be compound of industrial representatives
eager to learn about Lisp, its future and its presen and to hear
about software and hardware around Lisp.
The tentative agenda is the following. The only names which appear
are those of lecturers who have already acknowledged.
February, 22 1988
10.00 am M. Genuys Introduction
AFNOR/CG97/CN22 Chairman
10.15 am R.Mathis and C.Queinnec
State and Interest of Lisp Standardization.
10.45 am Break
11.00 am Invited Lecture
11.45 am Peculiarities of Standardization: Kanji
12.15 am Lunch
--- Today Lisp ---
2.00 pm Common Lisp Cleanup and Improvements
3.00 pm Objects
4.00 pm Break
4.15 pm UnCommon Lisps
17.15 pm Debate Why a standardization,
which standardization ?
February, 23 1988
--- Today use ---
9.00 am Interactions: CLX, errors
10.00 am Environments
11.00 am Break
11.15 am Performances and apertures
12.15 am Lunch
--- Hardware ---
2.00 pm Current hardware
3.30 pm Future hardware
4.30 pm Debate Future of Lisp in industrial world
∂20-Sep-87 1756 danny@Think.COM AAAI symposium
Received: from THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 17:55:57 PDT
Return-Path: <danny@Aquinas.Think.COM>
Received: from xenophanes by Think.COM via CHAOS; Sun, 20 Sep 87 16:45:19 EDT
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 87 16:47 EDT
From: Danny Hillis <danny@Think.COM>
Subject: AAAI symposium
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: debbie@Think.COM
In-Reply-To: <8706161857.AA12656@Think.COM>
Message-Id: <870920164752.5.DANNY@XENOPHANES.THINK.COM>
Here are some more data on the March 22-24 symposium. More details will
come by US mail. Thanks for accepting,
-danny
Parallel Models of Intelligence:
How Can Slow Components Think So Fast?
In a task such as recognition, reasoning and understanding the human
brain is able to perform complex computations in fractions of a second.
Yet the neurons of the brain apparently require milliseconds to switch,
so intelligent acts seem to require only a few hundred switching delays.
What models and architectures are capable of such high-speed reasoning?
We are interested in mechanisms that proport to address this problem,
including massively parallel symbolic models, connectionist models,
associative memories, classifier systems, marker propagation systems,
etc. How well do they work? How do they map onto parallel computers?
Are any of these models consistent with what we know about the brain and
human behavior? What existing AI frameworks are adaptable to parallel
processing? Are there non-parallel models that could satisfy this real
time constraint?
The conference will be focused on issues relating to this set of
questions. We propose to examine various proposed ``fast'' intelligent
mechanisms both as engineering approaches and as models of human
intelligence. We intend to discuss the nature of the time constraints
on human intelligence imposed by mechanisms of implementation and by the
requirements of performance. Specifically we would like papers in the
following areas:
- massively parallel models of intelligent behavior
- connectionist models, classifier systems, etc.
- associative and smart memory models
- other architectures capable of high-speed reasoning
- time constraints imposed by the circuitry of
the brain
- parallel adaptations of traditional models
- alternatives to parallelism
∂20-Sep-87 2045 BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: mailing list
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 87 20:45:16 PDT
Date: Sun 20 Sep 87 20:45:56-PDT
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: mailing list
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 20 Sep 87 18:36:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12336275625.12.BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Sorry about that. I don't know how it happened. I have now changed
it. See you when you return.
Jon
-------
∂21-Sep-87 1124 SMC searle essay
Essay should be sent to Vijay Ramamoorthy at Berkley, they may be sent to
vijay@erinie.berk.edu. Prof. Sele said that he will be seeing Vijay later today
and will let him know that you were concerned with where to send the essay.
Vijay may communicate electroniclly. Also Prof. Searle sends his regards.
∂21-Sep-87 1332 SMC money
The figure that I calculated is $1660.00, this includes Fall fees, medical
requirements, books, supplies, equipment, food and subsistence through the end of
the month. I have to pay fees early wed. morning!!! I don't know if U.S.mail is
good enough.
∂21-Sep-87 1542 SMC messages
Mary Dochercur(?) of VTSS (415) 725-0119
Steven Grubard (617)491-2600
Alphonse (415) 321-7819
∂21-Sep-87 2011 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
The following message has expired without successful delivery to recipient(s):
minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂18-Sep-87 2051 JMC re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST - TYPEWRITTEN OUTPUT - PART 3 of 3
To: minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 18 Sep 87 21:40:21 EDT.]
I received 5 messages, and the list seems to be here. I'm not sure
whether troff is available here, so please send a paper copy to
John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
University of Texas
Austin TX 78712
I won't be able to inspect the list until Sunday afternoon.
Regards,
------- End undelivered message -------
∂22-Sep-87 1728 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 87 17:28:37 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA24249; Tue, 22 Sep 87 19:28:54 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA00613; Tue, 22 Sep 87 20:30:56 EDT
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 87 20:30:56 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709230030.AA00613@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
Subject: re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
We have finally made contact over the net. The
enclosed message is the first,and only one that I have
received. Were you able to chat with Dr. John
Thomas? I believe that the title of Richard
Schifter's office is "The Office of Human Rights
and Humanitarian Affairs". If that is not the right
title it is a close approximation. If you want the
precise title I can send it to you. I have it in
my notes somewhere.
Jack
From JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Tue Sep 22 11:08:53 1987
Received: from by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA00237; Tue, 22 Sep 87 11:08:39 EDT
Message-Id: <8709221508.AA00237@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Date: 20 Sep 87 1659 PDT
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
To: minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
Status: RO
[In reply to message sent Sat, 19 Sep 87 11:56:55 EDT.]
Thanks for your message about Lerner and part 2.
Did you receive my previous acknowledgment?
Part 2 might have bounced because of a power shutdown at Stanford.
∂23-Sep-87 0700 JMC
John Thomas, 202 647-1373, Richard Schifter state dept. human rights
∂23-Sep-87 0918 MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Greetings
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Sep 87 09:18:29 PDT
Date: Wed 23 Sep 87 09:19:23-PDT
From: Toshiyuki Matsushim <MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Greetings
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: matu@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12336937075.12.MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Professor McCarthy:
Do you remember me ? I am a person who was introduced to you by Professor
Takasu at Yokohama in last April. I am now at Stanford, since I am accepted as
a graduate student. Actually, I have been here since last June, and had sent a
letter just before I came here. I would like to greet you, if it is not
bothersome to you. I would be very grateful and happy if I can meet you.
----------------
Toshiyuki Matushima
-------
∂23-Sep-87 1413 MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Greetings
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Sep 87 14:13:19 PDT
Date: Wed 23 Sep 87 14:14:11-PDT
From: Toshiyuki Matsushim <MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Greetings
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 23 Sep 87 10:33:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12336990743.25.MATU@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Professor McCarthy:
Thank you very much for your reply. I am looking forward to seeing you
in January at Stanford. I hope your have a wonderful time at Texas.
---------------------------
Toshiyuki Matsushima
-------
∂23-Sep-87 1516 PHY
mail:
2 packages from Russia - the only words I can read are Abstracts on
the covers. I've put them in your office.
AMS ballot election of officers for 1988
technical report list from University of Linkoping (Sweden)
advertising aboutbooks from Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Newsweek
advertising `Nominations requested by 30 Jan for Marconi International Fellowship'
announcement `Expansion of CISE institutional infrastructure program (small scale)
`Access to Energy' newsletter
memo to Reviewers and Advisors from Office of Technology Assessment
Congress of the U.S. subject AI staff paper `Science Technology and the
Constitution'
announcement of SIGAda S.F. Bay Area `Education Panel' October 20, 1987
GTE Mountain View
budgets for your signature
∂23-Sep-87 1902 LES Financial Planning
1. I heard from Genesereth today that you have expressed interest in getting
a prospective student named Gorbis and that part of this deal would be a
financial obligation on your part to support him.
2. RPG says that they would like to put four people on Qlisp beginning in
a month or so and want to know if we can sustain the financial support.
I have asked him to translate that into an estimated monthly burn rate
so that we can figure it out.
3. I just learned indirectly from John Pucci that they made a "mistake" and
shortly will take back $250k of the Qlisp funds until after the first of the
year. Fortunately, these same funds will appear in your follow-on DARPA
research account for formal reasoning.
4. The troops are agitating for the procurement of another Symbolics Lisp
machine, claiming that the one we have is saturated.
5. Pehoushek would like to have a Sun-2 for use in working with Gang-of-Four.
I can probably get a CSD unit for about $150/month.
We probably can't do all of these things. Are any of them on you "reject"
or priority lists.
BTW, I'll be in Thursday morning, then be gone till Sunday night.
∂23-Sep-87 1915 RWF re: Flaherty on Bork
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from JMC rcvd 23-Sep-87 11:13-PT.]
Jmc observes that it is accidental that liberal activism has been advantageous
to liberal goals. In fact , at times it has been disadvantageous. In the
1930s, theSupremes held much of Roosevelt's economic recovery program
unconstitutional, to the point that FDR proposed enlarging (packing) the
court. I think they eventually read the handwriting on the wall (election
returns) though.
There is a tacit assumption in many recent messges that minority rights are
a GOOD THING. Every right of a minority interferes with other rights, some
of them legitimate, of a majority. Examples: smokers vs nonsmokers on planes,
whichever is the majority. Fundamentalists on the sidewalk outside a birth
control clinic, advocating burning it down. The latter is a case where Bork's
previous opinion, that speech advocating illegal acts is unprotected, would
protect a liberal majority against a conservative minority. As a onetime
five-year-old atheist I know it is important to protect minority rights;
I also know that our national tradition of mutual tolerance is what makes
the need to protect minority rights the exception. I trust genuine majorities
and if I didn't trust them I dont see how an amendable Constitution could
effectively protect any minority of less than 25%. When a minority wins a
right, unless they gain more per capita than the majority loses, there is a
net loss to the public at llarge. I'm not saying that's wrong, but that
it is something to take into account.
Responses to my previous message were in part inaccurate about the law and
recent testimony. None refuted my assertion that Bork's poitions were
being misrepresented. They continue to be misrepresented here and in the press.
I do not intend to answer the restated arguments, because my point was not that
Bork should be confirmed. The pro-Bork argument is being made eloquently in the
hearing room. The anti arguments I have heard are not as good as I could make
against him myself. The hearings are the best education I have ever had in
legal reasoning; I recommend that anyone who can, see it all, and compare all
attributions to one's own memory and reading. The hearings are a finer
celebration of our constitution than any choreographer could devise.
For scorekeepers, I incline toward Bork (not just confirming, but favoring).
What has given me the most pause is the alleged opposition to ruling
unequal state legislative districts unconstitutional. Before that ruling,
the urban majorities in states like Illinois had no way to gain fair
representatiion. If the constitution could not fix that, it was isastrously
flawed. The amendment process is not of help unless the ruling minority is
well under one third. I wan to find if Bork opposed only the details of
the court solution; I myself would rather see approximately equal
contiguous districts, with weighted voting in the state legislatures.
My dilemma: I don't want too adopt a results-oriented view of the court,
but I want the system to work at all costs.
∂23-Sep-87 2325 mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET re: 1st IWoLES
Received: from UUNET.UU.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Sep 87 23:25:47 PDT
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by uunet.UU.NET (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA25552; Thu, 24 Sep 87 02:26:05 EDT
Received: by mcvax.cwi.nl; Wed, 23 Sep 87 20:40:56 +0200 (MET)
Received: by inria.inria.fr; Tue, 22 Sep 87 22:13:59 +0200 (MET)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 87 22:13:59 +0200
From: mcvax!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET (Christian Queinnec)
Message-Id: <8709222013.AA01577@inria.inria.fr>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: 1st IWoLES
Cc: inria!inria.inria.fr!chailloux@uunet.UU.NET,
inria!inria.inria.fr!queinnec@uunet.UU.NET
The sentence "You will have to debate with others in order to combine
your interventions" only applies to normal lecture not yours. You will
be alone to deliver your lecture. Thanks to reply and accept so quickly.
C.Queinnec
∂24-Sep-87 0401 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK Research Position
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 87 04:01:40 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 24 Sep 87 03:58:44-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 24 Sep 87 06:54:20-EDT
Received: from NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK (TCP 1600000011) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 24 Sep 87 05:47:11 EDT
Received: from computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk by NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa04393; 24 Sep 87 10:24 BST
Received: from cl.cam.ac.uk by Jenny.CL.Cam.AC.UK
with SMTP with TCP/IP over Ethernet id a028546;
24 Sep 87 10:18 BST
Received: by uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3)
id AA03305; Thu, 24 Sep 87 09:18:36 GMT
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 87 09:18:36 GMT
From: lcp%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Message-Id: <8709240918.AA03305@uk.ac.cam.cl.dunlin>
To: theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Research Position
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY COMPUTER LABORATORY
Research Position in Theorem Proving
A full-time researcher is required to join a project concerned with the
interactive theorem prover ISABELLE. Isabelle uses higher-order logic in a
novel way to facilitate the introduction of new logics; it currently supports
Intuitionistic Type Theory and classical first-order logic with ZF set theory.
Possible areas of research include performing an extended series of proofs,
introducing new logics, implementing new proof procedures, or studying basic
questions about logics and theories. The researcher will have a dedicated
workstation and an ample travel allowance. Cambridge is a beautiful town and
boasts one of the most active research communities in Europe.
Salary is up to 9865 pounds per year, for 21 months, starting in January 1988
or shortly thereafter. The position is ideal for someone possessing a recent
PhD in mathematics or computing, with knowledge of logic, program verification,
or functional programming. Please send applications, including resume and the
names of two referees, to
Lawrence Paulson
Computer Laboratory
New Museums Site
Pembroke Street
CAMBRIDGE CB2 3QG
England
Phone: +44 223 334623
Email: lcp%cl.cam.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk
∂24-Sep-87 0915 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Why must it be Helms?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 87 09:15:12 PDT
Date: Thu 24 Sep 87 09:15:59-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why must it be Helms?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 24 Sep 87 08:45:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12337198601.17.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Funny, there was an editorial about this in the NYTimes a few days
ago, as I recall. Perhaps that was Helms's source?
joe
-------
∂24-Sep-87 1200 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Benefits, etc.
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 87 12:00:30 PDT
Date: Thu 24 Sep 87 11:57:32-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Benefits, etc.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12337228010.18.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, I now have the detail of what you need to do regarding payments for
your house, benefits, etc.
1. House Mortgage $208.00/month
Grounds and Water 108.78/month
-------
$316.78 total
This amount is due per this schedule:
10/1 for September
11/1 for October
12/1 for November
1/1 for December
Then, beginning with your January 22 paycheck, deductions will be made
on a regular semi-monthly basis. You can pay monthly, or the whole
amount now if you wish. The check should be made payable to Stanford
University, and sent to Nancy Haley, Payroll, Encina 140, Stanford,
CA 94305.
2. Benefits Blue Shield $ 97.49/month
Dental 45.96/month
Life Insurance 80.64/month
--------
$ 224.09 total
Payment schedule:
10/1 for September
11/1 for October
12/1 for November
December's will be deducted from January salary. Again, you can pay
monthly, or the whole amount now if you wish. The check should be
made payable to Stanford University, and sent to Betty Strickland,
Payroll, Encina 140, Stanford, CA 94305.
PLEASE NOTE: I am informed that separate checks are required for house/
grounds and benefits. I understand that they are processed
by two offices, so you cannot combine the payments in one
check.
I don't generally get involved in personal payments, etc., for faculty or
staff, but if it will be easier for you to send the checks to me, I will be
glad to see that they are processed.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Betty
-------
∂24-Sep-87 1212 @RELAY.CS.NET:rjb@allegra.att.com Request for AAAI Co-sponsorship
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 87 12:11:55 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa01540; 24 Sep 87 14:55 EDT
Received: from btl by csnet-relay.csnet id ba11534; 24 Sep 87 14:40 EDT
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu@relay.cs.net
From: rjb@allegra.att.com
Date: Thu 24 Sep 1987 12:43:52
Original-To: research!csnet!sail.stanford.edu!jmc,
research!csnet!sumex-aim.stanford.edu!aaai-office
Subject: Request for AAAI Co-sponsorship
John McCarthy
AAAI Workshop Coordinator
Claudia Mazzetti
AAAI Executive Director
Dear John and Claudia,
I am writing to request AAAI co-sponsorship of a small technical
conference, which Ray Reiter, Hector Levesque, and I are organizing
(Ray is the Conference Chair; Hector and I are co-Program Chairs).
The conference---tentatively to be called The First International
Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and
Reasoning---will be held in Toronto, in May 1989. The Canadian
Institute for Advanced Research has already agreed to be a co-sponsor,
as has CSCSI, and we plan to approach SIGART as well. Our hope is
that AAAI will contribute $10,000 to help us cover expenses, as well
as help us with the mailing of our Call for Papers and Conference
Announcement.
We have two principal reasons for organizing such a conference.
First, we wish to focus on scientific foundations for commonsense
reasoning and representation in AI, as opposed to concerns of
engineering, descriptions of implementations, or AI programming
languages. This will be the first conference with such a tightly
focussed theme. Secondly, while it is true that IJCAI and AAAI, the
two main international AI conferences, subsume these topics, both have
become far too large and complex for adequate meaningful interaction
to occur among the proportionately few attendees concerned with
foundations for the field. In contrast, we plan a relatively modest
but high quality conference with between 300 and 500 attendees.
We believe that the AI community will see this conference as a
significant event. We have already assembled a strong and prestigious
program committee to guarantee the quality of accepted papers (we hope
to add your name, John, to our list; see the list at the end of this
note). In this regard, we believe that it would be important for AAAI
to be associated with this conference, and for the conference to be
allied with the organization.
We hope that you will agree to help support our conference. We think
it will be a very high-quality and very exciting meeting.
If I can provide any further details, please do not hesitate to
contact me. My net address is rjb@allegra.att.com, and my phone
number is (201) 582-2269.
With best regards,
Ron Brachman
_________________________________________________
Program Committee acceptances:
James Allen
Giuseppe Attardi
Woody Bledsoe
Eugene Charniak
Veronica Dahl
Kouichi Furukawa
Johan de Kleer
Herve Gallaire
Michael Genesereth
Michael Georgeff
Pat Hayes
Geoff Hinton
Alan Mackworth
Drew McDermott
Tom Mitchell
Robert Moore
Judea Pearl
Stan Rosenschein
Stuart Shapiro
William Woods
∂24-Sep-87 1251 PHY
telegram arrived:
I invited you to attend the partial evaluation and mixed computation
workshop in February 87. We are still very anxious and hope you will come.
Please reply urgently. also: will yougive a keynote address? We need
to know to rearrange final program.
Sincerely yours, Dines Bjorner
Lyngby
∂24-Sep-87 1625 rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU What Languages?
Received: from Gang-Of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 87 16:25:14 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (4.30/25-eef)
id AA03645; Thu, 24 Sep 87 16:23:12 pdt
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 87 16:23:12 pdt
From: Igor Rivin <rivin@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8709242323.AA03645@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 24 Sep 87 1453 PDT <8709242251.AA03611@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: What Languages?
Russian, French and perhaps Spanish...
∂24-Sep-87 1633 PHY dines bjorner
after receiving okay from telex@score that your telegram was accepted,
i received a phone call saying that they have no idea where to send the
telegram. Unfortunately, i'd deleted everything by that time. what is
the telex number or an address for bjorner? -Phyllis
∂25-Sep-87 1028 Arnon.pa@Xerox.COM Re: origins of the term "Abstract Syntax"
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 87 10:28:38 PDT
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 25 SEP 87 10:24:47 PDT
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 87 10:24:33 PDT
From: Arnon.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: origins of the term "Abstract Syntax"
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Cc: Arnon.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <870925-102447-16642@Xerox>
I'm trying to inform myself on the history and usage of the term
"Abstract Syntax". I assume it to mean "the intrinsic structure of an
expression, suppressing uninteresting syntactic details". The pointers
I've so far gotten suggest that you may have been the first to use the
phrase. Could you confirm/correct this, and/or provide pointers to the
earliest, and the most significant, discussions of the concept in the
published literature?
Thanks,
Dennis Arnon
Xerox PARC
∂25-Sep-87 1134 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In processing the following command:
MAIL/su
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown or Ambiguous:
mit-prep
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂25-Sep-87 1134 JMC ebos
To: AIR@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
IBM has decided not to support it further. Unless we can find other support,
e.g. from some local company, we'll have to drop it. I suppose NSF is
also a possibility.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂25-Sep-87 2334 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Sowell's testimony
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 87 23:34:49 PDT
Date: Fri 25 Sep 87 23:35:05-PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sowell's testimony
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12337617139.8.PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I just finished watching Thomas Sowell's (taped) testimony at the Bork
hearings, and I believe it confirms the previous claim I made to you
of his intellectual dishonesty (earlier based on an article about the
Bird court). In his testimony, it was clear he wasn't familiar with
certain aspects of Bork's earlier writings (even though they had
repeatedly been quoted during the hearings); but when questioned about
it, instead of simply saying he wasn't familiar with it, he tried to
beat around the bush. Arlen Specter (R, PA), in particular, made him
look silly.
--Oren
-------
∂27-Sep-87 2137 gasser%pollux.usc.edu@oberon.USC.EDU Request for AAAI Workshop Support - DAI Workshop.
Received: from OBERON.USC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Sep 87 21:37:38 PDT
Received: by oberon.USC.EDU (5.51/5.5) id AA02196;
Sun, 27 Sep 87 21:17:27 PDT
Received: by pollux.usc.edu (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3) id AA14450;
Sun, 27 Sep 87 21:17:19 PDT
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 87 21:17:19 PDT
From: gasser%pollux.usc.edu@oberon.USC.EDU (Les Gasser)
Message-Id: <8709280417.AA14450@pollux.usc.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Request for AAAI Workshop Support - DAI Workshop.
John,
I'm organizing the 8th workshop on Distributed AI, and
am writing this note to request funding for it from AAAI.
A preliminary description of the workshop appears below. The planning
committee has included:
Miro Benda, (Boeing AI Center)
Phil Cohen, (SRI)
Lee Erman, (Teknowledge)
Mike Genesereth, (Stanford)
Mike Georgeff, (SRI)
Carl Hewitt, (MIT)
Mike Huhns, (MCC)
Victor Lesser, (UMASS)
N.S. Sridharan, (FMC Corp)
Michael Fehling, (Rockwell)
Tentatively, the workshop will be held at the University of
California's Lake Arrowhead Conference Center, in the late spring of
1988, probably in early May.
A tentative description follows.
If you need more information, please let me know.
-- Les
Dr. Les Gasser
Computer Science Department
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA. 90089-0782
gasser@usc-cse.usc.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------
8th Workshop on Distributed AI
Lake Arrowhead Conference Center (Tentative)
Planned for May 1988
The 8th DAI workshop will focus on on issues of coordinating fairly
large-grain "agents," and not on issues of language-level concurrency,
fine-grained parallelism, concurrent machines, or "connectionist"
approaches. The driving focus will be be synthetic and pragmatic,
addressing questions of how we go about integrating theoretical and
experimental ideas about knowledge, planning, negotiation, action,
etc. so as to build working interacting agents?
Suggested topics:
How to describe problems, decompose them, and allocate them among a
collection of intelligent agents, including resource allocation,
setting up communication channels, dynamic allocation, etc.
How to assure coherent, coordinated interaction among intelligent
agents, including how is control allocated, how is coherence
determined, what is the role of communication in coherence,
plan synchronization, etc.
How to reason about other agents, the world, and the state of the
coordinated process, including plan recognition, prospective
reasoning (expectations), process, cognitive, knowledge, and belief
models, representation techniques, what needs modeling in what
situations, etc.
How to recognize and resolve disparities in viewpoints,
representations, knowledge, and goals (including dealing with
incomplete, inconsistent, and representationally incompatible
viewpoints) using techniques such as communication, negotiation,
conflict resolution, compromise, deal enforcement, specialization
and credibility weighting, etc.
Problems of language and communication, including interaction
languages and protocols, reasoning about communication acts
(e.g. when, what, how to communicate), dialogue coherence, etc.
Epistemological problems such as concept formation, mutual
knowledge, the mutual construction of language and coherence,
situation assessment with different frames of
reference, the problem of "shared meanings," etc.
Practical architectures for and real experiences with building
interacting intelligent agents or distributed AI systems, including
the limitations faced, resource bounded reasoning, etc.
Appropriate methodologies, evaluation criteria, and techniques for
DAI research, including comparability of results, basic assumptions,
useful concepts, canonical problems, etc.
Format:
Prospective participants should submit an extended abstract (8-10
pages) describing original work in DAI. Preference will be given to
work addressing basic research issues in DAI such as those outlined
above. A small number of "interested observers" will be selected for
participation and need only submit a request to attend with
some justification.
A number of submitted papers will be selected for full presentation,
critique, and discussion. Other participants will be able to present
their work in a "poster session." There will be ample time allowed for
informal discussion.
Participation will be limited to 35-40 people.
∂28-Sep-87 0900 JMC
Get library priv.
∂28-Sep-87 1011 JSW RFC on computer mathematics
To: IGS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
AIR@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
A copy of the following is on RF1019.TXT[RFC,NET] at SAIL:
RFC 1019:
Title: Report of the Workshop on Environments for
Computational Mathematics
Author: Dennis Arnon
Mailbox: Arnon.pa@Xerox.COM
Pages: 8
Characters: 21,151
This RFC is a report on a discussion of equations and their
representation in documentation and computational mathematics.
This is a request for the discussion of the ideas presented
here. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
∂28-Sep-87 1240 PHY
mail:
overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
book `Introduction to Commong Lisp' by Yuasa and Hagiya
sent by Alice Peters of Harcourt,Brace
`Vortex-scalar element calculations of a diffusion flame stabilized
on a plane mixing layer' paper by Ghoniem and Gini from NASA
letter of recommendation wanted for Robert H. Halstead, Jr. (granting
tenure) from MIT - list of publications, and a paper `An assessment
of mulilisp: lessons from experience' included
∂28-Sep-87 1336 @Score.Stanford.EDU:KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU couple of things
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Sep 87 13:36:51 PDT
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 28 Sep 87 13:36:58-PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 Sep 87 15:38-EDT
Date: 28 Sep 1987 15:32 EDT (Mon)
Message-ID: <KIRSH.12338282972.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: jmc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
cc: kirsh%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: couple of things
John,
1) Have you finished all revisions you want to make on your reply to
Carl's paper for the AIJ? If so, I'll send the copy I have off for
review.
2) I was asked to organize two sessions at the Society for Psychology
and Philosophy which will take place on 20,21,22 May at Chappel Hill,
North Carolina. Would you like to give a 30 or 40 minute talk about
why you think this fuss over embodiment is a tempest in a teacup? Rod
Brooks and John Perry and I will also speak. I take it that the real
challenge is that the logic approach mistakenly assumes that we can
specify in a nice way the planning problem, or the problem of
understanding liquids, in abstraction from an account of the details
of perception and action. The problems posed for the logic theorest,
then, are thought to be false abstractions. Any logic-based solution
solves an irrelevant problem.
No-one has posted a preferred date. So if you have any
restrictions we can probably accomodate them. Also, this is the kind
of conference at which attendees have to pay their own way.
I hope all is well,
-- David
∂28-Sep-87 1409 PHY
∂28-Sep-87 1401 JMC
∂28-Sep-87 1240 PHY
mail:
overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
discard
[This one says `Replacement charges will be assessed after 10-25]
∂28-Sep-87 1514 PHY
∂28-Sep-87 1502 JMC overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
To: library@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: PHY@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Unfortunately, I can't look for this, because I'm on leave till January
in Austin, Texas. Could you renew it till then?
--
looked for it in your office before notifying you. It has to be brought
it in person - which is okay - but where is it shelved?
∂28-Sep-87 1514 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Sep-87 13:55-PT.]
Article 70 classifies "anti-Soviet propaganda" as a crime punishable by
long imprisonment. If you want, I'll try to find out exactly what it says.
∂28-Sep-87 1732 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET conference
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Sep 87 17:32:05 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa26159; 28 Sep 87 17:38 EDT
Received: from reiter by ai.toronto.edu via UNIX id AA22320; Mon, 28 Sep 87 17:31:41 EDT
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 87 17:31:41 EDT
From: Ray Reiter <reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
Message-Id: <8709282131.AA22320@ai.toronto.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: conference
John,
Some time ago I sent you the following message. Do I have any hope of
convincing you?
Cheers,
Ray
Dear John,
As you will see from the following call for papers, Hector Levesque, Ron
Brachman and myself are organizing a conference on representation and reasoning
in AI. We intend to attract participants who are concerned with fundamental
issues of symbolic representations. With this objective in mind, we have
assembled a program committee whose current status I also enclose. The make-up
of the committee strongly reflects the scope and bias of the conference. So
far, everyone seems to think that such a conference is a good idea, and response
to our request for program committee members has been overwhelmingly positive.
No doubt you'll notice your name on the proposed committee. Can you be
persuaded?
We anticipate that each committee member will have fewer than 20 extended
abstracts to review. You will receive these papers in early November, 1988, and
have about a month to read them. It is possible, but not yet firmly decided,
that there will be a meeting of the full program committee in Toronto at the
beginning of Dec. for final approval of the papers.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes,
Ray
reiter@toronto.csnet
CALL FOR PAPERS
FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING
Royal York Hotel
Toronto, Ontario
May 15-18, 1989
The idea of explicit representations of knowledge, manipulated by
general-purpose inference algorithms, underlies much of the work in artificial
intelligence, from natural language to expert systems. A growing number of
researchers are interested in the principles governing systems based on this
idea. This conference will bring together these researchers in a more
intimate setting than that of the general AI conferences. In particular,
presentations will be of adequate length to present substantial results, and
we expect to avoid parallel sessions. Accepted papers will be collected in a
conference proceedings, to be published by Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
The conference will focus on principles of commonsense reasoning and
representation, as distinct from concerns of engineering and details of
implementation. Thus of direct interest are logical specifications of
reasoning behaviors, comparative analyses of competing algorithms and
theories, and analyses of the correctness and/or the computational complexity
of reasoning algorithms. Papers that attempt to move away from or refute the
knowledge-based paradigm in a principled way are also welcome, so long as
appropriate connections are made to the central body of work in the field.
Submissions are encouraged in at least the following topic areas:
Analogical reasoning Diagnostic reasoning
Commonsense reasoning Planning
Evidential reasoning Knowledge Representation Formalisms
Inductive reasoning Theories of the Commonsense World
Nonmonotonic reasoning Theories of Knowledge and Belief
Qualitative reasoning Belief Management and Revision
Deductive reasoning Formal Task and Domain Specifications
REVIEW OF PAPERS
The program committee will review extended abstracts (not complete papers).
In order to ensure the highest quality, each submission will be read by at
least two members of the committee and judged on clarity, significance, and
originality. An important criterion for acceptance of a paper is that it
clearly contribute to principles of representation of reasoning that are
likely to influence current and future AI practice.
Extended abstracts should contain enough information to enable the program
committee to identify the principal contribution of the research and its
importance. It should also be clear from the extended abstract how the work
compares to related work in the field, including references to relevant
literature.
Submissions must be substantively different from papers currently under review
and must not be submitted elsewhere before the author notification date.
SUBMISSION OF PAPERS
Submitted abstracts must be at most eight (8) double-spaced pages. All
abstracts must be submitted on 8-1/2" x 11" paper (or alternatively, a4),
and typed in 12-point font (pica on standard typewriter). Dot matrix
printout is not acceptable.
Abstracts must be received no later than November 1, 1988, at the address
listed immediately below. Authors will be notified of acceptance by
December 15, 1988. Final camera-ready copies of the full papers will be due
a short time later, on February 15, 1989. Final papers will be at most
twelve (12) double-column pages in the conference proceedings.
Send five (5) copies of extended abstracts to
Ron Brachman and Hector Levesque, Program Co-chairs
First International Conference on Principles of
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
c/o AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Avenue, Room 3C-439
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
USA
Inquiries of a general nature can be addressed to the Conference Chair:
Raymond Reiter, Conference Chair
First International Conference on Principles of
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
c/o Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
10 Kings College Road
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4
CANADA
Program Committee
James Allen ** accepted **
Giuseppe Attardi ** accepted **
Woody Bledsoe ** accepted **
Alan Bundy ** accepted **
Eugene Charniak ** accepted **
Veronica Dahl ** accepted **
Koichi Furukawa ** accepted **
Johan de Kleer ** accepted **
Herve Gallaire ** accepted **
Michael Genesereth ** accepted **
Michael Georgeff ** accepted **
Joe Halpern hjl
Pat Hayes ** accepted **
Geoff Hinton ** accepted **
Bob Kowalski rr
Alan Mackworth ** accepted **
John McCarthy rr
Drew McDermott ** accepted **
Tom Mitchell ** accepted **
Robert Moore ** accepted **
Judea Pearl ** accepted **
Stan Rosenschein ** accepted **
Stuart Shapiro ** accepted **
William Woods ** accepted **
∂28-Sep-87 2305 VAL Senderov
This may be related to what Senderov said about Article 70:
a030 0228 22 Sep 87
PM-Soviet-Human Rights, Bjt,0577
US Told Freedom Of Expression Enhanced
By GEORGE GEDDA
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Soviet authorities have told the Reagan
administration that they plan to repeal a law which makes defamation
of the Soviet system a crime, according to a top State Department
official.
The official also said the Soviets confirmed, during last week's
high-level talks, that they plan to repeal certain articles in the
penal code limiting religious freedom and to release prisoners
convicted under those statutes.
At the same time, the Soviets pressed the American side about
aspects of the U.S. system of justice, including laws in certain
states that permit the death sentence against persons for crimes they
committed as minors.
The exchanges occurred during a discussion of human rights issues,
one of four items on the agenda for the talks between Secretary of
State George P. Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard
Shevardnadze and their respective delegations.
Ambassador Richard Schifter, the assistant secretary of state for
human rights, said in an interview Monday that the Soviets informed
him that all prisoners convicted on charges of defaming the state
will be pardoned or released.
The sentence under that article is three years. There are no plans
to repeal a related article under which a citizen found to have
engaged in anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda faces a seven-year
prison term and five more in internal exile, Schifter said.
Summing up the discussions, Schifter said, ''What we got out of it
was clarification on a number of developments in the Soviet Union
which indicate that there are changes that are taking place.
''But they are changes - and they make no bones about it - within
the framework of a Leninist dictatorship... Anything that is
threatening to this Leninist dictatorship is going to be repressed,
but they are much more sophisticated in going about all this.''
He added that the Soviets have concluded that ''certain practices''
are no longer needed to maintain the system.
Schifter discussed the rights question with Yuri Reshevtov, a deputy
director of the Soviet Foreign Ministry's department of humanitarian
and cultural affairs.
In response to Reshetov's comments on the death sentence for crimes
committed by minors in the United States, Schifter said he replied
that the issue is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. He offered to
provide Reshetov with legal briefs on the subject.
In response to claims by Reshetov of ''heavy sentences'' given to a
peace group in the United States, Schifter said the group had taken
power drills to a missile site intent on destroying it. The
defendants were sentenced to 18-year terms which were later commuted
to 12.
''I simply posed the question to him as to what the penalty for this
is in the Soviet Union,'' Schifter said, smiling at the recollection.
While the Soviets said they expect the level of Jewish emigration to
remain at its current level of 800 a month, there were encouraging
developments in other areas, Schifter said.
There will be a review of cases in which an applicant for emigration
was turned down because he possessed sensitive information, he said.
The presumption will be that those who possess secrets now considered
obsolete will be allowed to emigrate.
Schifter said he also was told that relatives of potential emigrants
will no longer have as much authority to veto the process as they had
before.
AP-NY-09-22-87 0519EDT
- - - - - -
a077 0809 22 Sep 87
PM-Soviet-Human Rights, CORRECTION, a030,0047
WASHINGTON To CORRECT spelling of Reshetov, sted Reshevtov, SUB 10th
graf: Schifter discussed xxx cultural affairs
Schifter discussed the rights question with Yuri Reshetov, a deputy
director of the Soviet Foreign Ministry's department of humanitarian
and cultural affairs.
In response: 11th graf
AP-NY-09-22-87 1109EDT
***************
∂29-Sep-87 0807 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 87 08:07:45 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA12791; Tue, 29 Sep 87 10:08:01 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA05318; Tue, 29 Sep 87 11:10:06 EDT
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 87 11:10:06 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709291510.AA05318@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
Subject: re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Aleksandr Lerner's daughter is in Washington, DC today.
She just phoned. I am having dinner with her this
evening. I was wodering if you have spoken with Ershov
and if there is anything new. As I recall, Ershov was to
have phoned you between September 23-25. If there is some
positive movement, I would like to be able to tell Lerner's
daughter.
Thanks.
Jack
∂29-Sep-87 1051 LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 87 10:51:10 PDT
Date: Tue 29 Sep 87 10:44:49-PDT
From: Math/Computer Science Library <LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: overdue notice of `Simplification by operating-design proceeding' by Nelson
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 28 Sep 87 15:02:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12338525491.25.LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To: Prof. McCarthy
Fr: Larry Lim
OK. The loan period for "Simplification by operating-design ..." will be ex-
tended until you return.
-------
∂29-Sep-87 1117 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 87 11:16:51 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA17272; Tue, 29 Sep 87 13:15:17 EST
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA05530; Tue, 29 Sep 87 14:17:22 EDT
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 87 14:17:22 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8709291817.AA05530@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
Subject: re: HUMAN RIGHTS LIST _ TYPEWRITER OUTPUT - PART 2 of 3
Thanks for your prompt response.
Jack
∂29-Sep-87 1644 VAL Ramification
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, SJG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
de2smith@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, shoham@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
The formalization of the blocks world in my paper on theories of action has
this flaw: in addition to
(holds(at(b,l1),s) and holds(at(b,l2),s)) implies (l1 equals l2) (1)
and
causes(move(b,l),at(b,l),true) (2)
I had to postulate
not (l equals l1) implies causes(move(b,l),at(b,l1),false). (3)
This is an example of the "ramification problem": (3) must be a
"ramification" of (1) and (2), it shouldn't be necessary to state it as an
additional axiom. The following trick seems to solve the problem (at least
in this case).
We introduce another predicate, causes1, for "intrastate" causality. It takes
4 arguments; causes1(f,v,f',v') expresses that the fluent f getting the value
v causes the fluent f' to get the value v'. For instance, we can postulate:
not (l equals l1) implies causes1(at(b,l),true,at(b,l1),false). (4)
The new predicate causes1 will be circumscribed, along with causes and precond.
The following general axioms relate causes1 to other predicates:
(causes1(f,v,f',v') and (val(f,s) equals v)) implies (val(f',s) equals v'), (5)
(causes(a,f,v) and causes1(f,v,f',v')) implies causes(a,f',v'). (6)
In the presence of these general axioms and (2), we can replace (1) and (3) by one
axiom (4). Both (1) and (3) will follow; for the former, we'll need to
view holds(f,s) as an abbreviation for: val(f,s) equals true.
What do you think? If you like this idea, maybe you'll suggest better names than
"causes" and "causes1".
Vladimir
∂29-Sep-87 1646 PHY
mail:
travel brochure from Dina Bolla Agency - cruise Panama Canal with Jack Elway, Sr!
3-22 / 4-5-88
discard
`Japanese activities toward Lisp Standardization - listing of JEIDA committee
file
products for Electrophersis with sample of some kind (ad)
discard
Second International Peach week of Scientists 11-9/15-87 (ad)
If Peace not Peach as I imagine, discard, otherwise forward
letter (form) from Paul Lehner of George Mason University `he and Leonad
Adelman are organizing the publication of a special issue of `IEEE
Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics' -- purpose is to invite you to
contribute to this special issue.
forward
manuscripts from Eric Drexler - also requesting you to renew his visiting
scholar position. I called him and said you were away. He is going to
try and get another professor.
forward
Cathay Pacific Airways guide to mileage plus ad
discard
American Airlines ad - San Juan - Caribbean
discard
Science journal
forward
letter from John J. Grefenstette, Program Chairman for Second International
Conference on Genetic Algorithms and their applications - sincere gratitude
for support provided by AAAI for conference. Enclosing a copy of the
Proceedings of the Conference
file
∂29-Sep-87 1845 HOBBS@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM Further Adventures of Computational Linguist Errant
Received: from WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 87 18:45:34 PDT
Date: Tue 29 Sep 87 17:54:37-PDT
From: Jerry Hobbs <HOBBS@warbucks.ai.sri.com>
Subject: Further Adventures of Computational Linguist Errant
To: matter:
Cc: hobbs@warbucks.ai.sri.com
Message-ID: <559961677.0.HOBBS@warbucks.ai.sri.com>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(215)+TOPSLIB(126)+PONY(165)@warbucks.ai.sri.com>
If you're interested in seeing an account of my conquest of the Matterhorn,
answer this message and I'll send it to you.
-- Jerry
-------
∂29-Sep-87 2234 reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET re: conference
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 87 22:34:45 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa14643; 30 Sep 87 0:49 EDT
Received: from reiter by ai.toronto.edu via UNIX id AA07431; Wed, 30 Sep 87 00:42:22 EDT
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 87 00:42:22 EDT
From: Ray Reiter <reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
Message-Id: <8709300442.AA07431@ai.toronto.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: re: conference
Sorry you can't be persuaded. I'll consider your suggestion re Vladimir.
Best wishes
Ray
∂30-Sep-87 1150 PHY
Federal Express letter received today. I called Daedalus and gave them your
current address and phone number.
--
Dear John,
I have tried to reach you many times, have left messages, but we just don't
seem to be able to reach each other.
In a few hours, I leave for a week in England, but I am back next Tuesday.
However, the deadline for the issue is really now upon us. I have tried,
both by letter and telephone, to ask whether you will be writing, when
we may expect the essay. Since I have heard nothing, I assume that you are
not going to be contributing.
I cannot tell you how sorry I am by that. Indeed, if I were really to
receive a welcome home, the best would be the discovery of your manuscript
on my table next Tuesday. If it is not there by then, I see no possibility
of our being able to publish it in the issue. I cannot tell you how sorry
I would be by that.
With warm regards,
Sincerely yours,
Stephen R. Gaubard
Editor
Daedalus
Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Norton's Wood
136 Irving Street
Cambridge, Mass. 02138
(617) 491-2600