perm filename F86[JNK,JMC] blob
sn#864694 filedate 1987-01-17 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00705 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00099 00002
C00100 00003 ∂31-Jul-86 0948 FT00%UTEP.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA RECURSIVE NEGATION
C00113 00004 ∂31-Jul-86 1310 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA SOE retreat
C00116 00005 ∂31-Jul-86 1433 KIRCHNER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
C00117 00006 ∂31-Jul-86 1343 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Award nominations
C00120 00007 ∂31-Jul-86 1417 Thurai.CSCDdtb@HI-MULTICS.ARPA mailing list
C00121 00008 ∂31-Jul-86 1536 mhb@Ford-wdl1.ARPA Mailing List
C00122 00009 ∂31-Jul-86 1854 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Re: Award nominations
C00124 00010 ∂31-Jul-86 1902 ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU Re: Mailing List
C00127 00011 ∂31-Jul-86 1936 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
C00129 00012 ∂31-Jul-86 2126 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu CALL FOR PAPERS - RTA-87
C00137 00013 ∂31-Jul-86 2138 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu changes of addresses
C00141 00014 ∂01-Aug-86 0107 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JGRAY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Temporary hosts needed in fall
C00147 00015 ∂01-Aug-86 0911 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ELECTION RESULTS
C00149 00016 ∂01-Aug-86 1110 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The next couple of weeks.
C00151 00017 ∂01-Aug-86 1331 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon Release - What's new
C00153 00018 ∂01-Aug-86 1353 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon Release.
C00155 00019 ∂02-Aug-86 1205 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Hamiltonian Circuits
C00159 00020 ∂03-Aug-86 2154 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- John Myers
C00162 00021 ∂03-Aug-86 2216 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu 4th International Conference on Logic Programming
C00168 00022 ∂04-Aug-86 0058 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #32
C00174 00023 ∂04-Aug-86 1425 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Softball
C00175 00024 ∂05-Aug-86 0618 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talk at DEC-SRC
C00180 00025 ∂05-Aug-86 0926 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu Book Received
C00181 00026 ∂05-Aug-86 0953 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu papers received
C00184 00027 ∂06-Aug-86 0449 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #33
C00190 00028 ∂06-Aug-86 0756 simon@mimsy.umd.edu Re: papers received
C00194 00029 ∂06-Aug-86 1348 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA No PLANLUNCH next week.
C00195 00030 ∂07-Aug-86 0833 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Colloquia, seminars, etc.
C00197 00031 ∂07-Aug-86 1730 CLELAND@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Goodbye
C00198 00032 ∂07-Aug-86 1819 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Softball reminder
C00199 00033 ∂08-Aug-86 0115 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #34
C00211 00034 ∂08-Aug-86 0801 BRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU gone Aug. 10th thru 21st
C00212 00035 ∂08-Aug-86 1044 COWER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU System Stability
C00213 00036 ∂08-Aug-86 1512 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Forsythe Award
C00217 00037 ∂09-Aug-86 2056 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Issues
C00227 00038 ∂11-Aug-86 0057 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #35
C00239 00039 ∂11-Aug-86 0725 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Re: Issues
C00245 00040 ∂11-Aug-86 1530 MARJORIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Letter about software
C00247 00041 ∂12-Aug-86 0125 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #36
C00259 00042 ∂13-Aug-86 1150 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu report available
C00260 00043 ∂13-Aug-86 1207 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu Paper received
C00261 00044 ∂14-Aug-86 0153 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #37
C00281 00045 ∂14-Aug-86 1028 OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH -- RUSS GREINER -- WED. AUG. 20.
C00284 00046 ∂14-Aug-86 1209 Mailer%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU add to mailing list
C00286 00047 ∂15-Aug-86 0117 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #38
C00300 00048 ∂15-Aug-86 1018 CLT mini seminar series (final talk)
C00302 00049 ∂16-Aug-86 0045 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu FOCS program
C00317 00050 ∂16-Aug-86 1152 RPG Various Issues (cont'd)
C00323 00051 ∂16-Aug-86 1403 DLW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Various Issues (cont'd)
C00326 00052 ∂16-Aug-86 1854 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Theory Day at Columbia
C00330 00053 ∂16-Aug-86 2039 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Various Issues (cont'd)
C00334 00054 ∂17-Aug-86 1024 RPG Varia Concerning September Meeting
C00338 00055 ∂17-Aug-86 1126 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU X3J13 and issues
C00340 00056 ∂18-Aug-86 0822 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
C00345 00057 ∂18-Aug-86 1050 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA French Faculty under auspices of IBM France wish to visit 9/12
C00349 00058 ∂18-Aug-86 1149 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Franz Issue
C00352 00059 ∂18-Aug-86 1153 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Help us Celebrate! The Forum broke a MILLION!
C00354 00060 ∂18-Aug-86 1206 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Seminar: Wu Wen-tsun, "Mechanization of Geometry"
C00357 00061 ∂18-Aug-86 1210 gls@Think.COM X3J13 and issues
C00362 00062 ∂18-Aug-86 1211 gls@Think.COM X3J13 and issues
C00372 00063 ∂18-Aug-86 2032 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Wu's visit - appointments
C00374 00064 ∂18-Aug-86 2305 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Theory day at Columbia - correction
C00378 00065 ∂19-Aug-86 0130 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #39
C00385 00066 ∂19-Aug-86 2105 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA planlunch reminder -- Wednesday Aug. 20 -- Russ Greiner
C00388 00067 ∂20-Aug-86 0128 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #40
C00396 00068 ∂20-Aug-86 1629 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
C00401 00069 ∂21-Aug-86 1213 GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Philosophy Job in New Zealand
C00403 00070 ∂21-Aug-86 1221 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA A new tool is born.
C00410 00071 ∂21-Aug-86 1843 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
C00412 00072 ∂22-Aug-86 1001 CLT seminar on Kyoto Common Lisp
C00413 00073 ∂22-Aug-86 1513 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA NSF Proposal
C00414 00074 ∂23-Aug-86 1503 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA New arrival
C00417 00075 ∂23-Aug-86 1616 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: New arrival
C00419 00076 ∂23-Aug-86 1631 minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: New arrival
C00420 00077 ∂24-Aug-86 0939 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu The Second Symposium on Complexity of Approximately Solved Problems...
C00428 00078 ∂24-Aug-86 2005 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Re: X3J13 and issues
C00431 00079 ∂24-Aug-86 2235 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
C00434 00080 ∂25-Aug-86 0110 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #41
C00445 00081 ∂25-Aug-86 0946 RPG Various Issues
C00449 00082 ∂25-Aug-86 0951 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
C00451 00083 ∂25-Aug-86 1108 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA new arrival
C00452 00084 ∂25-Aug-86 1352 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Parallel architectures
C00453 00085 ∂25-Aug-86 1636 JJW New Alliant software
C00455 00086 ∂26-Aug-86 0151 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #42
C00464 00087 ∂26-Aug-86 1601 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
C00466 00088 ∂26-Aug-86 1828 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
C00468 00089 ∂27-Aug-86 1019 BLAIR@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Goodbye
C00469 00090 ∂27-Aug-86 1024 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Re: X3J13 and issues
C00471 00091 ∂27-Aug-86 1054 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
C00473 00092 ∂28-Aug-86 1253 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA No PLANLUNCH next week -- Labor Day
C00474 00093 ∂28-Aug-86 1416 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA TAO/ELIS
C00476 00094 ∂28-Aug-86 1423 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: TAO/ELIS
C00477 00095 ∂28-Aug-86 1454 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The demonstration of TAO/ELIS
C00479 00096 ∂28-Aug-86 1809 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu bye bye diablo
C00481 00097 ∂29-Aug-86 1001 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
C00487 00098 ∂29-Aug-86 1038 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
C00493 00099 ∂29-Aug-86 1155 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu NAIL test
C00494 00100 ∂30-Aug-86 1745 JJW Concentrix 2.0 now running
C00497 00101 ∂30-Aug-86 2349 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu PODC questionnaire
C00502 00102 ∂01-Sep-86 0123 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #46
C00513 00103 ∂02-Sep-86 0402 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Ida's thoughts on international standardization
C00520 00104 ∂03-Sep-86 1436 JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU 3rd Year Report
C00521 00105 ∂03-Sep-86 1459 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Devika Subramanian
C00524 00106 ∂03-Sep-86 1510 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper available
C00525 00107 ∂03-Sep-86 1531 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
C00526 00108 ∂03-Sep-86 1558 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
C00528 00109 ∂03-Sep-86 1613 avg@diablo.stanford.edu local stratify challenge
C00533 00110 ∂04-Sep-86 1024 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: paper received
C00534 00111 ∂04-Sep-86 1602 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Database Theory and the Real World
C00543 00112 ∂04-Sep-86 1627 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu VLDB Proceedings
C00544 00113 ∂05-Sep-86 1455 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Call For Papers - LICS
C00551 00114 ∂05-Sep-86 1513 JJW IMSL for Alliant
C00552 00115 ∂05-Sep-86 1639 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Memorial Gathering
C00553 00116 ∂07-Sep-86 2214 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA PLANLUNCH reminder
C00555 00117 ∂08-Sep-86 0106 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #47
C00570 00118 ∂08-Sep-86 1038 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>: CSLI RAships]
C00574 00119 ∂08-Sep-86 1257 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu shall we meet?
C00575 00120 ∂08-Sep-86 1415 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
C00576 00121 ∂08-Sep-86 1440 minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: paper received
C00578 00122 ∂08-Sep-86 1641 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Housing needed
C00579 00123 ∂08-Sep-86 2248 teodor%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
C00581 00124 ∂09-Sep-86 0924 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Call for Papers - LICS
C00587 00125 ∂09-Sep-86 1138 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
C00588 00126 ∂09-Sep-86 1221 WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
C00591 00127 ∂09-Sep-86 1236 berglund@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
C00594 00128 ∂09-Sep-86 1559 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
C00595 00129 ∂09-Sep-86 1717 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar, September 16,1986
C00602 00130 ∂09-Sep-86 2006 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
C00606 00131 ∂09-Sep-86 2307 keller@utah-cs.ARPA SLP '86
C00635 00132 ∂10-Sep-86 0123 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu STOC87 CALL FOR PAPERS
C00641 00133 ∂10-Sep-86 1507 WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>: Comprehensive Reading List ]
C00645 00134 ∂10-Sep-86 1509 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Aviv Bergman
C00650 00135 ∂10-Sep-86 1549 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rich's Surgery
C00652 00136 ∂11-Sep-86 0143 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #48
C00659 00137 ∂12-Sep-86 0338 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #49
C00668 00138 ∂12-Sep-86 1124 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Ralph Gorin <G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>: Nominations for the LOTS UNIX Advisory Committee]
C00672 00139 ∂12-Sep-86 1131 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tuesday lunches
C00673 00140 ∂15-Sep-86 0001 @SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu computational geometry day
C00677 00141 ∂15-Sep-86 0028 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA PLANLUNCH reminder: Aviv Bergman
C00679 00142 ∂15-Sep-86 0123 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #50
C00686 00143 ∂15-Sep-86 1044 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Poligon Release and New Manual.
C00688 00144 ∂15-Sep-86 1410 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The Poligon manual is V5.2 F.Y.I.
C00689 00145 ∂16-Sep-86 1436 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Secretary-Treasurer
C00691 00146 ∂16-Sep-86 1716 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Research Associate Candidate Igor Rivin
C00697 00147 ∂16-Sep-86 2247 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU course announcement
C00701 00148 ∂17-Sep-86 1122 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
C00702 00149 ∂17-Sep-86 1130 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Special talk
C00705 00150 ∂17-Sep-86 1342 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa Next week's PLANLUNCH -- 11am TUESDAY -- Rina Dechter
C00711 00151 ∂17-Sep-86 1539 LINK@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU BYe
C00712 00152 ∂18-Sep-86 0321 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #51
C00722 00153 ∂18-Sep-86 0830 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Student Brunch
C00723 00154 ∂18-Sep-86 1022 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Committee mailing lists
C00724 00155 ∂18-Sep-86 1211 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA bboards for new students
C00727 00156 ∂18-Sep-86 1510 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA changes
C00728 00157 ∂18-Sep-86 1513 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU visitor from Argonne
C00730 00158 ∂18-Sep-86 1539 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Assignment of new PhD students to research groups
C00737 00159 ∂18-Sep-86 1726 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA List of Forum companies
C00741 00160 ∂19-Sep-86 0949 grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU changes
C00742 00161 ∂19-Sep-86 1003 gls@Think.COM Digital Press
C00748 00162 ∂20-Sep-86 2247 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu talk tomorrow
C00749 00163 ∂21-Sep-86 1054 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu changes at TheoryNet
C00752 00164 ∂21-Sep-86 1421 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA faculty meeting
C00755 00165 ∂21-Sep-86 1426 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA meeting
C00757 00166 ∂22-Sep-86 0127 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #52
C00764 00167 ∂22-Sep-86 1049 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB CogSci Seminar-September 30,1986
C00769 00168 ∂22-Sep-86 1133 HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA paychecks
C00770 00169 ∂22-Sep-86 1210 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA UNIX for CS classes
C00772 00170 ∂22-Sep-86 1318 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM Seminar on Representation & Computation
C00777 00171 ∂22-Sep-86 1417 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sunrise Club Breakfast 10/14/86
C00780 00172 ∂22-Sep-86 1515 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Comprehensive exam syllabus
C00789 00173 ∂22-Sep-86 1839 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
C00793 00174 ∂24-Sep-86 0355 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #53
C00802 00175 ∂24-Sep-86 0821 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Call for Papers
C00808 00176 ∂24-Sep-86 1214 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA:grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
C00810 00177 ∂24-Sep-86 1402 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New address for Explorer hardware problem reporting
C00812 00178 ∂24-Sep-86 1615 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Object-Oriented Programming Workshop
C00815 00179 ∂25-Sep-86 0302 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:VICTOR%YKTVMZ.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Program of POPL '87
C00826 00180 ∂25-Sep-86 0611 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLB of the year
C00828 00181 ∂25-Sep-86 1016 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu tomorrow's meeting
C00829 00182 ∂25-Sep-86 1105 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #54
C00834 00183 ∂25-Sep-86 1351 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa No PLANLUNCH next week.
C00836 00184 ∂25-Sep-86 1724 JJW Mt St Coax fixed
C00837 00185 ∂26-Sep-86 0957 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Video
C00840 00186 ∂26-Sep-86 1346 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Expenditure Statements
C00843 00187 ∂26-Sep-86 1427 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA XPD, a new seminar
C00845 00188 ∂26-Sep-86 1640 CAROL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bye!
C00847 00189 ∂26-Sep-86 2239 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Expenditure Statements
C00849 00190 ∂26-Sep-86 2311 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sunday Brunch
C00851 00191 ∂27-Sep-86 1708 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Committees
C00858 00192 ∂28-Sep-86 1536 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tuesday lunch
C00860 00193 ∂29-Sep-86 1606 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
C00861 00194 ∂29-Sep-86 1632 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kudos
C00863 00195 ∂29-Sep-86 1909 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Computer Cost Centers, Policies, and Free Computers
C00872 00196 ∂30-Sep-86 0852 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Faculty Meeting
C00875 00197 ∂30-Sep-86 0855 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting
C00877 00198 ∂30-Sep-86 0916 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
C00878 00199 ∂30-Sep-86 0919 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Tuesday lunch]
C00880 00200 ∂30-Sep-86 0945 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Undergraduate mailing list
C00882 00201 ∂30-Sep-86 0947 CLT Seminar on program transformations and parallel Lisp
C00887 00202 ∂30-Sep-86 0952 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Seminar on program transformations and parallel Lisp
C00893 00203 ∂30-Sep-86 1132 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:THEORYNET@IBM.COM Cornell Day
C00896 00204 ∂01-Oct-86 0903 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
C00900 00205 ∂01-Oct-86 0955 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
C00903 00206 ∂01-Oct-86 1026 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Request for new student information
C00910 00207 ∂01-Oct-86 1654 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting/paper received
C00912 00208 ∂01-Oct-86 1809 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA I'm going away for a week.
C00913 00209 ∂01-Oct-86 1818 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Calendar, October 2, No. 1
C00919 00210 ∂01-Oct-86 1905 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Reception Reminder
C00921 00211 ∂01-Oct-86 1928 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
C00925 00212 ∂01-Oct-86 1945 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS 300 Department Lecture Series
C00927 00213 ∂02-Oct-86 0829 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU seminar in the philosophy of linguistics
C00929 00214 ∂02-Oct-86 0959 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:avg@navajo.stanford.edu Re: CSD Reception Reminder
C00931 00215 ∂03-Oct-86 0906 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Late Newsletter Entry
C00936 00216 ∂03-Oct-86 0930 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Research info for new students
C00937 00217 ∂03-Oct-86 0954 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Torben Thrane
C00938 00218 ∂03-Oct-86 1151 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:avg@navajo.stanford.edu pentagon puzzle
C00944 00219 ∂03-Oct-86 1506 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM Foundations of Computation POSTPONED
C00946 00220 ∂03-Oct-86 1638 HITSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SSN: why is this needed in LOOKUP/PEDIT database?
C00952 00221 ∂05-Oct-86 1459 @Score.Stanford.EDU:R.REULING@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU Classes using LOTS
C00954 00222 ∂05-Oct-86 1633 GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Sad News
C00956 00223 ∂05-Oct-86 1920 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa REMINDER -- Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
C00960 00224 ∂06-Oct-86 0849 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
C00961 00225 ∂06-Oct-86 1104 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Consulting
C00963 00226 ∂06-Oct-86 1131 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU "Foundations" Search
C00966 00227 ∂06-Oct-86 1226 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New Explorer Bands
C00971 00228 ∂06-Oct-86 1614 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Cognitive Science Seminar
C00978 00229 ∂06-Oct-86 2119 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM ICCSSE Call papers
C00986 00230 ∂07-Oct-86 1507 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Linguistics Talk, by Professor M. Motley
C00989 00231 ∂07-Oct-86 1541 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
C00990 00232 ∂07-Oct-86 1601 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Symbolics-Repair mailbox
C00992 00233 ∂07-Oct-86 1607 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA My Upcoming Absence
C00994 00234 ∂07-Oct-86 1607 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA My Upcoming Absence
C00996 00235 ∂07-Oct-86 1637 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA A new tool
C00999 00236 ∂07-Oct-86 1946 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU SSN in PEDIT database
C01005 00237 ∂08-Oct-86 0843 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(s)
C01010 00238 ∂08-Oct-86 1120 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
C01011 00239 ∂08-Oct-86 1540 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
C01014 00240 ∂08-Oct-86 1602 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Videotaping at TINLunch
C01016 00241 ∂08-Oct-86 1612 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New Software--how to use with old
C01018 00242 ∂08-Oct-86 1854 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 9, No. 2
C01028 00243 ∂08-Oct-86 2135 cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
C01029 00244 ∂09-Oct-86 0616 jjohnson@mitre.ARPA ANSI X3J13 committee
C01031 00245 ∂09-Oct-86 0748 TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU sun memory
C01032 00246 ∂09-Oct-86 0913 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu time of meeting
C01034 00247 ∂09-Oct-86 1054 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar announcement
C01038 00248 ∂09-Oct-86 1136 RPG Greetings
C01039 00249 ∂09-Oct-86 1300 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu local list
C01041 00250 ∂09-Oct-86 1327 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS retreat
C01043 00251 ∂09-Oct-86 1347 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 S8 down
C01045 00252 ∂09-Oct-86 1344 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa No PLANLUNCH for 2 weeks
C01047 00253 ∂09-Oct-86 1710 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS retreat
C01050 00254 ∂09-Oct-86 2005 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Mind and Language
C01051 00255 ∂10-Oct-86 0942 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Next Exec Council
C01053 00256 ∂10-Oct-86 1325 GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Logic Seminar
C01054 00257 ∂10-Oct-86 1420 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS300 Department Lecture Series
C01057 00258 ∂10-Oct-86 1432 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Courses satisfying programming project requirement
C01060 00259 ∂10-Oct-86 1547 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Meeting conflict
C01062 00260 ∂10-Oct-86 1607 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU oops!
C01063 00261 ∂10-Oct-86 2052 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM Call For Papers
C01069 00262 ∂10-Oct-86 2106 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM
C01076 00263 ∂11-Oct-86 0538 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM FOCS Symposium
C01078 00264 ∂12-Oct-86 1144 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Computer Use Policy
C01082 00265 ∂12-Oct-86 1531 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS
C01087 00266 ∂12-Oct-86 1552 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Funds
C01089 00267 ∂13-Oct-86 0915 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Undergrad program/course admin has moved!
C01092 00268 ∂13-Oct-86 1051 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
C01093 00269 ∂14-Oct-86 1000 GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Award
C01095 00270 ∂14-Oct-86 1004 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Good News!
C01097 00271 ∂14-Oct-86 1131 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu capture rule system ideas
C01113 00272 ∂14-Oct-86 1152 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>: PhD teaching requirement]
C01117 00273 ∂14-Oct-86 1657 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rich Cower's absence
C01119 00274 ∂14-Oct-86 1716 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Colloquium Announcement
C01126 00275 ∂15-Oct-86 0904 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(S)
C01131 00276 ∂15-Oct-86 1635 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Guest Speaker
C01133 00277 ∂15-Oct-86 1752 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Informational Meeting
C01135 00278 ∂15-Oct-86 1753 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 16, No. 3
C01142 00279 ∂16-Oct-86 0437 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #55
C01153 00280 ∂16-Oct-86 0917 PETERS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Microsoft Word on the MacIntosh
C01154 00281 ∂16-Oct-86 1427 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU When Supply Doesn't meet Demand
C01156 00282 ∂16-Oct-86 1557 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Talk by Abdu Fassi Fehri
C01159 00283 ∂16-Oct-86 1734 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly
C01160 00284 ∂16-Oct-86 1757 @Score.Stanford.EDU:MDIXON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU problems please
C01163 00285 ∂17-Oct-86 1431 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 3
C01179 00286 ∂17-Oct-86 1434 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 1:1, part 1
C01203 00287 ∂17-Oct-86 1441 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU ACM Scholastic Programming Contest
C01207 00288 ∂17-Oct-86 1448 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 4
C01230 00289 ∂17-Oct-86 1453 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 5
C01239 00290 ∂17-Oct-86 1507 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 6
C01259 00291 ∂17-Oct-86 1522 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 7
C01271 00292 ∂17-Oct-86 1533 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 8 (and last)
C01289 00293 ∂17-Oct-86 1931 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:2, part 2
C01307 00294 ∂19-Oct-86 1121 HENNISS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Beer theives
C01309 00295 ∂19-Oct-86 1514 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ullman@navajo.stanford.edu UG reception
C01310 00296 ∂20-Oct-86 0053 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #56
C01320 00297 ∂20-Oct-86 0830 CULY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Ferguson Greenberg Lecture
C01323 00298 ∂20-Oct-86 0840 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Lunch
C01324 00299 ∂20-Oct-86 0956 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU reminder about LOTS
C01328 00300 ∂20-Oct-86 1028 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk reminder
C01331 00301 ∂20-Oct-86 1043 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Cognitive Science Seminar, October 28, 1986
C01336 00302 ∂20-Oct-86 1253 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk by Livia Polanyi, A.I. Dept., BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA
C01342 00303 ∂20-Oct-86 1646 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Computer Forum speakers
C01346 00304 ∂21-Oct-86 0140 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM submission to theorynet
C01354 00305 ∂21-Oct-86 0747 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU proceedings for third world contries
C01357 00306 ∂21-Oct-86 1019 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
C01359 00307 ∂22-Oct-86 0829 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next Talk(s)
C01363 00308 ∂22-Oct-86 1017 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU It's a girl
C01366 00309 ∂22-Oct-86 1145 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 KSL-3600-8 is down for the count
C01368 00310 ∂22-Oct-86 1206 LES Facilities Committee
C01369 00311 ∂22-Oct-86 1430 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Facilities Committee
C01371 00312 ∂22-Oct-86 1616 @Score.Stanford.EDU:CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Open House on the Near West Campus
C01374 00313 ∂22-Oct-86 2023 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk Reminder
C01379 00314 ∂22-Oct-86 2048 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Call for papers - Computational Geometry
C01385 00315 ∂23-Oct-86 1147 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 23, No. 4
C01398 00316 ∂23-Oct-86 1418 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Report]
C01406 00317 ∂23-Oct-86 1433 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Open House on the Near West Campus]
C01410 00318 ∂23-Oct-86 1445 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU NWC Open House
C01411 00319 ∂23-Oct-86 1757 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu stuff recieved
C01413 00320 ∂23-Oct-86 1810 LES Facilities Retry
C01414 00321 ∂23-Oct-86 2051 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
C01416 00322 ∂24-Oct-86 0512 @Score.Stanford.EDU:CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Open House on the Near West Campus
C01418 00323 ∂24-Oct-86 0814 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #60
C01437 00324 ∂24-Oct-86 0835 OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH / WEDNESDAY 10/29 10:00am.
C01440 00325 ∂24-Oct-86 1024 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 MacSyma
C01441 00326 ∂24-Oct-86 1048 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
C01443 00327 ∂24-Oct-86 1147 LES re: Facilities Retry
C01444 00328 ∂24-Oct-86 1159 BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU honors
C01446 00329 ∂24-Oct-86 1436 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Donald Knuth!
C01449 00330 ∂24-Oct-86 1627 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Having trouble with Stanford travel?
C01451 00331 ∂24-Oct-86 1730 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Setting Qual dates
C01453 00332 ∂24-Oct-86 1740 avg@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
C01455 00333 ∂24-Oct-86 1819 chertok%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Language Processing talk 10/28
C01457 00334 ∂24-Oct-86 2207 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
C01459 00335 ∂25-Oct-86 0142 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Nominations for ORSA/CSTS prize
C01466 00336 ∂25-Oct-86 0241 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU ACM Thesis Award
C01469 00337 ∂25-Oct-86 1329 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM MONDAY MORNING
C01471 00338 ∂27-Oct-86 0653 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU X3J13 Meeting Dallas Dec 10-12
C01478 00339 ∂27-Oct-86 1027 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
C01479 00340 ∂27-Oct-86 1127 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU NRC Fellowships
C01482 00341 ∂27-Oct-86 1413 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA I'm going to be away.
C01483 00342 ∂27-Oct-86 1518 LES Meeting Place
C01484 00343 ∂28-Oct-86 0325 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #62
C01499 00344 ∂28-Oct-86 0923 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Preliminary class lists
C01501 00345 ∂28-Oct-86 1052 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU YIKES! NO GOLD BIKES!
C01504 00346 ∂28-Oct-86 1054 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Halloween Party
C01507 00347 ∂28-Oct-86 1121 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
C01511 00348 ∂28-Oct-86 1158 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
C01513 00349 ∂28-Oct-86 1244 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Psychology Colloquium
C01514 00350 ∂28-Oct-86 1349 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 10AM
C01518 00351 ∂29-Oct-86 0615 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
C01521 00352 ∂29-Oct-86 1003 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
C01541 00353 ∂29-Oct-86 1101 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU Colloquium list reminder
C01544 00354 ∂29-Oct-86 1214 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU German translation
C01546 00355 ∂29-Oct-86 1248 binford@su-whitney.arpa Meeting Place
C01547 00356 ∂29-Oct-86 1429 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday/Black Friday dates
C01549 00357 ∂29-Oct-86 1459 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU reminders
C01551 00358 ∂29-Oct-86 2042 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
C01553 00359 ∂29-Oct-86 2335 LES re: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
C01554 00360 ∂30-Oct-86 0312 JJW Ignorant and Mt St Coax switched
C01555 00361 ∂30-Oct-86 1202 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice No Planlunch next week
C01557 00362 ∂30-Oct-86 1226 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu CS 545 talk
C01558 00363 ∂30-Oct-86 1242 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Bats at Berkeley? mooooo!
C01561 00364 ∂30-Oct-86 1403 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
C01562 00365 ∂30-Oct-86 1456 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 30, No. 5
C01568 00366 ∂30-Oct-86 1616 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU More BATS info
C01577 00367 ∂30-Oct-86 1706 ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU PDP DISCUSSION GROUP
C01580 00368 ∂31-Oct-86 0759 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD/CSL Reunion
C01582 00369 ∂31-Oct-86 0932 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU FTCS17 Call for Papers -- important changes
C01589 00370 ∂31-Oct-86 1013 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
C01591 00371 ∂31-Oct-86 1204 KAHN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA MACLISP --> INTERLISP
C01592 00372 ∂31-Oct-86 1345 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Next Meeting of MSDI Group
C01595 00373 ∂31-Oct-86 1536 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU bats date now uncertain
C01596 00374 ∂02-Nov-86 2231 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
C01598 00375 ∂03-Nov-86 0159 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #63
C01654 00376 ∂03-Nov-86 0936 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: 3mb net problems
C01656 00377 ∂03-Nov-86 0947 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Support
C01661 00378 ∂03-Nov-86 1003 TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: 3mb net problems
C01663 00379 ∂03-Nov-86 1046 binford@su-whitney.arpa 3mb net problems
C01664 00380 ∂03-Nov-86 1100 @Score.Stanford.EDU:YEAGER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
C01665 00381 ∂03-Nov-86 1554 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar 11/11/86
C01671 00382 ∂04-Nov-86 0921 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU First-year Ph.D. support
C01675 00383 ∂04-Nov-86 0925 @Score.Stanford.EDU:cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: First-year Ph.D. support
C01678 00384 ∂04-Nov-86 0928 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: First-year Ph.D. support
C01681 00385 ∂04-Nov-86 0929 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday
C01683 00386 ∂04-Nov-86 0933 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS300 last slot
C01684 00387 ∂04-Nov-86 0935 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #64
C01694 00388 ∂04-Nov-86 0940 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
C01695 00389 ∂04-Nov-86 0939 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Annual IBM Party
C01698 00390 ∂04-Nov-86 0958 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Important 1987 dates
C01700 00391 ∂04-Nov-86 1022 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Where to buy your tickets for STOC
C01703 00392 ∂04-Nov-86 1029 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Second Computational Geometry Day
C01706 00393 ∂04-Nov-86 1033 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU new time for BATS@BERKELEY
C01708 00394 ∂04-Nov-86 1136 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee Meeting
C01710 00395 ∂04-Nov-86 1150 ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU GO
C01711 00396 ∂04-Nov-86 1151 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
C01713 00397 ∂04-Nov-86 1546 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU student resumes
C01715 00398 ∂04-Nov-86 1701 JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Thanks from Torben Thrane
C01717 00399 ∂04-Nov-86 1722 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Students to speak at forum
C01719 00400 ∂05-Nov-86 0152 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #65
C01725 00401 ∂05-Nov-86 0723 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU x3j13 second mailing
C01727 00402 ∂05-Nov-86 0903 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu GI is alive and well
C01729 00403 ∂05-Nov-86 0918 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu PODC87 Call for papers (correction)
C01735 00404 ∂05-Nov-86 1152 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next Talks
C01739 00405 ∂05-Nov-86 1507 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C01741 00406 ∂05-Nov-86 1643 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday meeting
C01743 00407 ∂05-Nov-86 1759 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Need to Set Forum Date for 1988!!
C01745 00408 ∂05-Nov-86 1835 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 6, No. 6
C01755 00409 ∂06-Nov-86 0143 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #66
C01766 00410 ∂06-Nov-86 0910 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling for Final Exams
C01769 00411 ∂06-Nov-86 1045 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU A little more on final exams
C01771 00412 ∂06-Nov-86 1214 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Big outage for this weekend
C01775 00413 ∂06-Nov-86 1245 SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU consultants in the linguistics Department
C01777 00414 ∂06-Nov-86 1604 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter textbooks
C01779 00415 ∂06-Nov-86 1614 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Three more talks of AFLB interest
C01782 00416 ∂06-Nov-86 1625 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar announcement
C01785 00417 ∂06-Nov-86 1800 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU lunches
C01787 00418 ∂06-Nov-86 2053 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU rides to BATS in Berkeley
C01789 00419 ∂06-Nov-86 2322 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:DAVIES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA seminar on syntax of English idioms
C01791 00420 ∂07-Nov-86 0119 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #67
C01799 00421 ∂07-Nov-86 1149 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Research mentors - clarification and request
C01804 00422 ∂07-Nov-86 1201 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Clarifications of programming project
C01814 00423 ∂10-Nov-86 0053 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #68
C01828 00424 ∂10-Nov-86 0842 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Lunch
C01829 00425 ∂10-Nov-86 1051 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C01831 00426 ∂10-Nov-86 1315 @Score.Stanford.EDU:RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
C01834 00427 ∂10-Nov-86 1727 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Going BATS??
C01836 00428 ∂11-Nov-86 0938 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
C01838 00429 ∂11-Nov-86 1059 @Score.Stanford.EDU:RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Information about telephone answering machine
C01840 00430 ∂11-Nov-86 1105 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Military Funding of Mathematics
C01851 00431 ∂11-Nov-86 1118 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Sixth Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical
C01867 00432 ∂11-Nov-86 1133 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu STACS87
C01878 00433 ∂11-Nov-86 1550 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU 1987 LINGUISTIC INSTITUTE
C01880 00434 ∂12-Nov-86 0153 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #70
C01898 00435 ∂12-Nov-86 1011 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee Meeting
C01899 00436 ∂12-Nov-86 1012 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Mailing list purge
C01901 00437 ∂12-Nov-86 1142 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB talks
C01903 00438 ∂12-Nov-86 1447 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU directions to Berkeley BATS
C01907 00439 ∂12-Nov-86 1507 PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU Komlos
C01909 00440 ∂12-Nov-86 1647 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 13, No. 7
C01917 00441 ∂13-Nov-86 0102 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #71
C01929 00442 ∂13-Nov-86 1022 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Bell Fellowship Call for Nominations
C01931 00443 ∂13-Nov-86 1132 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU security caution
C01933 00444 ∂13-Nov-86 2255 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Sixth ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems
C01936 00445 ∂14-Nov-86 0149 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #72
C01975 00446 ∂14-Nov-86 0939 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Advisory Panel Visit
C01977 00447 ∂14-Nov-86 1136 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET December Meeting
C01979 00448 ∂14-Nov-86 1137 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Delta reference number
C01981 00449 ∂14-Nov-86 1151 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Curriculum Vitae
C01982 00450 ∂14-Nov-86 1315 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Advisory Panel Visit, Continued
C01984 00451 ∂14-Nov-86 1519 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Shun Tsuchiya
C01985 00452 ∂14-Nov-86 1547 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice PLANLUNCH on MONDAY November 17 -- Jiro Tanaka
C01988 00453 ∂14-Nov-86 1756 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM smop
C01989 00454 ∂16-Nov-86 0917 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talk of AFLB interest
C01991 00455 ∂17-Nov-86 0115 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #73
C02011 00456 ∂17-Nov-86 0741 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Tuesday Lunch
C02012 00457 ∂17-Nov-86 1129 LES Facilities Committee Minutes of 11/4/86
C02018 00458 ∂17-Nov-86 1335 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU New Receptionist
C02019 00459 ∂17-Nov-86 1413 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB CogSci Seminar, 11/25/86
C02026 00460 ∂17-Nov-86 1636 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Holiday Party
C02028 00461 ∂17-Nov-86 1702 CBARSALOU@Score.Stanford.EDU New Engineers degree
C02035 00462 ∂17-Nov-86 1757 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU talk announcement
C02042 00463 ∂18-Nov-86 0108 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #74
C02051 00464 ∂18-Nov-86 0819 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
C02052 00465 ∂18-Nov-86 1102 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Janos Komlos
C02056 00466 ∂18-Nov-86 1211 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Shun Tutiya
C02057 00467 ∂18-Nov-86 1217 JJW Alliant visit
C02058 00468 ∂18-Nov-86 2048 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(s)
C02063 00469 ∂19-Nov-86 0114 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #75
C02074 00470 ∂19-Nov-86 0933 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Ginsberg Promotion
C02080 00471 ∂19-Nov-86 1022 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Meeting
C02081 00472 ∂19-Nov-86 1423 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Meeting
C02082 00473 ∂19-Nov-86 1605 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Symbolics Genera 7.0 (Rel 7.0)
C02085 00474 ∂19-Nov-86 1750 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 20, No. 8
C02091 00475 ∂19-Nov-86 2215 @Score.Stanford.EDU:JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU industry lecturers and visiting faculty for 1987-88
C02092 00476 ∂20-Nov-86 1113 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU "Determination Rules for Generalization & Reasoning by Analogy"
C02094 00477 ∂20-Nov-86 1601 BRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Jury duty over (for the moment)
C02096 00478 ∂20-Nov-86 1621 COLEMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU cup
C02097 00479 ∂20-Nov-86 1724 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Undergrad projects?
C02099 00480 ∂21-Nov-86 0141 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #77
C02108 00481 ∂21-Nov-86 0918 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty/Staff Directories
C02109 00482 ∂21-Nov-86 1539 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MSCS committee meetings
C02111 00483 ∂21-Nov-86 1612 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU OPEN HOUSE
C02114 00484 ∂21-Nov-86 2052 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU FOLIO update
C02119 00485 ∂22-Nov-86 1847 TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Greeting
C02121 00486 ∂23-Nov-86 1054 SCHAFFER@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Talk of AFLB interest
C02123 00487 ∂23-Nov-86 2212 lantz@gregorio.stanford.edu Re: Facilities Committee Minutes of 11/4/86
C02125 00488 ∂24-Nov-86 0108 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #78
C02133 00489 ∂24-Nov-86 0834 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rawls Lecture
C02134 00490 ∂24-Nov-86 0901 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
C02135 00491 ∂24-Nov-86 0911 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Plans
C02139 00492 ∂24-Nov-86 1059 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Holiday
C02140 00493 ∂24-Nov-86 1223 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly
C02142 00494 ∂24-Nov-86 1244 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
C02146 00495 ∂24-Nov-86 1317 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Structure In Complexity Theory Conference
C02148 00496 ∂24-Nov-86 1455 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter RAships
C02150 00497 ∂24-Nov-86 1823 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU You're Invited
C02152 00498 ∂24-Nov-86 2238 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,@HPP-3645-9.stanford.edu:Saraiya@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA AAP meeting this Wednesday, 11/26/86, 10:00am, Jim Rice.
C02154 00499 ∂25-Nov-86 0256 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #79
C02162 00500 ∂25-Nov-86 1158 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM talk
C02164 00501 ∂25-Nov-86 1302 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Reservation confirmation
C02167 00502 ∂25-Nov-86 1358 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:kannan@ernie.Berkeley.EDU Theory Seminar talk
C02169 00503 ∂25-Nov-86 1427 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
C02173 00504 ∂26-Nov-86 1021 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty/Staff ID's
C02174 00505 ∂26-Nov-86 1039 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
C02179 00506 ∂26-Nov-86 1104 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Theory Net
C02181 00507 ∂26-Nov-86 1117 BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU House or apartment needed.
C02182 00508 ∂26-Nov-86 1301 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA S10
C02183 00509 ∂26-Nov-86 1442 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:marria@su-ardvax.arpa Re: S10
C02185 00510 ∂27-Nov-86 1355 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Additional reservations
C02187 00511 ∂28-Nov-86 1519 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Next Week's PLANLUNCH -- WEDNESDAY Dec. 3 -- Haim Gaifman
C02191 00512 ∂29-Nov-86 1130 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
C02193 00513 ∂30-Nov-86 1352 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Theory Net
C02195 00514 ∂30-Nov-86 1508 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Housing Needed
C02197 00515 ∂01-Dec-86 0200 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #80
C02273 00516 ∂01-Dec-86 0900 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C02274 00517 ∂01-Dec-86 0955 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
C02275 00518 ∂01-Dec-86 1104 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday information
C02277 00519 ∂01-Dec-86 1132 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS committee meeting
C02278 00520 ∂01-Dec-86 1210 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM reminder
C02280 00521 ∂01-Dec-86 1234 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM tinlunch pre-newsletter
C02284 00522 ∂01-Dec-86 2014 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
C02286 00523 ∂01-Dec-86 2313 NUNBERG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU A point of usage
C02287 00524 ∂02-Dec-86 0755 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Reminder of IBM/Forum party
C02290 00525 ∂02-Dec-86 0859 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU fac mtg
C02295 00526 ∂02-Dec-86 1110 FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU visiting
C02296 00527 ∂02-Dec-86 1210 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:southall.pa@Xerox.COM Re: A point of usage
C02298 00528 ∂02-Dec-86 1217 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu CARLETON UNIV. S.C.S. TECHNICAL REPORTS
C02313 00529 ∂02-Dec-86 1225 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Thank You
C02315 00530 ∂02-Dec-86 1536 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER and ROOM CHANGE: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH: Haim Gaifman
C02319 00531 ∂02-Dec-86 1727 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU more about the 12 December Party . . .
C02322 00532 ∂03-Dec-86 0850 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Terry Winograd
C02323 00533 ∂03-Dec-86 1044 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
C02328 00534 ∂03-Dec-86 1753 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, December 4, No. 9
C02338 00535 ∂04-Dec-86 0121 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #81
C02345 00536 ∂04-Dec-86 0829 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU ICIT Dissertation Awards
C02347 00537 ∂04-Dec-86 1255 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU SPRING ROLLS/WHITE PLAZA/TOMORROW!!!
C02353 00538 ∂04-Dec-86 1318 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu POPL '87
C02365 00539 ∂04-Dec-86 1325 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu How to get the POPL special airline fare
C02367 00540 ∂05-Dec-86 1148 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice PLANLUNCH -- Wednesday 12/10 -- Roger Hale
C02371 00541 ∂05-Dec-86 1203 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Newsletter item
C02373 00542 ∂05-Dec-86 1223 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU PhD Orals of AFLB interest
C02377 00543 ∂05-Dec-86 1308 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Directions to AEL
C02378 00544 ∂05-Dec-86 1353 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bente Maergaard
C02380 00545 ∂05-Dec-86 1533 KAY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Seminar on EUROTRA
C02382 00546 ∂05-Dec-86 1536 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bente Maegaard - Correction
C02383 00547 ∂05-Dec-86 1733 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU meeting in Dallas
C02384 00548 ∂05-Dec-86 1733 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU third mailing cover letter
C02391 00549 ∂05-Dec-86 1734 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Dallas meeting draft agenda outline
C02394 00550 ∂05-Dec-86 1825 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Logisitcs for Dallas meeting
C02396 00551 ∂08-Dec-86 0116 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #82
C02401 00552 ∂08-Dec-86 0902 jjohnson@mitre.ARPA Re: meeting in Dallas
C02402 00553 ∂08-Dec-86 0940 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
C02403 00554 ∂08-Dec-86 1134 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Open House
C02405 00555 ∂08-Dec-86 1134 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Open House
C02407 00556 ∂08-Dec-86 1203 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Budget Letter
C02408 00557 ∂08-Dec-86 1724 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:nunberg.pa@Xerox.COM self-reflexivity (applied)
C02415 00558 ∂08-Dec-86 2302 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu U.T. Year of Programming
C02427 00559 ∂08-Dec-86 2343 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Concurrent Programming Institute
C02446 00560 ∂09-Dec-86 1042 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Tau Beta Pi evaluation forms
C02448 00561 ∂09-Dec-86 1235 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU UT Year of Programming
C02459 00562 ∂09-Dec-86 1243 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Concurrent Programming Institute
C02478 00563 ∂09-Dec-86 1421 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Holiday Party
C02485 00564 ∂09-Dec-86 1514 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER : Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 4:15 -- Roger Hale
C02489 00565 ∂09-Dec-86 1617 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU End Quarter Reports
C02491 00566 ∂09-Dec-86 1658 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU TINLunch abstract
C02493 00567 ∂09-Dec-86 1742 Mailer%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU PHIL-SCI
C02495 00568 ∂09-Dec-86 1740 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice NEXT MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger
C02498 00569 ∂09-Dec-86 2233 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU colloquium announcement
C02501 00570 ∂10-Dec-86 0358 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Logistics for Dallas Meeting
C02503 00571 ∂10-Dec-86 0600 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
C02506 00572 ∂10-Dec-86 0707 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU UT Year of Programming
C02517 00573 ∂10-Dec-86 0720 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Concurrent Programming Institute
C02536 00574 ∂10-Dec-86 0955 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (lack of) staff at Ventura
C02538 00575 ∂10-Dec-86 1228 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU LOTS TO EAT TODAY!
C02540 00576 ∂10-Dec-86 1542 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar this Friday
C02544 00577 ∂10-Dec-86 1801 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
C02546 00578 ∂10-Dec-86 1826 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, December 11, No. 10
C02561 00579 ∂10-Dec-86 1900 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
C02565 00580 ∂11-Dec-86 0014 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU NCube Computer Needs a Home
C02572 00581 ∂11-Dec-86 1459 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU LOTS-LEFT_OVER Sale
C02575 00582 ∂12-Dec-86 1053 BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Temporary home needed
C02576 00583 ∂12-Dec-86 1208 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing
C02583 00584 ∂12-Dec-86 1220 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Int'l Workshop on Par. Alg. and Arch. (2nd announcement)
C02588 00585 ∂12-Dec-86 1900 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Dallas meeting
C02589 00586 ∂13-Dec-86 1234 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU FOOD TO EAT NOW>>>
C02591 00587 ∂14-Dec-86 2315 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger -- 11am
C02594 00588 ∂15-Dec-86 0055 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #83
C02603 00589 ∂15-Dec-86 0808 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Curriculum vitaes
C02604 00590 ∂15-Dec-86 0905 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday Reminder
C02606 00591 ∂15-Dec-86 1116 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter TAs
C02610 00592 ∂15-Dec-86 1217 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Re: Winter TAs
C02611 00593 ∂15-Dec-86 1227 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Winter TAs
C02613 00594 ∂15-Dec-86 1630 RPG Contents of the X3J13 mailing list
C02617 00595 ∂15-Dec-86 2114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Upcomming Absense
C02619 00596 ∂15-Dec-86 2114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Upcomming Absense
C02621 00597 ∂16-Dec-86 0152 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #84
C02641 00598 ∂16-Dec-86 0842 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Grade Sheets
C02643 00599 ∂16-Dec-86 0953 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Reminder: Gray Tuesday meeting today at 2:30 downstairs
C02645 00600 ∂16-Dec-86 1140 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Mary Donoghue's replacement
C02647 00601 ∂16-Dec-86 1142 JOHN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Seminar Announcement
C02649 00602 ∂16-Dec-86 1204 HAILPERIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU ncube
C02650 00603 ∂16-Dec-86 1232 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU More on grade sheets
C02652 00604 ∂16-Dec-86 2222 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu PODS Advance Program
C02675 00605 ∂16-Dec-86 2223 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu PODS Advance Program
C02676 00606 ∂17-Dec-86 0237 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #85
C02718 00607 ∂17-Dec-86 1213 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice SPECIAL PRE-CHRISTMAS PLANLUNCH: Mark Fox
C02725 00608 ∂17-Dec-86 1253 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Gray Tuesday
C02728 00609 ∂17-Dec-86 1433 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu CALL FOR PAPERS - FOCS
C02737 00610 ∂17-Dec-86 1548 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
C02738 00611 ∂17-Dec-86 1612 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU geminate affricates
C02740 00612 ∂17-Dec-86 1625 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Name at Apple Needed
C02741 00613 ∂17-Dec-86 1700 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Name at Apple Needed
C02743 00614 ∂17-Dec-86 2045 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU lost book
C02744 00615 ∂18-Dec-86 0203 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #86
C02781 00616 ∂18-Dec-86 0833 YAMARONE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU THE bike...you know which one!
C02783 00617 ∂18-Dec-86 1134 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Combinatorics Seminar
C02786 00618 ∂18-Dec-86 1404 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU CACM Special Issue on Parallelism
C02788 00619 ∂18-Dec-86 1529 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU plain old geminates
C02790 00620 ∂19-Dec-86 0200 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #87
C02818 00621 ∂19-Dec-86 0608 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU proposed purposes
C02825 00622 ∂19-Dec-86 0608 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU minutes of Dallas meeting
C02827 00623 ∂19-Dec-86 0727 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU proposed purposes
C02829 00624 ∂19-Dec-86 0831 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM Re: proposed purposes
C02831 00625 ∂19-Dec-86 0936 ohlander@venera.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes
C02833 00626 ∂19-Dec-86 0958 ohlander@venera.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes
C02835 00627 ∂19-Dec-86 1155 berman@vaxa.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes,
C02837 00628 ∂19-Dec-86 1323 DLW@ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM proposed purposes
C02839 00629 ∂19-Dec-86 1344 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Final reminder on grade sheets
C02841 00630 ∂19-Dec-86 1643 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU S8 is a bit flakey.
C02844 00631 ∂19-Dec-86 2017 Moon@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM proposed purposes
C02847 00632 ∂20-Dec-86 0049 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #88
C02852 00633 ∂22-Dec-86 1135 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #89
C02895 00634 ∂22-Dec-86 1253 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU December 24
C02896 00635 ∂22-Dec-86 1849 hpfclp!dcm@hplabs.HP.COM Charter statement
C02902 00636 ∂23-Dec-86 0052 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #90
C02908 00637 ∂23-Dec-86 0950 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Honors for Gene
C02910 00638 ∂23-Dec-86 1502 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
C02912 00639 ∂24-Dec-86 0929 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu GillisSymposia
C02919 00640 ∂24-Dec-86 0943 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu PODS Program
C02942 00641 ∂24-Dec-86 1050 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLB of 1987
C02944 00642 ∂26-Dec-86 1126 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU ATT Grant
C02946 00643 ∂29-Dec-86 1114 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Wednesday, December 31.
C02947 00644 ∂29-Dec-86 1526 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee meeting
C02948 00645 ∂30-Dec-86 1422 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C02950 00646 ∂30-Dec-86 1433 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C02951 00647 ∂30-Dec-86 1727 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU End-of-Year Msg
C02959 00648 ∂31-Dec-86 0958 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
C02961 00649 ∂31-Dec-86 1354 LES CSD-CF Cost Center Rates
C02967 00650 ∂02-Jan-87 0150 LES CSD-CF Cost Center Rates
C02971 00651 ∂02-Jan-87 0924 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI December Monthly
C02972 00652 ∂02-Jan-87 1217 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
C02975 00653 ∂02-Jan-87 1236 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA:ladkin@kestrel.ARPA MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
C02977 00654 ∂03-Jan-87 1628 talmy%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UC Davis conference on interaction of form and function in language
C02986 00655 ∂04-Jan-87 1716 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU colloquium announcement
C02990 00656 ∂05-Jan-87 0856 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C02992 00657 ∂05-Jan-87 0906 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Support
C03000 00658 ∂05-Jan-87 0919 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
C03001 00659 ∂05-Jan-87 1111 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
C03002 00660 ∂05-Jan-87 1135 INGRID@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Japanese Visitors from ATR
C03004 00661 ∂05-Jan-87 1137 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Another special issue
C03007 00662 ∂05-Jan-87 1416 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Forsythe Lectures
C03014 00663 ∂05-Jan-87 1628 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
C03015 00664 ∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU 2nd meeting minutes X3J13/86-021
C03034 00665 ∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU proposed purposes X3J13/86-020
C03039 00666 ∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU general letter X3J13/86-022
C03045 00667 ∂05-Jan-87 1739 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Visitors policy
C03051 00668 ∂06-Jan-87 0723 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU task groups
C03057 00669 ∂06-Jan-87 1015 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU combinatorics seminar
C03060 00670 ∂06-Jan-87 1107 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Test message
C03062 00671 ∂06-Jan-87 1107 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU paco 1/9/87
C03066 00672 ∂06-Jan-87 1237 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Message from Marshall Bern
C03068 00673 ∂06-Jan-87 2157 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu proposed purposes
C03072 00674 ∂07-Jan-87 0137 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:USZKOREI%DS0LILOG.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Greetings from Stuttgart
C03076 00675 ∂07-Jan-87 0841 sciore@bu-cs.bu.edu a "new" paper
C03078 00676 ∂07-Jan-87 0949 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Qlisp meeting reminder
C03080 00677 ∂07-Jan-87 1031 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLBs of 1987
C03084 00678 ∂07-Jan-87 1102 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU MIS Committee
C03086 00679 ∂07-Jan-87 1602 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Contact TAs
C03088 00680 ∂07-Jan-87 1801 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Next Weeks PLANLUNCHES -- Pierpaolo Degano and Takashi
C03095 00681 ∂07-Jan-87 1836 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, January 8, No.12
C03105 00682 ∂07-Jan-87 1855 SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU flicks schedule
C03106 00683 ∂07-Jan-87 2227 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU baruch awerbuch
C03108 00684 ∂08-Jan-87 1322 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU orphaned (still) book
C03110 00685 ∂08-Jan-87 1519 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU AFLB on 15 January changed
C03112 00686 ∂08-Jan-87 1537 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Simonovits seminar on extremal graph theory
C03114 00687 ∂08-Jan-87 1605 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
C03117 00688 ∂08-Jan-87 1645 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talks of AFLB interest
C03119 00689 ∂08-Jan-87 1705 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU Awerbuch seminar
C03123 00690 ∂08-Jan-87 1721 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Informational Meeting
C03125 00691 ∂08-Jan-87 2126 CLT Logic seminar, organizational meeting
C03127 00692 ∂09-Jan-87 0122 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V5 #1
C03137 00693 ∂09-Jan-87 1548 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Committee meeting
C03139 00694 ∂09-Jan-87 1806 @Score.Stanford.EDU:Stansbury.pa@Xerox.COM Re: MS Committee meeting
C03141 00695 ∂10-Jan-87 1541 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu We're back
C03143 00696 ∂11-Jan-87 1446 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER -- tomorrow's Planlunch -- Pierpaolo Degano
C03148 00697 ∂12-Jan-87 0111 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V5 #2
C03152 00698 ∂12-Jan-87 0958 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu More history
C03154 00699 ∂12-Jan-87 1448 FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU goodbye
C03155 00700 ∂12-Jan-87 1600 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Sunrise Club Meeting 1/20/87
C03158 00701 ∂12-Jan-87 1618 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu KB/DB notes offered
C03160 00702 ∂12-Jan-87 1712 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: More history
C03161 00703 ∂12-Jan-87 1830 @Score.Stanford.EDU:cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu CSD Colloquium
C03163 00704 ∂13-Jan-87 0836 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Pricing for Reunion
C03165 00705 ∂13-Jan-87 0843 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Lunch
C03167 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂31-Jul-86 0948 FT00%UTEP.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA RECURSIVE NEGATION
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 09:47:54 PDT
Received: from WISCVM.ARPA (wiscvm.wisc.edu) by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 31 Jul 86 09:20:12 pdt
Received: from (MUSIC)UTEPA.BITNET by WISCVM.ARPA on 07/31/86 at
11:19:12 CDT
Date: 29 July 86 19:07-MDT
From: FT00%UTEP.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
To: NAIL@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Subject: RECURSIVE NEGATION
FROM: FT00 AT UTEP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM:
Teodor C. Przymusinski, <ft00@utep.bitnet> , 915-747-5761
Department of Mathematics, University of Texas, El Paso, TX 79968
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Please, allow me to jump rather late into your discussion on recursive
negation. Only now I had a chance to read all the broadcasts and since they
involved generalizations of stratified logic programs and, in particular, the
notion of `locally stratified' programs, as introduced in my paper `On the
semantics of stratified deductive databases', I felt tempted to add my voice.
In his initial memo, Volodia presented two examples, one involving the
definition of even numbers and the other involving block-moving, and pointed
out that both of them are locally stratified but not stratified and suggested
that `... NAIL!'s restriction on the use of negation is too strong and
eliminates some reasonable programs ...'. He wondered whether the ideas of
NAIL! can be applied to locally stratified programs. This started the
exchange of arguments pro and contra...
I do not pretend to know the answer to Volodia's question, but
I believe that this issue involves answering three basic questions
listed below and I am not sure that all of them were sufficiently clarified
in the discussion:
1. Do locally stratified programs have a clearly defined semantics or -
in other words - do we really know what we are trying to say by writing
such programs? I believe that the answer is an unequivocal YES; precise
arguments can be found in my paper, but I enclose a brief discussion
below.
2. Do we know sufficiently many interesting and useful locally stratified
(but non-stratified) programs to justify such an extension? Below
I am giving some arguments, in addition to those presented by Volodia,
to justify what I believe is again an affirmative answer.
3. Do we know how to efficiently implement such an extension or do we
expect to encounter some strong precedural barriers? I do not know the
answer to this question. Some statements were made suggesting that
such an implementation is difficult. I am not quite convinced by them
and would like to hear some specific arguments. I expand on
this point below.
(By the way, I prefer to separate declarativeand procedural aspects of the
problem as much as possible. Allen seems to prefer to freely intermix them,
which is a bit confusing. For example, the semantics of locally stratified
or stratified programs is well-defined regardless of such procedural
issues as the bounded term property etc.)
Ad 1. Semantics of locally stratified programs.
To convince you that locally stratified programs have a nice and clear
semantics I am enclosing some excerpts from my paper. First definition:
DEFINITION. Suppose that P is a logic program and that < is a dependency
relation defined analogously as in Apt et. al., but on the set of GROUND ATOMS
of P insead of the set of PREDICATES of P. We say that P is LOCALLY STRATIFIED
if < is well-founded. This obviously generalizes the notion of stratified
programs. In fact, we have:
Th.1. A logic program P is locally stratified iff it is
possible to decompose the Herbrand universe H of P into infinitely many
disjoint sets H1, H2 , ... , Hr, ... so that for every ground instance
A1 /\... /\ Am /\ ~B1 /\ ... /\ ~Bn => C,
of a clause from P we have
(i) for every i<=m, Level(Ai) <= Level(C);
(ii) for every j<=n, Level(Bj) < Level(C),
where Level(A)=i, if A is in Hi.
Now we define the notion of a PERFECT MODEL of a program P.
We say that a model N of P, obtained from a model M by adding or
removing some ground atoms, is PREFERABLE to a model M
if addition of a lower priority atom A to N is always COMPENSATED by the
simultaneous removal from M of a higher priority atom B (i.e. such that B > A).
This reflects the general principle, that we are willing to minimize higher
priority atoms even at the cost of enlarging atoms of lower priority,
in an attempt to minimize high priority atoms as much as possible. A
model M is PERFECT, if there are no models preferable to it. More formally:
Definition. Suppose that M and N are two different models of P. We say that
N is preferable to M if for every ground atom A in N - M there exists an atom
B in M-N such that B > A. We say that a model M of P is perfect if there are
no models preferable to M.
The following results hold:
Th. 2. Every perfect model is minimal.
Th. 3. If P is positive, then a model M of P is perfect iff it is minimal.
Th. 4. Every locally stratified logic program has exactly one perfect model
and - in case of stratified programs -it coincides with the models
constructed by Apt et. al. and by Allen.
CONCLUSION: The unique perfect model of a locally stratified logic program
defines a correct semantics of P, incorporating a natural form
of the Closed-World Assumption.
This approach can be extended onto databases containing disjunctive information.
Ad 2. Applicability of locally stratified programs.
Volodia gave two interesting examples of locally stratified programs. Let me
add one more to it, which I believe is fairly typical of examples in the
domain of mathematics. One can easily find more complex and more
interesting examples, but for illustration purposes this one will do.
Suppose that we are interested in those numbers Z which are pure squares
i.e. such that Z=X*X, with X not being a full square. Then we would write:
p(Z) <- Z=X*X, ~p(X) % X,Z integers > 1
This clearly represents a locally stratified non-stratified program and one
can easily write a Prolog program to answer ground queries about p. Perhaps,
NAIL! should also be able to handle similar programs. It seems
to me that definitions of this type are quite common in mathematics and,
I suspect, also in other areas.
Ad 3. Procedural aspects.
Allen mentioned in his message that locally stratified programs are
`...hard to implement with any degree of generality by known methods.'
It is quite possible that he is right, but I would like to know some
specific reasons. Certainly, running out of stack by the Prolog program
evaluating the block-moving example had nothing to do with negation.
It happened only because the variable S was not instantiated. The same
thing would have happened in the program p(s(X)):-p(X) if we tried
to answer the query <- p(T) or with the `workhorse' predicate `member'.
I can see one clear difficulty with such implementation, namely how to
recognize that a program is locally stratified. One way out it,
could perhaps be to require that the length of terms
in recursive negation is supposed to decrease. This would in essence
specify a subclass of the class of locally stratified programs.
On the other hand, I do not see how to verify that a program has
a bounded term property, either
Teodor
∂31-Jul-86 1310 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA SOE retreat
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 13:10:28 PDT
Date: Thu 31 Jul 86 13:08:15-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: SOE retreat
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12227140403.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The School of Engineering had a "mini-retreat" that I attended at
which we talked over various items concerning long-range goals,
budgeting, etc. Nothing outstanding occurred, but probably the
goals, budgeting, etc. will get discussed as a matter of course
during this fall's Tuesday faculty lunches.
The invitees to this retreat were the dept. chairs, so we also had
an SOE excom mtg to consider promotions, appts., etc with these
results:
1) specifically Gupta, Shoham and Latombe were approved. Their
papers now go to the Advisory Board and provost.
2) Chan was not approved mainly because it was felt that his
recommendations (although very good) were not "outstanding." There
was also some concern about his being a half-time tenured person.
3) generally, the excom was very "quality conscious" this time (although
we are always supposed to be---I think everyone was looking more thoroughly
at papers because of the time allowed by the retreat setting).
Two other people (besides Chan) were also not approved (out of a total
of 7 considered).
There is renewed emphasis these days (from the Provost's office on
down) that tenure appointments must be TRULY OUTSTANDING!!
-Nils
-------
∂31-Jul-86 1433 KIRCHNER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 14:33:19 PDT
Date: Thu 31 Jul 86 14:17:12-PDT
From: Helene Kirchner <KIRCHNER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Goodbye,
I am coming back to France at the end of August and before leaving
I would like to thank everybody at CSLI for this extremely fruitful and
interesting year.
I'll try to keep posted with CSLI and SRI activities and hope to come
back to California sometimes.
Sincerely
Helene
-------
∂31-Jul-86 1343 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Award nominations
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 13:43:30 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 13:35:18-PDT
Date: 31 Jul 86 1336 PDT
From: Joe Weening <JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Award nominations
To: CSD-List@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: Patashnik@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Nominations are invited for the Twelfth George E. Forsythe Memorial Award
and the Second Computer Science Department Service Award. Each award is
given annually by the Computer Science Department, following the
recommendations of a committee composed of the past winners.
The Forsythe Award recognizes outstanding student contributions to the
teaching of computer science at Stanford. The award criteria guidelines
require that a recipient exhibit continued involvement as well as
excellent achievement in the field of teaching. Recent winners of the
Forsythe Award have been Veronica Falcao and Oren Patashnik.
The Service Award, initiated last year, recognizes outstanding student
contributions to the well-being of the department in non-academic areas.
Last year's Service Award winner was Joe Weening.
Please mail your nominations to Patashnik@Sushi and JJW@SAIL, and please
include with your nomination an explanation of how your nominee fulfills
these requirements. The deadline for nominations is August 10.
Thank you,
The Forsythe Award Committee
The Service Award Committee
∂31-Jul-86 1417 Thurai.CSCDdtb@HI-MULTICS.ARPA mailing list
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 14:17:31 PDT
Received: from HI-MULTICS.ARPA by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 31 Jul 86 13:59:26 pdt
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 15:56 CDT
From: Thurai@HI-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: mailing list
To: nail@DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <860731205608.191930@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Please add me to the NAIL mailing list. Thurai@hi-multics
Thanks Bhavani Thuraisingham
∂31-Jul-86 1536 mhb@Ford-wdl1.ARPA Mailing List
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 15:36:04 PDT
Received: from FORD-WDL1.ARPA by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 31 Jul 86 15:16:14 pdt
Received: by FORD-WDL1.ARPA (5.15/5.9)
id AA10019; Thu, 31 Jul 86 14:21:19 PDT
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 14:21:19 PDT
From: mhb@Ford-wdl1.ARPA (Michael H. Bender)
Message-Id: <8607312121.AA10019@FORD-WDL1.ARPA>
To: nail@su-aimvax.ARPA
Subject: Mailing List
Please remove me from the Nail mailing list.
Thanks, Mike
∂31-Jul-86 1854 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Re: Award nominations
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 18:54:13 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 18:49:38-PDT
Date: 31 Jul 86 1850 PDT
From: Joe Weening <JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Award nominations
To: CSD-List@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: Patashnik@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
A few people so far have responded with a name, without any mention of why
their nominee should receive the Forsythe or Service Award. Please
remember to include a few sentences describing what the person has done
to deserve the award.
Thanks for the nominations made so far!
∂31-Jul-86 1902 ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU Re: Mailing List
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 19:01:30 PDT
Received: from sally.UTEXAS.EDU by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 31 Jul 86 18:50:46 pdt
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 20:32:34 cdt
From: ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU (Arthur M. Keller)
Posted-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 20:32:34 cdt
Message-Id: <8608010132.AA21398@sally.UTEXAS.EDU>
Received: by sally.UTEXAS.EDU (4.22/4.22)
id AA21398; Thu, 31 Jul 86 20:32:34 cdt
To: mhb@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
Subject: Re: Mailing List
Cc: nail@DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU
Perhaps there should be a nail-request@diablo.stanford.edu for requests
to be added to or deleted from nail, as there are few who know how to
get the mailer to do it directly.
(-:
Perhaps there should also be a nail-requestors@diablo.stanford.edu
listing all those who have sent mail to the nail mailing list to be
added to or deleted from that list. They would be on that list
instead of nail. All messages sent to nail requesting addition or
deletion from nail would then be redirected to nail-requestors. After
all these people have publicly demonstrated an interest in the
maintenance of the nail mailing list, while most recipients of nail
have not. :-)
Arthur
∂31-Jul-86 1936 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 19:25:02 PDT
Received: from ames-io.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 19:19:55-PDT
Received: from JUP by IO with VMS ;
Thu, 31 Jul 86 19:14:00 PDT
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 19:14:00 PDT
From: WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: @sig03.dis
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Wednesday, August 6, 1986, 7:30 PM
Dick House, Pacific Sierra Research
FORGE System: Interactive Vectorization Aid for Supercomputers
At AXIOM Systems
1589 Centre Pointe Drive, Milpitas
Near Montague & Capital, east of 17
For directions: 408/943-9460
Wheelchair Access
For more information: Mary Fowler, 415/972-6531, 839-6547
∂31-Jul-86 2126 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu CALL FOR PAPERS - RTA-87
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 21:26:15 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 21:21:22-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 21:21:29-PDT
Received: from uwisc by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 31 Jul 86 23:05:58 CDT
Return-Path: mcvax!crin!lescanne@seismo.CSS.GOV
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 29 Jul 86 16:26:04 CDT
Return-Path: <mcvax!crin!lescanne>
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV with UUCP; Tue, 29 Jul 86 16:58:00 EDT
Received: by mcvax.uucp; Tue, 29 Jul 86 22:39:30 +0200 (MET)
Received: by inria.UUCP; Tue, 29 Jul 86 21:15:41 -0100 (MET)
Received: by crin.UUCP; Wed, 16 Jul 86 21:10:00 -0200 (MET)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 86 21:10:00 -0200
From: mcvax!crin!lescanne@seismo.CSS.GOV (Pierre LESCANNE)
Message-Id: <8607161910.AA04129@crin.UUCP>
To: theory@wisc-rsch.ARPA
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS - RTA-87
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 23:05:32 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
RTA-87
2nd INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
on
REWRITING TECHNIQUES AND APPLICATIONS
May 25-27 1987 Bordeaux, France
TOPICS
In May 1985 the First International Conference on Rewriting Techniques
and Applications met at Dijon. The conference was a great success, attracting
over 100 researchers working on rewriting techniques. The second conference
will take place at Bordeaux, another city famous for its wine, in May 1987.
Papers concerning the theory and applications of term rewriting are solicited
for the conference. Areas of interest include the following, but authors are
encouraged to submit papers on other topics as well.
Equational Deduction Functional and Logic Programming
Computer Algebra Automated Theorem Proving
Unification and Matching Algorithms Rewrite Rule Based Expert Systems
Algebraic and Operational Semantics Semantics of Nondeterminism
Theory of general rewriting systems Rewriting and Computer Architecture
Specification, Transformation, Validation and Generation of Programs
SUBMISSION
Each submission should include 11 copies of a one page abstract and 4
copies of a full paper of no more than 15 double spaced pages. Submissions are
to be sent to one of the Co-Chairmen:
For Europe: Pierre Lescanne, RTA-87, Centre de Recherche en
Informatique de Nancy, Campus Scientifique, BP 239,
54506 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy Cedex, FRANCE.
For other countries: David Plaisted, RTA-87,
Department of Computer Science,
New West Hall 035-A,
University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill,
Chapel Hill NC 27514, USA.
Paper selection will be done by circulating abstracts to all members of the
program committee, with each full paper assigned to several committee members
having appropriate expertise. In addition to selected papers, a few invited
lectures will be given by well-known researchers who have made major
contributions in the field:
INVITED LECTURERS
J-P. Jouannaud, University of Paris-Sud, France,
D. Musser, GE Research and Development Laboratory, Schenectady, USA,
M. O'Donnell, University of Chicago, Illinois, USA.
SCHEDULE
Paper submission deadline is December 15, 1986.
Acceptance/Rejection by January 25, 1987.
Camera ready copy by March 9.
Proceedings will be distributed at the conference and published by Springer
Verlag in the LNCS series.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
B. Buchberger, University of Linz, Austria,
R. Book, University of Santa Barbara, USA,
B. Courcelle, University of Bordeaux, France,
N. Dershowitz, University of Illinois, USA,
J. Guttag, MIT, USA,
D. Kapur, General Electric, USA,
P. Lescanne, (Program co-Chairman) CRIN, France,
R. Loos, University of Karlsruhe, FRG,
D. Plaisted, (Program co-Chairman), University of North Carolina, USA
G. Plotkin, University of Edinburgh, UK,
M. Stickel, SRI-International, USA.
LOCAL COMMITTEE
B. Courcelle, R. Cori, M. Claverie
For information send mail on UUCP to: mcvax!inria!crin!lescanne
or on ARPAnet to: pierre@larch.
--------------
TN Message #62
--------------
∂31-Jul-86 2138 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu changes of addresses
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Jul 86 21:37:56 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 21:31:03-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 21:09:53-PDT
Message-Id: <8608010354.AA08911@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from uwisc by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 31 Jul 86 22:54:59 CDT
To: TheoryNet-list:;
Subject: changes of addresses
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 86 22:54:47 -0500
From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Here are 3 changes of addresses. I am using a new mail program.
As far as I can tell it works fine, and you should not get a
long (garbage) header like the last message. If there are any problems
let me know.
-- Udi Manber
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi. I have recently accepted an endowed chair (called Millican P
Professorship) at UCF. My address after 15 August will be:
Prof. Narsingh Deo
Department of Computer Science
University of Central Florida
Orlando, FL 32816
The new csnet address will be deo@ucf.
Narsingh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear colleague.
Starting Aug. 10-th and through the next accademic year my address will be
Prof. A.Paz
Dept of Math and CS
University of Denver University Park.
Denver 80208-0189
Colorado USA
csnet address - paz@udenver.
Sincerely A.Paz Technion-Haifa.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am leaving Bell Labs to join the faculty of the University of Liege in
Belgium. Starting August 1, my address will be:
Institut Montefiore, B28
Universite de Liege au Sart-Tilman
4000 LIEGE
BELGIUM
Pierre Wolper
--------------
TN Message #61
--------------
∂01-Aug-86 0107 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JGRAY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Temporary hosts needed in fall
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 86 01:07:22 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 1 Aug 86 00:58:05-PDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 00:57:41-PDT
From: Jamison R. Gray <JGRAY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Temporary hosts needed in fall
To: csd-list@Score.Stanford.EDU, csd@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12227269553.9.JGRAY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Would you be willing to offer floor space or a couch to a new computer
science student in need? The CSD orientation committee needs people
who would be willing to put up an incoming student for a night; your
name would be listed along with the other kind souls willing to
provide this service, in the orientation letter to be mailed out to
our new grad students, who will be arriving in september.
This doesn't represent a promise to be a tour guide, mentor, or taxi
service (though it isn't too late to volunteer to be a student
advisor!): all you are expected to provide is a place to sleep for a
night or two. Whatever you want to provide beyond that is completely
up to you. And it doesn't mean you have to host someone every or any
night -- you'd just be one person in a list of people to call, and are
free to decline if it happens to be an inconvenience that night.
I don't know how many of you stayed with a CSD member when you arrived
here. I was lonely and terrified when I first drove into Palo Alto,
and it meant an awful lot to me to have someone to call; my host
not only gave me a space to sleep, but gave me some encouragement and
advice, and it made a big difference for me.
Though this has been a student service in the past, I don't see any
reason why a faculty or staff member couldn't help out if they wanted.
An important requirement is that you know where you'll be during the
period people will be arriving, probably from late August to the
beginning of October. If you're interested, please send the following
information to jgray@sushi: NAME, ADDRESS, HOME PHONE, and WORK
PHONE.
<Begin National Anthem in background>
Think, for a moment, of those tired and poor huddled masses,
travelling west toward an unknown future, following a Dream. A Dream
of graduate study in computer science. A Dream of academic freedom,
governed by an immortal document called the Fundamental Standard. A
Dream of a sun-drenched, palm-tree-filled place called Stanford.
YOU can help these people find their dream. Your couch can be their
Ellis Island, your tacky living room lamp their shining beacon of
hope and liberty.
<National Anthem gets louder>
Yes, in this important year, the centennial of Miss Liberty, YOU have
the opportunity to do your part, in ushering in the Future of Our
Department. Say YES, by replying to this message, and you can make a
big difference for some new student. It really doesn't take much, and
you might even make a friend.
<National Anthem rises toward tear-inducing climax>
Please help welcome these frightened newcomers to our palm-lined
shores, and reply by next tuesday, August 5th. Do your part for the
next generation.
Thank you.
On the brink of (sniff) tears,
The Orientation Committee
-------
∂01-Aug-86 0911 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ELECTION RESULTS
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 86 09:11:46 PDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 09:08:08-PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ELECTION RESULTS
To: officers: ;
cc: AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12227358835.10.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I'm pleased to announce the new executive council members for 1986-1989.
They are Barbara Grosz (752 votes of 1348 ballots); Doug Lenat (737/1348);
William Woods (685/1348); and Lynn Conway (675/1348).
This year was probably the worst year for ballot returns. Normally about 30%
of the membership votes; 11% voted this year.
The other nominees received the following votes:
David Barstow -- 595
Judea Pearl -- 554
Tomas Lozano-Perez -- 429
A. Joshi -- 422
I'd like to remind you that the informal Exec Council meeting has changed
to Salon 8 at 6:00 pm on SUnday, AUgust 10, and the formal Exec Council
meeting is still at 6:30 pm on Tuesday, Aug 12 in Salon 10 at the
Franklin Plaza Hotel.
See you at the conference!
Claudia
-------
∂01-Aug-86 1110 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The next couple of weeks.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 86 11:10:26 PDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 11:08:59-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: The next couple of weeks.
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12227380835.69.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Just as Mr Acuff is to be away for the next couple of weeks so will
I be. I plan to make a Poligon release today, which should be enough
to keep Poligon users going for a couple of weeks. Because of the lack
of anyone to fix hardware/software for the next couple of weeks you
would all be well advised to back up your work to Ardvax.
If you need to get in touch with me I'll try to read my mail though
I cannot guarantee it. My finger.Plan says where I'll be.
Rice.
-------
∂01-Aug-86 1331 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon Release - What's new
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 86 13:31:40 PDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 13:30:21-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Poligon Release - What's new
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12227406571.57.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Sorry, in my last message I forgot to mention what's different about
the new release. The major difference is a reimplementation of Futures
in the serial mode. This should improve the fidelity of the simulation
and should remove the problems that user were having with the Immediate
scheduler.
There are a few new options on some of the menus that come out of the
command menu. These are all documented in the new manual.
Sundry bugs have been fixed.
If you have any trouble using this whilst I'm away you should be able
to a) back off to the older version b) try putting in a few uparrows.
Rice.
-------
∂01-Aug-86 1353 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon Release.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 86 13:53:15 PDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 13:18:11-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Poligon Release.
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12227404355.57.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have just released a new version of the Poligon Compiler and run-time
system. The old versions are now called Poligon-Language and Poligon
respectively and the new ones are New-Poligon-Language and New-Poligon.
I have just generated a new version of the manual (5.1). I will make up
a few copies and put them on my desk along with the master for anyone who
wants one.
Rice.
-------
∂02-Aug-86 1205 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Hamiltonian Circuits
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Aug 86 12:05:51 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 2 Aug 86 12:02:03-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 2 Aug 86 12:02:15-PDT
Received: from uwisc by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 2 Aug 86 13:46:14 CDT
Return-Path: PEHOUSHEK@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 1 Aug 86 20:25:17 CDT
Date: Fri 1 Aug 86 13:47:22-PDT
From: Daniel Pehoushek <PEHOUSHEK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Hamiltonian Circuits
To: THEORY@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Message-Id: <12227409667.39.PEHOUSHEK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 86 13:44:39 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
I am new to TheoryNet, so please forgive any etiquette blunders.
I have any algorithm which finds the minimum weighted Hamiltonian Circuit in
a graph, or proves that none exist. It works quite well for sparse graphs,
such as 3-regular graphs. It is provably exponential, in general, though. It
is also provably polynomial on a non-trivial class of graphs.
It is most successful on 3-regular graphs with less than 60 or so vertices. On
a XEROX 1108 workstation (virtually a micro) it generally finds the minimum
weighted circuit in times ranging from seconds (for 3-regular 30 vertex graphs)
to minutes (3-regular 60 vertex graphs). Randomly generated 3-regular graphs
tend to be hamiltonian almost all the time, after about 20 vertices.
Does anyone have a similar algorithm for sparse graphs? How well does the
polyhedral approach for TSP work on sparse graphs? Would anyone like to compare
results? I am willing to find the minimum weight Hamiltonian Circuit in any
3-regular graph with up 60 vertices, or to declare it non-hamiltonian; just
send by EMAIL a comprehensible graph structure.
It may be that someone has already discovered this algorithm, in which case
I appear to be young, brash, and foolish. Oh well. If there is sufficient
interest, I may be able to release a version of the code (20-30 pages, Lisp).
Sincerely, Dan Pehoushek (PEHOUSHEK@SCORE.ARPA)
Systems Control Technology, Inc.
1801 Page Mill Rd.
Palo Alto, CA. 94303
(415) 494-2233
--------------
TN Message #63
--------------
∂03-Aug-86 2154 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- John Myers
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 86 21:54:12 PDT
Date: Sun 3 Aug 86 21:47:30-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- John Myers
To: planlunch-reminder.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 3-Aug-86 21:47:30.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DECISION-MAKING AND ACTION IN THE REAL WORLD
John Myers (JMYERS@SRI-AI)
SRI International, Robotics Laboratory
11:00 AM, MONDAY, Aug. 4
SRI International, Building E, Room EK228
In this philosophical talk I will present my opinions as to how to
design an entity capable of operating in the real world, under limited
resources. These include limited time, information, and capabilities.
I will present models that stress heuristic aspects of behavior,
rather than traditional pre-planning techniques. As Terry Winograd has
said, "The main problem is to come up with what you are going to do in
the next five seconds."
After covering the problem and some traditional paradigms, I will
discuss three main concepts, along with a follow-up concept. These
are: the Theory of Stances, the Freudian Motivation Model, and the
Theory of Alternative Choices, along with the Principle of
Responsibility. These are contrasted against traditional approaches
by their emphasis on workability, as opposed to correctness.
Examples will be interspersed in the talk.
-------
∂03-Aug-86 2216 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu 4th International Conference on Logic Programming
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Aug 86 22:16:00 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sun 3 Aug 86 22:10:21-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 3 Aug 86 22:10:31-PDT
Received: from uwisc by rsch.wisc.edu; Sun, 3 Aug 86 23:54:02 CDT
Return-Path: JLL@IBM.COM
Received: from ibm-sj.csnet by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 2 Aug 86 01:43:20 CDT
Date: 1 August 1986, 23:23:06 EDT
From: Jean-Louis Lassez <JLL@ibm.com>
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <080186.232306.jll@ibm.com>
Subject: 4th International Conference on Logic Programming
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Sun, 03 Aug 86 23:53:50 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
Fourth International Conference On Logic Programming
University of Melbourne, Australia
Late May 1987
The conference will consider all aspects of logic
programming, including, but not limited to:
Theory and Foundations
Architectures and Implementations
Programming Languages and Methodology
Databases
Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Expert Systems
Relations to other computation models, programming
languages, and programming methodologies.
Of special interest are papers discussing novel applications
and applications that address the unique character of logic
programming.
Papers can be submitted under two categories, short - up to
2000 words, and long - up to 6000 words. Submissions will
be considered on basis of appropriateness, clarity,
originality, significance, and overall quality.
Authors should send six copies of their manuscript, plus an
extra copy of the abstract to:
Jean-Louis Lassez
ICLP Program Chairman
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
H1-A12
P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
USA
Deadline for submission of papers is December 1, 1986.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by
February 28, 1987. Camera ready copies are due April 1st,
1987.
General Chairman:
John Lloyd
Department of Computer Science
University of Melbourne
Parkville, Victoria 3052
Australia
Program Committee
Ken Bowen, Syracuse, USA
Keith Clark, Imperial College, U.K.
Jacques Cohen, Brandeis, USA
Veronica Dahl, Simon Fraser University, Canada
Maarten van Emden, University of Waterloo, Canada
Koichi Furukawa, ICOT, Japan
Ivan Futo, SZKI, Hungary
Seif Haridi, SICS, Sweden
Jean-Louis Lassez, Yorktown Heights, USA
Giorgio Levi, University of Pisa, Italy
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Institute, Israel
John Lloyd, University of Melbourne, Australia
Fumio Mizoguchi, Science University of Tokyo, Japan
Fernando Pereira, SRI International, USA
Antonio Porto, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Marek Sergot, Imperial College, U.K.
David Warren, Manchester University, U.K.
--------------
TN Message #64
--------------
∂04-Aug-86 0058 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #32
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 86 00:58:10 PDT
Date: Saturday, August 2, 1986 12:30PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #32
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 4 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 32
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Fourth International Conference On LP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 August 1986, 23:11:51 EDT
From: Jean-Louis Lassez <JLL@ibm.com>
Subject: Fourth International Conference On Logic Programming
CALL FOR PAPERS
Fourth International Conference On Logic Programming
University of Melbourne, Australia
Late May 1987
The conference will consider all aspects of logic
programming, including, but not limited to:
Theory and Foundations
Architectures and Implementations
Programming Languages and Methodology
Databases
Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Expert Systems
Relations to other computation models, programming
languages, and programming methodologies.
Of special interest are papers discussing novel applications
and applications that address the unique character of logic
programming.
Papers can be submitted under two categories, short - up to
2000 words, and long - up to 6000 words. Submissions will
be considered on basis of appropriateness, clarity,
originality, significance, and overall quality.
Authors should send six copies of their manuscript, plus an
extra copy of the abstract to:
Jean-Louis Lassez
ICLP Program Chairman
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
H1-A12
P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
USA
Deadline for submission of papers is December 1, 1986.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by
February 28, 1987. Camera ready copies are due April 1st,
1987.
General Chairman:
John Lloyd
Department of Computer Science
University of Melbourne
Parkville, Victoria 3052
Australia
Program Committee
Ken Bowen, Syracuse, USA
Keith Clark, Imperial College, U.K.
Jacques Cohen, Brandeis, USA
Veronica Dahl, Simon Fraser University, Canada
Maarten van Emden, University of Waterloo, Canada
Koichi Furukawa, ICOT, Japan
Ivan Futo, SZKI, Hungary
Seif Haridi, SICS, Sweden
Jean-Louis Lassez, Yorktown Heights, USA
Giorgio Levi, University of Pisa, Italy
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Institute, Israel
John Lloyd, University of Melbourne, Australia
Fumio Mizoguchi, Science University of Tokyo, Japan
Fernando Pereira, SRI International, USA
Antonio Porto, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Marek Sergot, Imperial College, U.K.
David Warren, Manchester University, U.K.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂04-Aug-86 1425 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Softball
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Aug 86 14:25:26 PDT
Date: Mon 4 Aug 86 14:11:57-PDT
From: Gary Holden <HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Softball
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: msgs@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
Everyone is invited and strongly encouraged to come for a strictly
fun game of softball on Friday afternoons. Place: Roble field. Time: 5
o'clock sharp.
Gary.
-------
∂05-Aug-86 0618 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talk at DEC-SRC
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Aug 86 06:18:13 PDT
Date: Tue 5 Aug 86 06:14:33-PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Talk at DEC-SRC
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12228375811.8.PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Here's a talk of AFLB interest, to be held on Thursday, Aug. 7, 10:30,
at DEC-SRC, 130 Lytton Ave, Palo Alto (driving instructions follow the
abstract).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Effect of Link Failures on Computations in Asynchronous Rings
Liuba Shrira
Dept. of Computer Science,
Technion, Haifa, Israel
We investigate the message complexity of distributed computations on
rings of asynchronous processors. In such computations, each
processor has an initial local value and the task is to compute some
predetermined function of all local values. Our work deviates from
the traditional approach to complexity of ring computations in that
we consider the effect of link failures. A link is said to fail if some
message sent through it never reaches its destination.
We show that the complexity of any non-trivial function is THETA(n
log n) messages when n, the number of processors, is a-priori known;
and is THETA(n↑2) when n is not known. Interestingly, these tight
bounds do not depend on whether the identity of a leader is known
before the computation starts. These results stand in sharp contrast
to the situation in an asynchronous ring with no link failures, where
the message complexity is affected by the a-priori knowledge of a
leader but is not affected by the knowledge of n.
This is joint work with Oded Goldreich, from MIT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Visitors: DEC-SRC is located at 130 Lytton Ave., in Palo Alto. That
is the red brick building on the corner of Lytton and Alma, opposite
Bagel Works. Lytton is parallel to University and is the next street
north. Alma is parallel to El Camino and is the next street east
(towards 101). University is the street that continues Palm Drive.
The other end of Palm Drive is the oval in front of Stanford CSD. The
total distance from CSD to DEC is about 1 mile.
The entrance into our parking structure is from High street. High is
parallel is one block east of Alma and is a one-way street going from
Lytton towards University. Hence you need to get first on Lytton, turn
on High, and then immediately turn right into the parking structure.
IN THE PARKING: By the time you arrive probably all ground level
parking will be full. On the left side, at the end, there is a ramp
that takes you to more parking spaces on the roof. Register your car
at the front desk.
-------
∂05-Aug-86 0926 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu Book Received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Aug 86 09:26:11 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 5 Aug 86 09:15:23 pdt
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 86 09:15:23 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Book Received
To: nail@diablo
"On Knowledge Base Management Systems"
(Brodie&Mylopoulos, eds.)
Springer-Verlag.
This is the proceedings of the Islamorada Workshop on "Area X."
---jeff
∂05-Aug-86 0953 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu papers received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Aug 86 09:51:49 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 5 Aug 86 09:38:25 pdt
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 86 09:38:25 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@diablo
These are all by M. V. Hermenegildo, of U Texas, Austin
1) "Efficient Management of Backtracking and AND-Parallelism
(with R. I. Nasr)
2)"An abstract Machine for Restricted AND-parallel execution of logic programs"
3) "Goal scheduling and memory management in parallel logic systems"
(with G. J. Lipovski and R. A. Warren)
4)"A restricted AND-parallel execution model and abstract machine
for Prolog programs" (MCC Tech. rept. PP-104-85)
5)"B-log: a branch-and-bound methodology for the parallel execution
of logic programs." (with Lipovski)
The first of these actually taught me something interesting.
First, suppose you use only *restricted* AND-parallelism,
i.e., you only work on two goals in parallel if they are
independent--there is no variable found in arguments of both
goals. [Example: p(f(X),Y) and q(Z,g(h(X,Y))) are not independent,
because they share X.]
Then if you are executing independent goals in parallel, and one
of them fails, you can fail all the goals, because no way in which
the other goals succeed can make the failing goal succeed.
Note that is not the case if you are executing, say p(X,Y)
in parallel with q(Y,Z), because if q fails, perhaps it does so because
p instantiated Y to a bad value, and another instantiation of Y allows p
to succeed.
---jeff
∂06-Aug-86 0449 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #33
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 86 04:49:03 PDT
Date: Tuesday, August 5, 1986 6:00PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #33
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 6 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 33
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Farmer Problem,
Query - Compiler
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 86 18:02:14 GMT
From: Mario O. Bourgoin
Subject: How should I do this?
Hello,
I am trying to write a solution program for the Farmer
problem. Simply stated:
A farmer wants to move himself, a silver fox, a fat goose and
some jucy grain across a river. Unfortunately, his boat is so
tiny he can only take one of his things across on any trip.
Worse yet, an unattended fox will eat a goose, and an
unattended goose will eat the grain, so the farmer must not
leave the fox alone with the goose or the goose alone with the
grain. What is he to do?
So far, I have stated the problem in the way outlined below. Can
someone help we to get this working? It figures out the first
alternative of moving the goose across but then starts looping
on what to do for the next move.
same(yes,1,1).
same(yes,2,2).
same(no,1,2).
same(no,2,1).
legal(state(F,X,G,A)) :-
(same(no,X,G);same(yes,F,X)),
(same(no,G,A);same(yes,F,G)).
linked(state(F1,X1,G1,A1),state(F2,X2,G2,A2)) :-
same(no,F1,F2),
(same(yes,X1,X2);(same(yes,F1,X1),same(yes,G1,G2),same
(yes,A1,A2))),
(same(yes,G1,A2);(same(yes,F1,G1),same(yes,X1,X2),same
(yes,A1,A2))),
(same(yes,A1,A2);(same(yes,F1,A1),same(yes,G1,G2),same
(yes,X1,X2))).
path(State1,State2) :-
legal(State1),legal(State2),
(linked(State1,State2);(path(State1,State3),path(State3,
State2))).
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Aug 86 10:15:59-CDT
From: Dave Plummer <ATP.PLUMMER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Stand-alone compiler
Can anyone tell me anything about the Prolog stand-alone
compiler described in version 3 of the Edinburgh Prolog
manual? In particular:
a] Where can I get a copy ?
b] Will it compile programs written under version 3.3 of
Edinburgh Prolog?
c] Will it solve the following problem... My program is
too big for the 'incore' compiler, in that when I call
'compile(ListOfAll50Files).' with ListOfAll50Files suitably
instantiated the compiler gives the message '? heap full'
before finishing up. Will the stand-alone compiler exhibit
the same symptoms ?
Thanks you.
-- Dave
------------------------------
Date: Tue 5 Aug 86 10:35:58-PDT
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Stand-alone compiler
That's puzzling, I don't remember there ever being a note on the
stand-alone bootstrap compiler that is used to build DEC-10/20 Prolog.
Anyway, the compiler (which I have) is not really usable for user
programs, it only works for specially prepared stand-alone programs
(like the Prolog system itself). I'm afraid your ``heap full'' problem
is the result of the limited address space of the DEC-10/20 machines
(256K words). The only solution I see for your problem is to use a
Prolog on a machine with a larger address space (VAX, Sun,...).
Sorry for the bad news...
-- Fernando
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Aug-86 0756 simon@mimsy.umd.edu Re: papers received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 86 07:56:18 PDT
Received: from mimsy.umd.edu by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 6 Aug 86 07:34:35 pdt
Received: by mimsy.umd.edu (5.9/4.7) id AA02560; Wed, 6 Aug 86 10:33:02 EDT
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 86 10:33:02 EDT
From: Simon Kasif <simon@mimsy.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8608061433.AA02560@mimsy.umd.edu>
To: ullman@diablo.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: papers received
Cc: nail@diablo.stanford.edu
I have not seen the paper from U. Texas but the observation that
if you execute variable independent goals in parallel and one of them
fails => all fail is really a special case of the observation
that we made in the Intelligent Channel strategy.
There, you execute everybody (whether they share a variable or not).
However, all the AND goals must agree on the current instantiation
of the shared variables. Once , one of the goals fails with this binding
you faill all of them and backtrack to the next binding (if exists).
Obviously, if there are no shared variables in the current list of goals
the complete failure of one fails the rest.
One of the motivations is to detect failures as early as possible.
The other, minimize copying and save memory (only one environment
is needed to record the active binding).
--simon.
p.s. I recently has been thinking about the following problem
partially inspired by reading Z. Galil and U. Vishkin papers on
optimal parallelism. Namely, you are given a fixed number
of processors P: get "optimal speedup".
A small instance of this problem is the one I (and student )
looked at.
Given a goal G1,G2, ...Gn and P processors;
For different values of N and P what should you do: allocate a processor
to each goal or use more processors to solve individual goals.
The analysis we did so far is rather trivial but some of the answers
are a bit surprising
and depend on the distribution of "good bindings"
and "bad bindings" and the ability to parallelize the execution
of individual goals. Has people in the nail group looked at this problem?
∂06-Aug-86 1348 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA No PLANLUNCH next week.
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 86 13:48:16 PDT
Date: Wed 6 Aug 86 13:42:39-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: No PLANLUNCH next week.
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 6-Aug-86 13:42:39.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Due to AAAI, there will be no PLANLUNCH next week. The following
week, PLANLUNCH will be on Wednesday (August 20). Russ Greiner
will be giving a talk on analogical reasoning.
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂07-Aug-86 0833 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Colloquia, seminars, etc.
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Aug 86 08:33:31 PDT
Date: Thu 7 Aug 86 08:23:14-PDT
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Colloquia, seminars, etc.
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Michael would like to compile a list of all the colloquia, seminars, con-
ferences, talks, visitors, etc. that will happen in the 1986-87 year. If
you know of any that will be happening anywhere on campus and might be of
interest, could you let me know as much information as you have at this
time? Thanks very much. Marti at Philosophy
-------
∂07-Aug-86 1730 CLELAND@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Goodbye
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Aug 86 17:30:35 PDT
Date: Thu 7 Aug 86 17:21:49-PDT
From: Carol Cleland <CLELAND@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Goodbye
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Dear Folks,
As I am leaving California for Colorado tomorrow, I want to take the time
now to express my thanks to everyone at CSLI for an exciting and rewarding
year.
Carol
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
-------
∂07-Aug-86 1819 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Softball reminder
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Aug 86 18:19:30 PDT
Date: Thu 7 Aug 86 18:07:19-PDT
From: Gary Holden <HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Softball reminder
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU,
msgs@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
Don't forget: Softball
5 pm
Friday 8th August
Roble field
Everyone is welcome!
Gary.
-------
∂08-Aug-86 0115 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #34
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Aug 86 01:14:53 PDT
Date: Thursday, August 7, 1986 11:00AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #34
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 8 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 34
Today's Topics:
Announcement - LP conference,
Query - Bagof Bug,
Puzzle - Farmer's
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 August 1986, 10:52:40 EDT
From: Jean-Louis Lassez <JLL@ibm.com>
Subject: LP conference
The dates of the 4th International Logic Programming
Conference have now been determined. The conference
will be held at the University of Melbourne on the
25-29 May 1987.
Thank you,
-- jl
------------------------------
Date: Wed 6 Aug 86 14:38:43-CDT
From: Dave Plummer <ATP.PLUMMER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: DEC-10 Bagof - Bug?
Given the program:
p(1,←).
p(2,←).
p(3,3).
p(4,4).
and the goal bagof(X, p(X,Y), S). Edinburgh DEC-10 Prolog
returns,
S = [1,2,3]
X = ←??
Y = 3
and on backtracking
S = [4]
X = ←??
Y = 4
This behaviour doesn't agree with my reading of the
documentation, since the solution set [1,2,4] is
consistent with Y = 4. Is this a bug?
-- Dave
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 86 17:22:00 BST
From: William Clocksin <wfc%cam.cl@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Subject: Farmer Puzzle
Mario Bougoin's Farmer problem: does it help to say
that this problem is a thinly disguised "Missionaries
and Cannibals" problem, the solution to which appears
in various places i.e., Kowalski's book.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 86 10:46:32 pdt
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Farmer problem
My suggestion is to first take all the or's (;'s) out
of the program and see if what you have makes sense.
This will give you a better chance of having a correct
program. In particular, the rule for linked←state
looks suspicious and is overly complicated. Taking the
or's out will also make it more obvious why the program
loops. Others will no doubt point out the cause, but
you can see for yourself using 'trace'.
There are 2 ways to remove or's from the rule p :- a,(b; c),d.
If goal 'a' is cheap, just split it into
p :- a, b, d. p :- a, c, d.
If 'a' is expensive, and you don't want to pay to redo it when
b fails, invent a new predicate, say b←or←c, and write
p :- a, b←or←c, d. b←or←c :- b. b←or←c :- c.
10 or 20 simple rules are easier to check for correctness and
completeness than 4 complicated ones.
------------------------------
Date: 06 Aug 86 15:25:08 PDT (Wed)
From: vis!greg@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Subject: Farmer, Wolf, Goose/Goat, Grain/Cabbage
% Here's a solution to the Farmer, Wolf, Goat/Goose,
% Cabbage/Grain problem. Improvements could be made by:
%
% 1. Using a better data structure for states already
% seen, e.g. a tree, a hash table, assert, or a bit set.
%
% 2. Using best first search.
%
% Fortunately, we can separate these concerns from the
% problem.
%
% Domain independent depth first search rules:
% solve( initial State, Goal state, solution Path )
solve(S,G,P) :- path(S,G,[S],P).
% path( current State, Goal state, History list,
% solution Path
path(G,G,H,H).
path(S,G,H,P) :- move(S,N), % move to a New state
not(unsafe(N)), % which is legal
not(member(N,H)), % and not seen before
path(N,G,[N|H],P). % then complete the path
member(X,[X|T]) :- !.
member(X,[Y|T]) :- member(X,T).
% Domain rules (independent of search strategy):
move(fwgc(X,W,G,C), fwgc(Y,W,G,C)) :- opp(X,Y). % farmer goes alone
move(fwgc(X,X,G,C), fwgc(Y,Y,G,C)) :- opp(X,Y). % farmer takes wolf
move(fwgc(X,W,X,C), fwgc(Y,W,Y,C)) :- opp(X,Y). % farmer takes goat
move(fwgc(X,W,G,X), fwgc(Y,W,G,Y)) :- opp(X,Y). % farmer takes cabbage
opp(e,w). opp(w,e). % East and West are opposites
unsafe(fwgc(F,X,X,C)) :- opp(F,X). % wolf would eat goat
unsafe(fwgc(F,W,X,X)) :- opp(F,X). % goat would eat cabbage
% example query:
% ?- solve( fwgc(e,e,e,e), fwgc(w,w,w,w), Solution ).
-- J. Greg Davidson
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 86 12:42:10 edt
From: Yasuda%upenn-graded@cis.upenn.edu
Subject: Solution; Farmer Problem
Here we go! The solution here is due to
Ronald M. Lee.
/*********************************************************/
/* The Farmer and the River Problem */
/*********************************************************/
/*********************************************************/
/* Problem:
The Farmer has a goat, a cabbage, and a wolf. He needs to
cross a river, but his boat will only hold himself and one
other article. The problem arises because 1)the cabbage and
the goat cannot be left unattended, nor 2) can the goat and
the wolf.
*/
/* state predicate describes the arrangement of the
four individuals, whether they are here or there.
state(Farmer, Cabbage, Goat, Wolf) */
forbid( state(here, there, there, ←)). /* restriction 1 */
forbid( state(here, ←, there, there)). /* restriction 2 */
forbid( state(there, here, here, ←)). /* dual of 1 */
forbid( state(there, ←, here, here)). /* dual of 2 */
crossing( state(here, X, Y, Z),
state(there, X, Y, Z)). /* cross alone */
crossing( state(here, here, Y, Z),
state(there, there, Y, Z)). /* cross with Cabbage */
crossing( state(here, X, here, Z),
state(there, X, there, Z)). /* cross with Goat */
crossing( state(here, X, Y, here),
state(there, X, Y,there)). /* cross with Wolf */
trans(X, Y) :- crossing(X, Y),
not(forbid(Y)).
trans(X, Y) :- crossing(Y, X),
not(forbid(Y)).
go(X, Z, [X|L]) :- plan(X, Z, L, [X]).
plan(X, X, [], ←). /* terminating condition */
plan(X, Z, [Y|L], Q) :-
trans(X,Y),
not(member(Y, Q)),
plan(Y, Z, L, [Y|Q]).
/* plan(From, To, Update←Route, Old←route):
You can read it as: "You can go from From to
To via Update←Route, if there is a trans from From
to To, and if you haven't been to Y before ( prevents
looping), and if you can go gom From to To."
*/
/* member/2 */
member(X,[X|←]).
member(X,[←|Rest]):- member(X,Rest).
/* to test this program just call
go(state(here,here,here,here),
state(there,there,there,there),
L).
*/
Sincerely,
-- Osvaldo
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂08-Aug-86 0801 BRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU gone Aug. 10th thru 21st
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Aug 86 07:55:33 PDT
Date: Fri 8 Aug 86 07:47:57-PDT
From: Brad Horak <Brad@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: gone Aug. 10th thru 21st
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I'll be at AAAI next week, and then on vacation for a few days the following
week. I plan on reading mail occasionally during that time, but please
contact another member of the computer group if you have a problem that I
can't handle remotely.
--Brad
-------
∂08-Aug-86 1044 COWER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU System Stability
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Aug 86 10:44:06 PDT
Date: Fri 8 Aug 86 10:40:18-PDT
From: Rich Cower <COWER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: System Stability
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cower@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
We might have found and fixed the cause of the crashes this morning.
I'm not sure we fixed it so please continue to save your work often.
The new Exec mentioned in an earlier message has been removed.
thanks...Rich
-------
∂08-Aug-86 1512 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Forsythe Award
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Aug 86 15:12:21 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 8 Aug 86 15:06:37-PDT
Date: 08 Aug 86 1508 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Forsythe Award
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I understand that the following announcement has drawn no nominations from
faculty members so far. I encourage you to respond if you know of worthy
candidates.
Les Earnest
---------------
Return-Path: <JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 31 Jul 86 13:35:18-PDT
Date: 31 Jul 86 1336 PDT
From: Joe Weening <JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Award nominations
To: CSD-List@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: Patashnik@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Nominations are invited for the Twelfth George E. Forsythe Memorial Award
and the Second Computer Science Department Service Award. Each award is
given annually by the Computer Science Department, following the
recommendations of a committee composed of the past winners.
The Forsythe Award recognizes outstanding student contributions to the
teaching of computer science at Stanford. The award criteria guidelines
require that a recipient exhibit continued involvement as well as
excellent achievement in the field of teaching. Recent winners of the
Forsythe Award have been Veronica Falcao and Oren Patashnik.
The Service Award, initiated last year, recognizes outstanding student
contributions to the well-being of the department in non-academic areas.
Last year's Service Award winner was Joe Weening.
Please mail your nominations to Patashnik@Sushi and JJW@SAIL, and please
include with your nomination an explanation of how your nominee fulfills
these requirements. The deadline for nominations is August 10.
Thank you,
The Forsythe Award Committee
The Service Award Committee
-------
∂09-Aug-86 2056 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Issues
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Aug 86 20:55:55 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Sat 9 Aug 86 23:56:11-EDT
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1986 23:56 EDT
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12229584869.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues
We've got (at least) three "where do we go from here" issues to think
about:
First, and most important, there's the whole issue of what we're going
to do about standards and about resolving the technical questions that
are before us. As I understand it, the resolution of the EuLisp affair
was more or less that (a) neither we nor the EuLisp people will try to
rush through an official standard in the next couple of years, (b) we
will try to develop some sort of informal standard as a way of cleaning
up the short-term problems with Common Lisp, and (c) we will work with
the EuLisp people (and the Japanese) to develop a formal ISO standard in
the far distant future. For this future standard, we will agree to
consider somewhat deeper changes than we have been considering for the
short-term Common Lisp cleanup; on the other hand, it must be made clear
to the EuLisp group that they don't get to dictate whatever changes they
want, unless they want the resulting "standard" to be opposed and, if
adopted, ignored.
The above is my second-hand understanding of the outcome of the
discussions AFTER the mass meeting on standardization, between Steele,
Gabriel, and Mathis on our side and the key Eulisp people, so it may not
be quite right. As I understand it, some thought is being given to
using a second edition of CLtL as the focus for the short-term, informal
fixup of Common Lisp. If we do this, we need to work out some mechanism
for making the little decisions (do we go with something like the
current technical committee?) and we need to make sure that Guy is not
exposed to nasty liability issues if he changes the book without some
sort of formal standards process to hide behind.
The second big issue is committee membership (assuming we still have
something like a technical committee). Given the confusion during the
Lisp conference, I don't know whether any formal invitations were issued
to the Japanese or to the Europeans. I guess we need to figure out what
the structure is before issuing any inviations.
During the Conference Fritz Kunze of Franz Inc. took me aside and made
clear the following: they want one of their people (John Foderaro) on
the technical committee, they believe that they are being harmed in the
marketplace (relaive to Lucid) by not having someone on the committee,
and they "intend to change this situation, whatever it takes". I assume
this means a big fight at X3 and, if that fails, a lawsuit. Of course,
if these committees went away altogether, so would the problem, but if
we proceed as an informal "gang of eight" working on CLtL2, we'd better
understand what our legal position is, because Kunze will make it as hot
for us as he can.
I made clear my own view of this the last time this issue came up (when
we were selecting the current committees): I think we should add
Foderaro to the committee and avoid a fight over this. I don't think
that Foderaro has demonstrated any particular talent for language
design, but his implementation experience would make his inclusion
defensible, at least. He has a consitutency, of sorts, outside of his
own company: there are still a lot of Franz users out there. I don't
believe that Franz Inc. is really being harmed by not having someone on
the technical committee, but I believe that Kunze sincerely believes
this -- it's easier for him to blame his marketing problems on an
external conspiracy than on any problems with his own company. In
principle, if we take Foderaro, there are a lot of other companies that
could demand a place as well, but as far as I know Franz Inc is the only
company that is seriously disgruntled by the current setup. If we add
Foderaro, no real harm is done; if we don't, there will be a nasty fight
that we don't really need right now, and we'll have to be very careful
at every turn not to expose ourselves to a lawsuit. If the rest of you
want to fight it out on this issue, fine, but I personally am not
well-covered against this kind of trouble and will probably try to get
myself out of the line of fire.
Finally, there is the issue of leadership in the technical
decision-making. As I told most of you at the conference, I am
resigning as chairman of the technical committee. For the last couple
of weeks I have been reconsidering my own priorities. I've put a lot of
years into Common Lisp, and for the past few years I've been the person
who has taken responsibility for moving things forward: whatever had to
be done, if nobody else could be found, I made it my problem. My
feeling was that Common Lisp should not be allowed to unravel, whatever
the cost. This has taken a lot of time and has been very stressful at
times. I have decided that I no longer want to do this, and that I
couldn't do it for much longer even if I wanted to -- the accumulated
strain is taking its toll. I am willing to coninue as an active member
of the technical committee, but not in a leadership role. I hope that
someone else can be found to assume this responsibility, or that the
leadership role can be split up and redefined so that it is less
stressful, but I'm determined to stay out of this in any event. If no
one can be found to push things forward in the future, then Common Lisp
may stop improving; I'd hate to see that, but I could live with it.
I would like to announce my resignation soon. It would look better if a
new (perhaps interim) chairman were announced at the same time. If
necessary, I could delay the resignation until the Washington meeting in
September, but I won't be pushing on any technical issues or moderating
the mailing list discussion in the meantime.
-- Scott
∂11-Aug-86 0057 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #35
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 86 00:57:02 PDT
Date: Sunday, August 10, 1986 1:57PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #35
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 11 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 35
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Bagof & ->,
Complaint - Comments & Consideration,
Puzzle - Farmer Solution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 86 16:22:12 pdt
From: Allen VanGelder <AVG@diablo>
Subject: Bagof Comments
Dave Plummer came up with a lulu in Vol. 3, Issue 34:
What should bagof do here?
p(1,←). p(2,←). p(3,3). p(4,4).
?- bagof(X, p(X,Y), S).
He reports that that the first solution was Y=3,S=[1,2,3],
but the second was Y=4,S=[4]. He expected the second to be
Y=4,S=[1,2,4]. In fact, if he reversed p(3,3) and p(4,4)
he surely would have gotten Y=4,S=[1,2,4] as the first
solution.
In designing NAIL! (*), we decided that neither of these
solutions was likely to make any sense in practice. We
established the following rule for evaluating our 'findall':
a variable in the goals (middle argument) of the 'findall'
was existentially quantified if it did not appear elsewhere.
Thus NAIL! delivers one solution, S=[1,2,3,4], to the above
question.
If the user really is interested in "grouping by" values of Y,
to use terminology from DBMS, then the the Y values need to
come from some source outside the 'findall'. E.g., add the
rule
g(Y,S) :- findall(X, p(X,Y), S).
Then NAIL! would answer the question ?- g(3,S) with S=[1,2,3]
and would answer g(4,S) with S=[1,2,4]. So far, this is
something like what Dave Plummer expects from 'bagof'.
In addition ?- g(23,S) is answered S=[1,2]. NAIL! would
decline to answer ?- g(U,S), essentially because there are
infinitely many answers.
The "universe" has to be specified. Thus, it is valid to ask:
?- member(U, [3,4,23,14,hike]), g(U,S).
which has five solutions that readers will have no trouble
figuring out.
* For information on NAIL!, see "Design Overview of the NAIL!
System" in Proceedings ICLP, July 86, London, or STAN-CS-86-1108
from Stanford Univ. Computer Science Dept.
------------------------------
Date: 9 Aug 1986 09:24-EST
From: Saumya Debray <Debray@Arizona.csnet>
Subject: Manipulating Programs With ->
It's well known that cuts can cause problems for tools that manipulate
Prolog programs. For example, inline expansion can't be done in a
straightforward way. In a paper at the Boston SLP last year, O'Keefe
recommended the use of the use of the if-then-else construct ( -> ) to
alleviate such problems. However, the way the construct "P -> Q ; R"
is parsed by Prolog -- as
';'( '->'(P,Q), R ) -- can also lead to problems
in the manipulation of Prolog programs.
In general, given two clauses
p(X) :- Body1.
p(X) :- Body2.
with identical heads, one would expect to be
able to replace them with the single clause
p(X) :- Body1 ; Body2.
This transformation is useful because it lets us avoid multiple
unifications of the same head arguments, and allows us to factor
common literals in the clauses. (We also use it in our compiler as a
starting point for other transformations that in some cases let us
generate code to create fewer choice points at runtime.)
Notice that this transformation works even if Body1 and Body2 contain
cuts. Well, it doesn't work if Body1 is of the form G1 -> G2. The
reason, of course, is that while one intuitively expects the principal
functor of P -> Q ; R to be '->', it really is ';'.
The problem is "merely" an idiosyncrasy of Prolog syntax, but an
annoying one. Perhaps the people involved with some of the earlier
implementations of Prolog could tell us the reasons for designing the
syntax of -> in this way?
-- Saumya Debray
------------------------------
Date: 8 Aug 86 12:43 PDT
From: Ghenis.pasa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Problem postings without comments
Regarding the recent posting of a buggy solution to the Farmers
problem with a request for help:
It DID lead to the posting of correct solutions, which is of value
to the distributon list, BUT, I doubt that too many people would
bother spending a lot of time trying to decypher the code in the
original posting when the author didn't care enough to insert some
comments init. >:-(
Personally, I refuse to spend more than 20 seconds trying to figure
out what an uncommented piece of code is doing, unless I have to.
Maybe my intelligence is too mediocre to simply recognize the
obvious meaning of "(F1,X1,G1,A1)" without being told. :-)
It is a matter of common sense and proper network etiquette that
any code postings to a list should include comments (if they are
meant to be analyzed) or be omitted altogether. This is doubly
true of postings of buggy code which list members are being asked
to read.
-- Pablo Ghenis
------------------------------
Date: Sun 10 Aug 86 13:53:24-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Uncommented Code
It is more often the case than not that code is checked before its
published. There exists some limitations on my time that make
detailed verification not always possible, unfortunately.
Best,
-- Chuck
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 86 00:15:04 edt
From: Yasuda%upenn-graded@cis.upenn.edu
Subject: Farmer Problem Solution
Yes, it works!!!!
============================= infile =======================
consult('farm.pro').
go(state(here,here,here,here),
state(there,there,there,there),
Path).
;
;
halt.
============================================================
======================== prolog call =======================
prolog <infile >outfile
============================================================
======================== outfile ===========================
C-Prolog version 1.5
| ?- farm.pro consulted 1340 bytes 0.333333 sec.
yes | ?- | |
Path =
[state(here,here,here,here),state(there,here,there,here),
state(here,here,there,here),state(there,there,there,here),
state(here,there,here,here),state(there,there,here,there),
state(here,there,here,there),state(there,there,there,there)]
Path =
[state(here,here,here,here),state(there,here,there,here),
state(here,here,there,here),state(there,here,there,there),
state(here,here,here,there),state(there,there,here,there),
state(here,there,here,there),state(there,there,there,there)]
no | ?- [ Prolog execution halted ]
============================================================
This program gives two solutions!
A nice thing about this solutions is that it can be used to
implement other problems. For example: Misssionaries and
Cannibals. [Indeed. -ed]
Regards,
-- Osvaldo
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂11-Aug-86 0725 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Re: Issues
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 86 07:25:20 PDT
Date: 11 Aug 1986 07:25-PDT
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Issues
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]11-Aug-86 07:25:00.MATHIS>
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12229584869.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
I think Scott had a reasonably good summary of what we are trying
to do re ISO. We didn't mean to leave anybody out at our after
the meeting meeting. What basically happened was that Chailloux,
Gabriel, and Steele seemed to agree on the possible discussion of
some technical issue so I asked Padget to write down a possible
statement for an ISO new work item. Everybody wanted to agree on
something and this was bland enough to get some agreement.
Basically we agreed that the ISO standard would have levels,
there was no discussion of how much any group would have to
compromise.
From the ISO new work item proposal:
Title: Development of an ISO standard for Lisp.
Purpose: The standard will specify the syntax, semantics, and
conformity requirements of the language in terms of a few
coherent levels of increasing magnitude and breadth. The work
will draw on the experiences of the Lisp communities in the U.S.,
Europe, and Japan.
Program of Work: The first meeting of an ISO Working Group on
Lisp could be during the Summer or early Fall of 1987.
Considerable work on Lisp and its possible standard specification
is already underway. This will be drawn together in the ISO
Working Group. A Draft Proposal should be ready by July 1989 for
SC balloting.
I think the best work for the US in X3J13 is the clarification of
the current Steele specification. The X3J13 Committee could do
their work as primarily a list of issues and decisions about
those issues. If Steele wants to produce a second edition
incorporating those changes, he could do so. I do not think it
appropriate to move toward any more formal standardization than
that at the ANSI level. This would prepare the US to take a very
strong role in the ISO work.
About committees -- Separate from our Steering and Technical
committees, I asked Chailloux, Padget, Ida, and Gabriel to join
me as a kind of international coordinating committee with
unspecified roles and responsibilities. I did this to give them
a feeling of being included and also to separate it from our US
activities. I think our current technical and steering
committees were always seen as temporary and their end is coming.
For the technical committee, I am very sad that Scott has had to
make the decision he has. We talked about it at some length. I
hope he can maintain an active role.
The September meeting of X3J13 would be an ideal place to elect a
new chairman and membership for the technical committee. We
should take the composition of that committee as a priority
discussion item. Then Scott could pick a time to announce his
resignation and we could announce that the selection of members
and chairman of the technical committee would be an item on the
agenda of the X3J13 meeting.
-- Bob
∂11-Aug-86 1530 MARJORIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Letter about software
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Aug 86 15:30:27 PDT
Date: Mon 11 Aug 86 15:15:46-PDT
From: Marjorie Maxwell <MARJORIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Letter about software
To: Folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I have a letter from Logica UK Limited in London, England sent to CSLI
in which they are inquiring about a software package received by them
6/8/86. There was evidently no name put on the package and they would
like to know who it was sent to as they employ about 1100 people. If any
one has any knowledge of this, please let me know so that I can let
them know who the package is for.
Thanks,
Marjorie
-------
∂12-Aug-86 0125 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #36
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Aug 86 01:25:36 PDT
Date: Monday, August 11, 1986 8:15PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #36
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 12 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 36
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Manipulating ->,
Puzzle - Farmer & Extension Tables
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 10 Aug 86 14:04:09-PDT
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Manipulating Programs With ->
To be honest I can't remember any substantial discussion on
this topic back when -> was added to the DEC-10 interpreter,
but looking back into it I see a very good reason. The
alternatives of a disjunction are like the alternative
clauses of a disjunction, -> is like cut in one of those
clauses. Thus
p :- a -> b; c.
is equivalent to
p :- q.
q :- a, !, b.
q :- c.
If -> had the higher precedence, the most obvious interpretation
would be
q :- a, !, r.
r :- b.
r :- c.
which is clearly useless. The argument becomes even more compelling
if one thinks about the intended interpretation of goals like
(a -> b;
c;
d -> f;
g)
-- F
------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1986 11:10-EST
From: Saumya Debray <debray%suny-sbcs@csnet-relay>
Subject: Manipulating Programs With ->
I agree with you regarding the parse of "P -> Q ; R",
←if← we're to understand -> in terms of cut. I'd
prefer not to have to do that as far as possible --
for one thing, understanding program behaviour in the
presence of cuts isn't always straightforward, and
for another, cuts can invalidate program transformations
that one would like to have hold (e.g. "hard" cuts
invalidate unfold transformations; "soft" cuts as in
-> can invalidate "clause factoring" transformations,
as in the example I gave earlier).
I guess I'd much rather deal with a distfix ->/3, which
I find more intuitive.
-Saumya Debray
[recall; Much of this ground has been covered in prehistoric Digest
exchanges. Reconsulting the Archives might be in order. -ed]
------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1986 11:17-EST
From: Suzanne Dietrich <suzanne%suny-sb@csnet-relay>
Subject: Farmer Puzzle and Extension Tables
I agree with Ed Windes:
>- First, I don't think your 'linked' procedure is doing what it
>should. Seems to me that the query 'linked(state(1,1,1,1),X).'
>should produce four distinct alternatives.
The alternatives are:
1) farmer takes the fox
2) farmer takes the goose
3) farmer takes the grain
4) farmer takes only himself across
Also, I think there may be a typo in the 'linked' procedure.
>linked(state(F1,X1,G1,A1),state(F2,X2,G2,A2)) :-same(no,F1,F2),
>
>(same(yes,X1,X2);(same(yes,F1,X1),same(yes,G1,G2),same(yes,A1,A2))),
>(same(yes,G1,A2);(same(yes,F1,G1),same(yes,X1,X2),same(yes,A1,A2))),
---------------------↑ Should this be G2?
>(same(yes,A1,A2);(same(yes,F1,A1),same(yes,G1,G2),same(yes,X1,X2))).
Ed Windes also suggests:
>- Second, you need to rewrite your 'path' procedure because
>A) it is left-recursive, and B) you need to keep a record of
>states already visited, and exclude them from the possible
>next states.
The path procedure as written is logically correct. Unfortunately,
Prolog enters an infinite loop on this program due to the points
A and B above.
Consider another solution to the Farmer Program (of unknown
origin):
-----------------------------------------------------------
/* state(Farmer,Fox,Goose,Grain) */
state(n,n,n,n). /* Initial state */
state(X,X,U,V):- /* Farmer takes Fox */
safe(X,X,U,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,X1,U,V).
state(X,Y,X,V):- /* Farmer takes Goose */
safe(X,Y,X,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,X1,V).
state(X,Y,U,X):- /* Farmer takes Grain */
safe(X,Y,U,X),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,U,X1).
state(X,Y,U,V):- /* Farmer goes by himself */
safe(X,Y,U,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,U,V).
/* North(n) and South(s) are opposite shores */
opp(n,s).
opp(s,n).
/* safe(Farmer,Fox,Goose,Grain) */
safe(X,Y,X,V). /* Farmer is with Goose */
safe(X,X,X1,X):-opp(X,X1). /* Farmer is not with Goose */
/* QUERY: state(s,s,s,s). */
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This program also suffers from an infinite loop due to revisiting
of states. David S. Warren and I have developed an algorithm which
evaluates most simple recursive programs (including left-recursion).
The method, known as extension tables, applies the dynamic
programming principle to computation in which previous results are
saved and later reused to avoid recomputation. The algorithm, called
the ET algorithm, is a simple source-to-source transformation on a
Prolog program. The latter farmer program is successfully executed
with an ET saved on the predicate state/4. I also used the ET
algorithm on the predicate path/2 in the former Farmer program (with
the correction of A2 to G2) and the query succeeded.
Here is the ET transformation for the predicate state/4:
1] Define a predicate code←state/4 to have the original
definition for state
code←state(n,n,n,n). /* Initial state */
code←state(X,X,U,V):- /* Farmer takes Fox */
safe(X,X,U,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,X1,U,V).
code←state(X,Y,X,V):- /* Farmer takes Goose */
safe(X,Y,X,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,X1,V).
code←state(X,Y,U,X):- /* Farmer takes Grain */
safe(X,Y,U,X),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,U,X1).
code←state(X,Y,U,V):- /* Farmer goes by himself */
safe(X,Y,U,V),opp(X,X1),state(X1,Y,U,V).
2] Redefine the predicate state/4 to save calls and answers
state(X1,X2,X3,X4) :-
call←state(Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4), /* check for call */
same(state(Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4),state(X1,X2,X3,X4)),!,
et←state(X1,X2,X3,X4). /* use et answers */
state(X1,X2,X3,X4) :-
assert(call←state(X1,X2,X3,X4)), /* save call */
code←state(X1,X2,X3,X4), /* compute answer */
not(et←state(Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4),
same(state(Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4),state(X1,X2,X3,X4))),
assert(et←state(X1,X2,X3,X4)). /* save answer */
Note: The predicate same/2 identifies two terms to be the same
if they are identical upon renaming of variables.
A predicate subsumes/2 can be used instead of same/2:
if there was a previous call to p(X,Y) and p(X,b) is
called, then the answers for p(X,b) are a selection of
the answers for p(X,Y) so a table lookup can be used.
The ET algorithm is not complete for Datalog (function-free
Prolog). This simple facility, which modifies Prolog's top-down
left-to-right depth-first evaluation strategy, executes and
terminates evaluation on many programs for which Prolog's
evaluation enters an infinite loop. The ET* algorithm, which
is complete for Datalog, iterates using the ET algorithm until
no new answers are produced.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂13-Aug-86 1150 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu report available
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 86 11:49:39 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:34:35 pdt
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:34:35 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: report available
To: nail@diablo
Jeff Naughton's report "Optimizing Function Free Recursive
Inference Rules", STAN-CS-86-1114, is available by sending
email to Rosemary Napier, rfn@sail.
---jeff ullman
∂13-Aug-86 1207 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu Paper received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Aug 86 12:07:47 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:45:10 pdt
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:45:10 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Paper received
To: nail@diablo
"The Object-Oriented Classification Paradigm", Peter Wegner, Brown Univ.
This is "light reading", but it attempts to get at an important
issue: what makes a programming language an "Object-Oriented" PL?
(In a sense, Logic PL's are restricted forms of O-O PL's.)
---jeff
∂14-Aug-86 0153 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #37
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Aug 86 01:53:16 PDT
Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1986 11:57AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #37
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 14 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 37
Today's Topics:
Implementation - `->',
Puzzle - Farmer Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 86 10:12:33 pdt
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Programs with ->
In designing NAIL! (*) we came across the same confusion about ->
and ';' that was brought up by Saumya Debray and commented upon by
Fernando Pereira. We decided to add 'else' as an operator of lower
precedence than -> and stop overworking the semi-colon. Let's see
howthis works on Fernando's examples:
Prolog NAIL!
Source p :- a -> b; c. p :- a -> b else c.
Parse :- :-
/ \ / \
p ; p ->
/ \ / \
-> c a else
/ \ / \
a b b c
Equivalent to p :- q. p :- q.
q :- a, !, b. q :- a, b.
q :- c. q :- not a, c.
Source a -> b; c; d -> f; g a -> b else c; d -> f else g
a -> b; c; d -> f; g
a -> b; c; d -> f else g
a -> b else c; d -> f; g
a -> b else (c; d -> f else g)
Who knows how a programmer thinks the expression on the left reads?
Following the heuristic "the first semi-colon after -> is an 'else'"
yields the 1st line on the right. The heuristic "when you see a lot
of semi-colons, they are all or's" yields the second line on the
right. The 3rd and 4th lines provide other possible readings by
humans.
Actually, Prolog reads the 5th line. The subtle difference between
the 2nd and 5th lines is that when (a -> b) fails in Prolog, it
matters whether 'a' failed or 'b' failed. If 'b' failed, there is NO
backtracking to 'c' and/or (d -> e), while if 'a' failed, there IS
backtracking.
This certainly looks like an error-prone construction with semi-colon
having two English translations. As far as I can see, its only excuse
for being that way is that it was easy to implement by reducing it to
other Prolog primitives. But the main reason to HAVE if-then-else in
the language, as argued by Lee Naish, is that it represents a concept
that ISN'T easily expressible by other Prolog primitives.
* For information on NAIL!, see "Design Overview of the NAIL! System"
in Proceedings ICLP, July 86, London, or STAN-CS-86-1108 from Stanford
Univ. Computer Science Dept.
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 86 04:02:00 GMT
From: Mario O. Bourgoin <ucbcad!nike!ll-xn!mit-amt!mob@berkeley>
Subject: Farmer Puzzle
First, I would like to thank all the persons who answered my
request for help. Your advice and suggestions were most useful
in making this exercise a learning experience for me.
Thanks to:
- Dave Broderick. He was the first to send me a solution to the
Farmer problem. His program modeled the state as composed of
left and right riverbank lists and the problem as finding a
sequence of sequential addition/deletions from these lists to
reach the goal. As an example:
Start state: river(farmer+[fox,goose,grain],[]).
Goal state: river([],farmer+[fox,goose,grain]).
- Chrisj@basser.oz. He was the last to send me a solution to the
Farmer problem. I got it just as I was writing this article
and haven't had time to try it out yet. His answer is to the
Australian version of the problem, involving a Koala,
Eucalyptus leaves, a Dingo and of course a Farmer.
- Maarten van Emden mhvanemden. His reply was to send me a
problem set which included questions about moving from node to
node through a graph which was where my head space was at at
the time. This covered two methods to prevent program
looping: the depth-bound approach and the path record
approach. The problem set also included many questions which
brought home other points that were essential in cleaning up
my model of Prolog's behavior. This reply was without doubt
the most useful one.
- Ed Windes. He pointed out the problem of the path/2 procedure
being left-recursive and also mentioned the need for keeping a
record of visited states to prevent looping while walking
through the problem state graph.
- Wayne Cook and Suzanne Dietrich. Both made the suggestion that
already seen states be asserted and looked up as a means of
controlling looping. I had already used the technique in a
small classification expert system as a means of avoiding
solving for already discovered facts.
Truth Maintenance Systems (TMS) accomplish this caching in an
efficient way that allows easy checking of which facts are or
are not applicable to a situation. TMSs also replace
chronological backtracking with dependency directed
backtracking for greater search efficiency. Johan de Kleer
(Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1986) of Xerox PARC
has designed an assumption based TMS which eliminates most
backtracking of all types. Maybe such systems will be
included in future versions of Prolog.
- Chuck Restivo. For being the moderator to this newsgroup and
sending my request for help to places that may not have been
reached otherwise.
------------------------------------------------------------------
On to the problem itself. There were three problems that prevented
the original program from finding ←a← solution to the Farmer
problem:
- There was a typo in the statement of the linked/2 procedure.
- The path/2 procedure was left recursive. While the solution
statement was logically correct, the left recursion caused
much unnecessary searching to find a solution. This was fixed
by replacing the left call to a call to linked/2.
- The path/2 procedure did not restrict alternate linked states
to those not yet encountered. This was fixed by adding a Path
variable to the input(?) list of the path/2 predicate making
it into a path/3 predicate.
While the last two fixes are not in theory essential to the
finding of a solution, not fixing them results in stack overflow
before a solution can be found. If Prolog refused to solve for
goals already encountered, this problem would not exist. A hash
table of calls would provide an efficient solution to the problem
of whether a state has been met already given a consistent
encoding of variable names. Can someone provide me with a reason
other than efficiency for why this is not done?
Ed Windes and Suzanne Dietrich pointed out that the linked/2
procedure did not produce all of correct linked states for the
state(1,1,1,1) input. This was due only to the typo in the
third and clause of the predicate. With this fixed, the predicate
is able to generate all of the linked states, albeit with much
redundancy.
There are two answers to the Farmer Puzzle. While with the above
fixes my program would manage to produce a correct solution,
resolution for alternate answers would repeat many of the
already encountered solutions. The number of repetitions has an
upper bound of 2↑58 as near as I can calculate. The 58 was
obtained by counting the number of legal second states produced by
Prolog using linked/2 and subtracting the total number of
legal states from the result. Can someone substantiate this answer?
The problem is that both legal/1 and linked/2 are
loose characterizations of what they claim to represent so that they
reproduce previously given answers upon resolution. legal/1 for
example will produce 16 legal states while there are only 10
legal ones. 16 was obtained through figuring out the number of
states that legal/1 can produce. Can someone give me an
explanation or a pointer to an explanation as to how to calculate
the number of repeated resolutions to linked/2 or similar predicates?
Another problem of efficiency was that my statement of the problem
did not take advantage of Prolog's unification procedure for
stating similarity between elements of states. Taking advantage of
this feature eliminates the same(yes,←,←) predicate and associated
matching. This results in up to 2.5 times! fewer procedure calls.
This statistic was gathered by hand. Can someone point me to tools
that allow me to get statistics from Prolog? I use C-Prolog.
Better yet, can someone point me to theory that would allow me to
calculate the expected number of calls a particular problem
statement will require to generate all solutions?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the final solution:
/*
The problem solver keeps track of the current state as a
predicate of the form:
state(Farmer,Fox,Goose,Grain).
Where Farmer is abbreviated F, Fox is X, Goose is G and Grain is A.
Each place can take on a value of either 1 or 2, each number
representing a side of the river.
*/
/* Test for membership of an element in a list */
member(E,[E|←]).
member(E,[←|T]) :- member(E,T).
/* Define sides 1 and 2 as being opposite */
opposite(1,2).
opposite(2,1).
/*
A legal state is one where either the farmer is on the same side as
the goose or is on the same side as both the fox and the grain. In
the latter case, the condition that the farmer be on the opposite
side from the goose is necessary to prevent resolutions that repeat
states already covered by the first legal/1 definition.
*/
legal(state(F,←,F,←)).
legal(state(F,F,G,F)) :- opposite(F,G).
/* There are four cases for linked states:
Only the farmer changes sides */
linked(state(F1,X,G,A),state(F2,X,G,A)) :-
opposite(F1,F2),
legal(state(F2,X,G,A)).
/* The farmer and the fox change sides */
linked(state(F1,F1,G,A),state(F2,F2,G,A)) :-
opposite(F1,F2),
legal(state(F2,F2,G,A)).
/* The farmer and the goose change sides */
linked(state(F1,X,F1,A),state(F2,X,F2,A)) :-
opposite(F1,F2),
legal(state(F2,X,F2,A)).
/* The farmer and the grain change sides */
linked(state(F1,X,G,F1),state(F2,X,G,F2)) :-
opposite(F1,F2),
legal(state(F2,X,G,F2)).
/*
This is the top level predicate whose purpose is to establish
whether there is a non-circular path from the Start state to the
Goal state. Solution is that path. path/3 calls path/4 with a list
of the Start state as the germ of the already seen states list.
*/
path(Start,Goal,Solution) :-
path(Start,[Start],Goal,Solution).
/*
A path from State to Goal exists if State is linked with Goal.
Path is the list of states encountered up to now. Solution is Path
prepended with Goal.
*/
path(State,Path,Goal,[Goal|Path]) :-
linked(State,Goal).
/*
A path from State1 to Goal exists if there exists a State2 which
has not yet been encountered, which is linked with State1 and for
which a path exists to Goal. State2 is part of the list of states
encountered up to now and Solution is the list of states leading
from the original state to Goal.
*/
path(State1,Path,Goal,Solution) :-
linked(State1,State2),
not(member(State2,Path)),
path(State2,[State2|Path],Goal,Solution).
-- Mario O. Bourgoin
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂14-Aug-86 1028 OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH -- RUSS GREINER -- WED. AUG. 20.
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Aug 86 10:28:26 PDT
Date: Thu 14 Aug 86 10:19:53-PDT
From: Margaret Olender <OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH -- RUSS GREINER -- WED. AUG. 20.
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 14-Aug-86 10:19:53.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNING BY UNDERSTANDING ANALOGIES
Russell Greiner (greiner%ai.toronto.edu@csnet-relay)
University of Toronto
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, Aug. 20
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
This research describes a method for learning by analogy --- i.e., for
proposing new conjectures about a target analogue based on facts known
about a source analogue. After formally defining this process, we present
heuristics which efficiently guide it to the conjectures which can help
solve a given problem. These rules are based on the view that a useful
analogy is one which provides the information needed to solve the problem,
and no more. Experimental data confirms the effectiveness of this
approach.
-------
∂14-Aug-86 1209 Mailer%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU add to mailing list
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Aug 86 12:09:00 PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 Aug 86 14:45-EDT
Received: from MIT-MULTICS.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 14 Aug 86 14:41:22 EDT
Received: from CRNLNS(MIKERO) by MITVMA (Mailer X1.23) id 8862;
Thu, 14 Aug 86 14:39:37 EDT
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 86 14:37 EDT
From: <MIKERO@CRNLNS.BITNET>
Subject: add to mailing list
To: phil-sci@mc.lcs.mit.edu
X-Original-To: phil-sci@mc.lcs.mit.edu, MIKERO
Dear Co-ordinator,
Please add me to your mailing list; send postings to
MIKERO%CRNLNS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Thank you.
∂15-Aug-86 0117 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #38
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Aug 86 01:17:33 PDT
Date: Thursday, August 14, 1986 4:56PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #38
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 15 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 38
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Lemmas & Searches,
Implementation - Parsing `->'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 86 12:45:36 GMT
From: David Sherman <mnetor!lsuc!dave@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Lemmas
Mario O. Bourgoin writes:
>If Prolog refused to solve for goals already encountered,
>this problem would not exist. A hash table of calls would
>provide an efficient solution to the problem of whether
>a state has been met already given a consistent encoding of
>variable names. Can someone provide me with a reason other
>than efficiency for why this is not done?
I'd be interested in hearing the answer to this too. I believe
this is what Kowalski describes as "lemmas" in Logic for Problem
Solving - that is, whenever a goal is resolved (to either yes or
no), that fact can be recorded.
I suppose it might be possible to program this into Prolog
without modifying Prolog itself - i.e., with predicates. Has
anyone done this? (It's of interest to me for the income tax
analysis system I'm working on.)
One obvious problem that I can see is what to do with assert and
retract. For the lemma-system to be correct, it would have to be
able to figure out the implications of calls to assert and
retract, *including* how these affect predicates several calls
away. For example:
tired(today) :- toomuch(netnews, yesterday).
toomuch(netnews, Day) :-
read(netnews, Minutes, Day),
Minutes > 120.
read(netnews, 180, yesterday).
?- tired(today).
yes.
retract(read(netnews, 180, yesterday)).
?- tired(today).
If the implementation of retract has to search the entire
database and start making changes to what's been put into the
lemma hash table, the whole point of the system (improving
efficiency) could be defeated.
Comments?
-- David Sherman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 86 15:15:38 pdt
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Exponential searches in the Farmer problem
Mario Bourgoin made a very interesting observation in his summary of
the Farmer problem.
> The number of repetitions has an upper bound of 2↑58 as near > as I
can calculate. The 58 was obtained by counting the > number of legal
second states produced by Prolog using > linked/2 and subtracting the
total number of legal > states from the result. Can someone
substantiate this answer?
This is not correct. 2↑58 is the number of nodes in a balanced BINARY
tree of DEPTH 58. The search tree for "Farmer" is neither balanced
nor binary, nor is its depth 58. However, the size of the search tree
IS exponential in the number of legal states. The analysis is a bit
involved. Many readers may wish to skip to "-------" at this point.
The general rule is that if the search has b branches at each node and
(always) goes to depth d, then there are about b↑d nodes. In these
path/state problems, the branching factor b corresponds to the number
of states adjacent to a given state, and the depth d corresponds to
the path length, which is bounded by the number of legal states if the
search is restricted to simple paths. Mario appears to be estimating
b = 58, so it should be in the base, not the exponent.
However, not all searches go to the same depth, so it is not clear
what the correct estimate of d is. Taking the average is WRONG:
consider a search tree that looks like a long list of length d. Then
b=2 and the average depth is d/2, but the number of nodes is 2d - 1,
which is linear, and NOT the exponential 2↑(d/2).
In any event, assume there are 10 DISTINCT legal states, but 58
apparent states due to redundancy in the way they are specified. If
the program allows only simple paths, no path is longer than 9, and we
get 58↑9 as a crude upper bound. That can be improved to 43 * 18↑9 by
assuming the redundancy factor is always 6. (See below.) Well, that
number is still quite unacceptable, and shows the high price of
redundancy.
Without any redundancy in the statement of the 10 legal states, 8 *
3↑9 looks likes an upper bound, assuming the (naive) rules
canGo(Goal, Goal, ←). canGo(S1, Goal, Visited) :-
legal(S2), linked(S1, S2), not member(S2, Visited),
canGo(S2, Goal, [S2 | Visited]).
(These rules assume "legal" is a "generator" and "linked" is a
"tester". If "linked" can be formulated as a "generator", we may be
able to do better. See below.)
I got the 8 * 3↑9 estimate as follows: from each internal node in the
search, there are 10 branches to try -- 1 per legal state. In this
problem, exactly 4 are linked to S1, the current state. Thus 7
branches fail immediately (i.e. within the rule): 6 because they are
not linked to the current state, and (at least) 1 because it goes back
to the state visited just before S1. (Notice how all the "domain
knowledge" enters the analysis; we are using the knowledge that the
links are symmetric.) So charge the node 8, 1 for itself and 1 for
each of its predictable failures. The "true" branching factor is at
most 3.
If legal states are specified redundantly by a factor of 6, then we
multiply both the 7 and the 3 by 6, and get 43 * 18↑9, which is about
6↑10 times the non-redundant figure.
Actually, Mario's final program is even better than (1+7) * 3↑9
because he is able to make "linked" a "generator" and eliminate the
"legal" subgoal. Thus, the estimate is (1+1) * 3↑9 because he
generates 4 LINKED states and fails on (at least) 1. Thus careful
programming saves a factor of 4 right there.
While the search tree is actually much smaller because of the regular
structure of "linked", the bound of 2 * 3↑9 is about 40,000. This
illustrates the danger that search algorithms will get out of hand.
Recall that if there are d states and the branching factor is b, we
get an estimate of b↑d nodes. This is huge for moderate sized d, even
if b is only 2 or 3.
To achieve a quantum jump in (guaranteed) efficiency, we need to
switch to a depth first search (or breadth first search) that
remembers ALL the visited nodes, not just the ones on the currently
successful path. While this can easily be done (for bounded degree
graphs) in linear time in a language with arrays and assignments, in
Prolog it is not so easy, and may take quadratic time. If you use
"assert" to remember, it depends on how fast the interpreter can
retrieve an asserted fact, something over which the user has no
control. Even so, d↑3 is less than 2↑d for problems beyond "toy"
size.
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 1986 07:20-EST
From: Saumya Debray <debray%suny-sb@csnet-relay>
Subject: Parsing Prolog's ->
I got the following message from Fernando Pereira, which I
think is a reasonable defense for the way Prolog's -> is
currently parsed:
From: Fernando Pereira <pereira%sri-stinson.arpa>
Subject: Manipulating Programs with `->'
The explanation in terms of cut was just a "crutch".
Maybe a better explanation is in terms of a guarded
command. The goal
( C1 -> G1; ... ; Cn -> Gn )
is analogous to the Dijkstra guarded command
[ C1 -> G1 [] ... [] Cn -> Gn ]
and also to the Lisp COND
(COND ((C1) G1) ... ((Cn) Gn))
The alternative syntax makes the goal analogous to
[ C1 -> G1 [] true -> [ C2 -> G2 [] true -> ...
[ Cn -> Gn ]...]
which is a different beast altogether. The latter
reading is fatally sequential, whereas the former
has at least a potential for parallel evaluation
of the guards.
-- Fernando
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂15-Aug-86 1018 CLT mini seminar series (final talk)
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Speaker: Gian Luigi Belin
Time: Friday, August 22, noon (bring your lunch if you like).
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks (Stanford Computer Science Dept)
Topic: Experiments in Automatic Theorem Proving
We discuss our experience of interaction with EKL, a proof checker based
upon a rewriting system and a decision procedure that use higher order logic.
Minor variations in the linguistic representation of a mathematical fact
have major consequences on its proof.
Flexibility is gained by the use of explicit definitions using quantifiers
as well as definitions by primitive recursive functionals.
Lengthy logic derivations are often avoided using rewriting.
Sensible subdivision in short lemmata is essential to accomplish
proofs of nontrivial mathematical facts.
In the proof of correctness of a class of programs the optimal strategy may
be to express as a predicate their common abstract property and prove it,
rather than case by case direct verification.
The subject of the experiment was the elementary theory of finite groups and
authors patience.
∂16-Aug-86 0045 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu FOCS program
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 86 00:45:37 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 16 Aug 86 00:40:42-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 16 Aug 86 00:40:38-PDT
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 16 Aug 86 00:16:25 CDT
Return-Path: rackoff%ai.toronto.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 12 Aug 86 15:10:08 CDT
Received: from toronto by csnet-relay.csnet id ae06950; 12 Aug 86 10:14 EDT
Received: by utai.uucp id AA04501; Mon, 11 Aug 86 14:19:06 edt
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 86 14:19:06 edt
From: Charles Rackoff <rackoff%ai.toronto.edu@csnet-relay.arpa>
Message-Id: <8608111819.AA04501@utai.uucp>
To: theory%rsch.wisc.edu@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: FOCS program
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 86 00:15:51 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Foundations of Computer Science Conference 1986
Oct. 27-29
Toronto, Canada
PROGRAM
SUNDAY EVENING, Oct. 26, 1986
8:30 Reception and registration
MONDAY MORNING, Oct. 27, 1986
Session Chair: John Hopcroft
9:00 "An O(n 2 (m\(plnlogn)logn) min-cost flow algorithm." Zvi Galil,
Columbia University and Tel-Aviv University; Eva Tardos,
Eotvos L. University and MSRI
9:20 "Probabilistic construction of deterministic algorithms:
approximating packing integer programs." Prabhakar Raghavan,
Berkeley
9:40 "On a search problem related to branch-and-bound procedures."
Richard Karp, Berkeley; Michael Saks, Rutgers University and
Bell Communications Research; Avi Wigderson, MSRI and the
Hebrew University
10:00 "Probabilistic Boolean decision trees and the complexity of
evaluating game trees." Michael Saks, Rutgers University and
Bell Communications Research; Avi Wigderson, MSRI and
Hebrew University
10:20 Coffee
Session Chair: Moshe Vardi
10:40 "A physical interpretation of graph connectivity and its algorithmic
applications" N. Linial, MSRI and Hebrew University; L.
Lovasz, MSRI and Eotvos Lorand University; A. Wigderson,
Hebrew University and MSRI
11:00 "The asymptotic spectrum of tensors and the exponent of matrix
multiplication." Volker Strassen, Universitat Zurich
11:20 "Storing a dynamic sparse table." Alfred Aho, David Lee,
AT&T Bell Laboratories
11:40 "Lower bounds for accessing binary search trees with rotations."
Robert Wilber, IBM Almaden
12:00 "What search algorithm gives optimal average-case performance
when search resources are highly limited?" David Mutchler,
Naval Research Laboratory
12:20 Lunch
MONDAY AFTERNOON
Session Chair: Alok Aggarwal
2:10 "Geometric applications of Davenport-Schinzel sequences." M.
Sharir, R. Cole, K. Kedem, D. Leven, R. Pollack, and S. Sifrony,
Courant Institute and Tel Aviv University
2:30 "Lower bounds on the complexity of multidimensional searching."
Bernard Chazelle, Ecole Normale Superieure and Princeton
University
2:50 "Planar realizations of nonlinear Davenport-Schinzel sequences by
segments." Ady Wiernik, Tel-Aviv University
3:10 "Proving by example and gap theorem." Hong Jia-Wei, Beijing
Computer Institute, University of Toronto, Courant Institute,
University of Chicago
3:30 Coffee
Session Chair: Ravi Kannan
3:50 "An optimal algorithm for the All-Nearest-Neighbors problem."
Pravin Vaidya, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
4:10 "An algorithm for constructing the aspect graph." W. Harry
Plantinga and Charles Dyer, University of Wisconsin
4:30 "An algorithmic approach to the automated design of parts
orienters." B.K. Natarajan, Cornell University
4:50 "Finite-resolution computational geometry." Dan Greene and
Frances Yao, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
5:10 "On Newton's method for polynomials." Joel Friedman,
Berkeley
9:00 Business Meeting
TUESDAY MORNING, Oct. 28, 1986
Session Chair: Umesh Vazirani
9:00 "How to generate and exchange secrets." Andrew Yao, Stanford
University
9:20 "Information theoretic reductions among disclosure problems."
Gilles Brassard, Claude Crepeau, Universite de Montreal; Jean-
Marc Robert, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
9:40 "Proofs that yield nothing but their validity and a methodology of
cryptographic protocol design." Oded Goldreich, MIT and
Technion; Silvio Micali, MIT; Avi Wigderson, MSRI and Hebrew
University
10:00 "Non-transitive transfer of confidence: a perfect zero-knowledge
interactive protocol for SAT and beyond." Gilles Brassard, Claude
Crepeau, Universite de Montreal
10:20 Coffee
Session Chair: Nancy Lynch
10:40 "Dynamic deadlock resolution protocols." Baruch Awerbuch
and Silvio Micali, MIT
11:00 "Programming simultaneous actions using common knowledge."
Yoram Moses and Mark Tuttle, MIT
11:20 "Flipping persuasively in constant expected time." C. Dwork,
IBM Almaden, D. Shmoys, MIT and MSRI; L. Stockmeyer, IBM
Almaden
by
segments." Ady Wiernik, Tel-Aviv University
3:10 "Proving by example and gap theorem." Hong Jia-Wei, Beijing
Computer Institute, University of Toronto, Courant Institute,
University of Chicago
3:30 Coffee
Session Chair: Ravi Kannan
3:50 "An optimal algorithm for the All-Nearest-Neighbors problem."
Pravin Vaidya, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
4:10 "An algorithm for constructing the aspect graph." W. Harry
Plantinga and Charles Dyer, University of Wisconsin
4:30 "An algorithmic approach to the automated design of parts
orienters." B.K. Natarajan, Cornell University
4:50 "Finite-resolution computational geometry." Dan Greene and
Frances Yao, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
5:10 "On Newton's method for polynomials." Joel Friedman,
Berkeley
9:00 Business Meeting
TUESDAY MORNING, Oct. 28, 1986
Session Chair: Umesh Vazirani
9:00 "How to generate and exchange secrets." Andrew Yao, Stanford
University
9:20 "Information theoretic reductions among disclosure problems."
Gilles Brassard, Claude Crepeau, Universite de Montreal; Jean-
Marc Robert, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
9:40 "Proofs that yield nothing but their validity and a methodology of
cryptographic protocol design." Oded Goldreich, MIT and
Technion; Silvio Micali, MIT; Avi Wigderson, MSRI and Hebrew
University
10:00 "Non-transitive transfer of confidence: a perfect zero-knowledge
interactive protocol for SAT and beyond." Gilles Brassard, Claude
Crepeau, Universite de Montreal
10:20 Coffee
Session Chair: Nancy Lynch
10:40 "Dynamic deadlock resolution protocols." Baruch Awerbuch
and Silvio Micali, MIT
11:00 "Programming simultaneous actions using common knowledge."
Yoram Moses and Mark Tuttle, MIT
11:20 "Flipping persuasively in constant expected time." C. Dwork,
IBM Almaden, D. Shmoys, MIT and MSRI; L. Stockmeyer, IBM
Almaden
hicago
9:20 "A new pebble game that characterizes parallel complexity classes."
H. Venkateswaran, University of Washington, Seattle; and Martin
Tompa, IBM Yorktown Heights
9:40 "K+1 heads are better than K for PDA's." Ming Li, Ohio State
University; and Marek Chrobak, Warsaw University
10:00 "On the power of interaction." William Aiello, Shafi Goldwasser
and Johan Hastad, MIT
10:20 Coffee
Session Chair: Joel Seiferas
11:00 "Collapsing Degrees." Stuart Kurtz, University of Chicago;
Stephen Mahaney, AT&T Bell Laboratories; and James Royer,
University of Chicago
11:20 "Three results on the polynomial isomorphism of complete sets."
Judy Goldsmith and Deborah Joseph, University of Wisconsin,
Madison
11:40 "Permanent and determinant." Joachim von zur Gathen,
University of Toronto
12:00 "Time-space tradeoffs for branching programs contrasted with
those for straight-line programs." Karl Abrahamson, University
of British Columbia
12:20 "Meanders, Ramsey Theory and lower bounds for branching
programs." Noga Alon, Tel Aviv University; and Wolfgang
Maass, University of Illinois at Chicago
12:40 Lunch
WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON
Session Chair: Mihalis Yannakakis
2:10 "The token distribution problem." David Peleg and Eli Upfal,
IBM Almaden
2:30 "Separator-based strategies for efficient message routing." Greg
Frederickson and Ravi Janardan, Purdue University
2:50 "Parallel complexity of logical query programs." Jeffrey Ullman
and Allen Van Gelder, Stanford University
3:10 "On the power of one-way communication." Jik Chang, Oscar
Ibarra, and Anastasios Vergis, University of Minnesota
3:30 Coffee
Session Chair: Hal Sudborough
3:50 "An efficient parallel algorithm for planarity." Philip Klein,
MIT; and John Reif, Harvard University
4:10 "Approximate and exact parallel scheduling with applications to
list, tree and graph problems." Richard Cole, Courant Institute;
and Uzi Vishkin, Courant Institute and Tel Aviv University
4:30 "An optimal randomized parallel algorithm for finding connected
components in a graph." Hillel Gazit, University of Southern
California
4:50 "Tight complexity bounds for parallel comparison sorting."
Noga Alon, and Yossi Azar, Tel Aviv University; and Uzi
Vishkin, Courant Institute and Tel Aviv University
5:10 "Parallel merge sort." Richard Cole, Courant Institute
--------------
TN Message #67
--------------
∂16-Aug-86 1152 RPG Various Issues (cont'd)
To: cl-steering@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Scott's resignation is a blow to the technical committee. I believe that
the duties Scott performed can be broken down as follows:
Titular Head: anyone who can speak calmly
Technical Lead: distributed among the technical committee
On the issue of EuLisp/Common Lisp, I think that there is a hope
of accomplishing the merger rather than using it as a delaying tactic.
The technical compromise from our point of view is merging the
value/function name spaces. This puts user code in jeopardy, and it
exposes a problem with macros. We are experiencing some of the macro
problems already, and we should look closely at a solution.
As part my vague position on the ``kind of international coordinating
committee with unspecified roles and responsibilities,'' I plan to attend
about 1 out of 3 EuLisp meetings (assuming I can find some way to pay for
the trips). The face-to-face EuLisp/Common Lisp meeting tuesday night at
the Lisp conference demonstrated some hard feelings on both sides. The
private continuation of that discussion over beer was much calmer and
demonstrates the power of personal interaction rather than long-distance
carping.
I heard it suggested (by Sussman among others) that Common Lisp has `won' and
EuLisp is simply a desperation move on the part of the European community.
That might be true, but I think it doesn't serve the internation Lisp community
well to pursue that strategy, especially if we can clean up Common Lisp
in the balance.
On the Kunze issue, as you know I am a major naysayer to including
Foderaro on the Technical committee. We have discussed his qualifcations
at length, and I don't want to repeat either them or our conclusions.
I spoke with Kunze myself, and he stated that Franz lost a major account
because someone said that they did not believe that Franz could follow
Common Lisp developments and that Franz could not speak for the Common Lisp
community. I believe that membership by any single person or every person
in Franz on X3J13 should solve that particular problem without having to
place someone on the Technical committee, which I see as more select.
I question Franz's ability to play an effective role on the select committees
based on a press conference held by Franz at AAAI. The press conference touched
on the recent events surrounding EuLisp. No one from Franz was at the tuesday
night meeting, but at the press conference the relationship between EuLisp
and Common Lisp was explained to the press. Franz stated that Common Lisp
had won and that the best strategy was for the US to ignore the Europeans.
A British reporter was at the press conference and was upset by the attitude
taken by Franz. She came and talked to me about the relationship between
EuLisp and Common Lisp, at which point I told her of the ISO new work item that
Bob Mathis quoted to this list.
Perhaps the best bet is to let X3J13 vote on the members of the Technical
and Steering committees, but for the time being, if the current Technical
committee votes to help Franz's marketting department, I will go along with
the decision.
-rpg-
∂16-Aug-86 1403 DLW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Various Issues (cont'd)
Received: from [192.10.41.41] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 86 14:02:52 PDT
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 63593; Sat 16-Aug-86 16:45:50 EDT
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 86 16:50 EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Various Issues (cont'd)
To: RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, cl-steering@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: The message of 16 Aug 86 14:52 EDT from Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Message-ID: <860816165009.3.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I'd like to point out one specific problem with putting Fodorero onto
the technical committee: how will it look to the marketing departments
of the other vendors, who do not have "representatives" [sic] on the
technical committee? If you add Fodorero, you'll have to explain why.
Even if you come up with a bland explanation, it's still pretty likely
that word will get out that it was done because Franz claimed that they
were at a marketing disadvantage, etc., etc. At this point, you will be
in the position of having confirmed that, indeed, Franz was at a
disadvantage, and now they are not. Our position, that members of the
technical committee are individuals rather than company representatives,
will be untenable. If you were in the marketing group at TI, what would
you think at this point? Or LMI or Gold Hill or Integrated Inference
Machines or the KCl company? When they approach you with the same
request, what will you say? I think this issue deserves consideration.
∂16-Aug-86 1854 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Theory Day at Columbia
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 86 18:54:31 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 16 Aug 86 18:49:56-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 16 Aug 86 18:50:03-PDT
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 16 Aug 86 20:30:36 CDT
Return-Path: JENKINS@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:10:01 CDT
Received: by crys.wisc.edu; Wed, 13 Aug 86 11:09:46 CDT
Date: Wed 13 Aug 86 12:10:53-EDT
From: "Debra A. Jenkins" <JENKINS@cs.columbia.edu>
To: theory@crys.wisc.edu
Subject: Theory Day at Columbia
Message-Id: <12230505065.35.JENKINS@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 86 20:30:14 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
THE NINTH THEORY DAY
at Columbia University
SPONSORED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
(FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1986)
10:00 DR. LEO GUIBAS
DEC SRC and Stanford University
TOPOLOGICAL SWEEP METHODS IN COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY
11:00 DR. MARTIN TOMPA
IBM Research
A NEW PEBBLE GAME THAT CHARACTERIZES PARALLEL COMPLEXITY CLASSES
2:00 PROFESSOR STEPHEN A. COOK
University of Toronto
FEASIBLY CONSTRUCTIVE PROOFS
3:00 PROFESSOR ODED GOLDREICH
Technion and MIT
PROOFS THAT YIELD NOTHING BUT THEIR VALIDITY
OR All NP LANGUAGES HAVE ZERO-KNOWLEDGE PROOFS
All lectures will be in the Kellogg Conference Center on the fifteenth
floor of the International Affairs Building, 118th Street and
Amsterdam Avenue.
The lectures are free and open to the public.
Call (212) 280-2736 for more information.
--------------
TN Message #68
--------------
∂16-Aug-86 2039 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Various Issues (cont'd)
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Aug 86 20:39:28 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Sat 16 Aug 86 23:39:56-EDT
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1986 23:39 EDT
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12231416922.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Various Issues (cont'd)
In-reply-to: Msg of 16 Aug 1986 14:52-EDT from Dick Gabriel <RPG at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Perhaps the best bet is to let X3J13 vote on the members of the Technical
and Steering committees, but for the time being, if the current Technical
committee votes to help Franz's marketting department, I will go along with
the decision.
Probably the Franz people will be willing to wait until the X3J13
meeting and see what develops there, before they do anything drastic.
I suggested to Kunze that he do this, and he seemed to agree at the
time.
If the Franz people come out of Washington feeling screwed, it must be
very clear that everything was done by the book, and even then it could
get messy. Maybe there's some way they end up with the official
participation they seem to want, without establishing the principle that
whoever makes the most threats gets to call the tune.
I'm not sure what to expect at the Washington meeting. Presumably
anyone present who says he wants to participate gets to be on the X3J13
committee? And it is then this big committee that selects something
like technical and steering committees? What sorts of rules will govern
this? Can one company pack the meeting? Do we even want to propose
that the current technical and steering committees, more or less, be
adopted by X3J13? I assume that this arpanet style of discussion is
foreign to X3 and that most efforts in the past have progressed via face
to face meetings, with some very small group doing all the preparation
behind the scenes.
I'd be interested in hearing what Bob Mathis thinks is going to go on in
Washington, since he is the only one of us (I think) who has been
through this before.
-- Scott
∂17-Aug-86 1024 RPG Varia Concerning September Meeting
To: cl-steering@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I presume that no voting can happen at the meeting in September.
It is not practical for all interested parties to show up, and
it certainly has not been advertised. If Bob Mathis says I'm wrong,
that you can bet that 55 people from Lucid will be there, plus proxies from
all our clients.
That last sentence ought to convince anyone who thinks that we should
have a hard vote that it is a bad idea, because a strategy like the one
I just outlined will occur to other people as well.
I think we ought to propose that the current ad hoc committees be continued,
and I presume Kunze will propose additional members. At that point DEC and
some of the others will see what's happening and probably propose some of their
own, or else they'll stand up and state that the current committees are
OK. Were I cynical, I could propose we start to lobby with the various
companies to block such a move to expand.
In fact, I think we ought to propose that the current technical committee
write a new specification and let X3J13, as a whole, judge it.
Another possible scenario for the September meeting is to simply report on
progress, vote on procedures, take opinions on the EuLisp question, take
opinions on the depth of changes allowed, and approach the meeting as if
it were presumed that the current technical committee will remain in
place until the first draft is ready.
As far as the planning is concerned, I understand it to be the case that
Bob Mathis is `at our service,' rather than the other way around. At the
EuLisp meeting he stated that the current Common Lisp constituency could
not back down from standarization now that the ball is rolling (China might
step in was a proposed scenario), but I think that underestimates the
strength of the community that would be backing down.
-rpg-
∂17-Aug-86 1126 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU X3J13 and issues
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Aug 86 11:26:17 PDT
Date: 17 Aug 1986 11:26-PDT
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: X3J13 and issues
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Mathis@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]17-Aug-86 11:26:09.MATHIS>
Let's not talk about digging in heels or backing down. The J
committees are "technical" committees from the X3 standpoint.
The openness of X3J13 means that interested people can be on the
"technical" committee. What we need is a subcommittee that gets
the work done -- call it a "clean-up" committee (nobody ever
wants to be on those).
Before the September meeting it would be good to have a strategy
for who should be on that committee. I would like it to have a
chairman who could divide up the work. I would also not like
there to be any open controversy about it membership. The people
we want on it should be at the September meeting. It should not
be a list of names but rather a group of workers. We also need
it to have a strategy of more frequent meetings.
Bob
∂18-Aug-86 0822 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 08:21:52 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Mon 18 Aug 86 11:21:42-EDT
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1986 11:21 EDT
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12231806814.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: X3J13 and issues
In-reply-to: Msg of 17 Aug 1986 14:26-EDT from MATHIS at ADA20.ISI.EDU
So perhaps the model we want to promote is that X3J13 is the "technical
committee". This is open to anyone who puts in the time and money, and
it is the body with actual authority to make technical decisions. The
Franz people will be on there, and that will give them the kind of
official representation they seem to crave.
Since that group will be too large to get any complicated work done,
there will have to be subcommittees that produce well-debugged proposals
on various issues. Certainly there would be a subcommittee on
object-oriented programming, one on errors (which might converge very
quickly), and something we might call "cleanup" dealing with all the
little problems of the current manual. Maybe also one on characters
(they would try to work with the Japanese to develop a character
standard that accommodates Kanji and maybe flushes fonts and/or bits),
and one on standards issues relating to the compiler -- there is a
complicated nest of issues in here that want to be worked on together.
I guess that there would still be need for some sort of steering
committee as well, though maybe this is just a set of informal advisors
to Mathis.
The current technical committe people would be on various of these
subcommittees. An advantage of this setup is that some additional
people from the heavily involved companies could get into the act, where
before we tried hard to avoid dupllication. KMP should be involved in
the error subcommittee, Gregor in objects, and so on. The only
politically sensitive one might be "cleanup", which deals with most of
the things the old technical committee was trying to deal with earlier.
But since the real power rests with the full X3J13, which is open, maybe
people will relax a little.
There's still the issue of whether certain companies try to pack X3J13
with their own people. Do things move slowly enough that we could
safely wait to see if anyone else tries this, rather than launching a
first strike? Or is there some procedural mechanism in X3 that makes
packing impossible or ineffective? I guess there's always the practical
threat that if some splinter group takes over X3J13, the companies that
don't like this can agree to ignore this committee and all its works.
(If this threat exists in credible form, there is little chance of ever
having the situation arise.)
-- Scott
∂18-Aug-86 1050 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA French Faculty under auspices of IBM France wish to visit 9/12
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 10:50:39 PDT
Date: Mon 18 Aug 86 10:46:43-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: French Faculty under auspices of IBM France wish to visit 9/12
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12231833229.35.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We have received a request from IBM France (coordinated through
Jean Paul Jacob of IBM Almaden) for 12 faculty members from France to
visit CSD/CSL on Friday, September 12. I will list the participants,
please let me know if you are able to see them, and suggest a time.
J. Ganouna, Dir. of Nuclear Physics Institute - CNRS Paris
G. Touzot, Dir. Theoretical Mathematics Inst., CNRS Marseille
J. Bertrand, Dir. of Mechanics Dept., Univ. of Marseille
J.S. Lienard, Dir. of research center on Computer Sciences and
Applied Math., Univ. of Orsay. Personal interest: speech recognition.
A. Costes, Dir. of Automation and System Analysis Laboratory, CNRS Toulouse
J. Bories, Dir. of Fluid Mechanics Inst., Univ. of Toulouse
J. Lenfant, Dir. of Parallel Architecture Dept., IRISA Rennes
D. Bloch, Dir. of Polytechnicum Institute - Univ. of Grenoble
(electronics and programming)
M. Johanin, Dir. of Computing Center of Orsay (modelling)
M. Rimpault, Dir. of Computing Resources of Univ. of Bordeaux
(math., physics, and chemistry)
G. Falco, Dir. of Computing Facilities at the Chamber of Trade and Industry,
Paris (30 higher education schools)
J. Connes, Computing facilities Manager - CNRS, National Center for
Scientific Research.
and from IBM France:
J. J. Duby, Scientific Director
P. Stefanou, Manager of Science and Technology Programs
P. Pineau, Education and Science Programs Manager
and
a representative of the Minister of Higher Education and Research
and the director of computing centers from the Chamber of Trade and Industry
The group will visit IBM locations in Almaden, Santa Teresa and Palo Alto.
Also Berkeley.
IBM Almaden and Yorktown Heights share a Forum membership and Jeff
Ullman is the faculty liaison.
Please advise.
Carolyn
-------
∂18-Aug-86 1149 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Franz Issue
Received: from B.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 11:48:59 PDT
Date: 18 Aug 1986 11:47-PDT
Sender: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
Subject: Franz Issue
From: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[B.ISI.EDU]18-Aug-86 11:47:39.OHLANDER>
I have very strong objections to being blackmailed to place someone from Franz
on the Technical Committee. I also don't understand why Franz, among all of
the other developers of LISP, has to have special help in this area. While it
is true that some vendors have members on the committee, there are sound
historical reasons for such participation. I feel that, if we allow Kunze to
exert this kind of pressure, we have to be prepared to submit to anyone who
has the same kind of problem. At the same time, I want to be practical. I
think Gabriel's recommendation to put someone from Franz on the X3J13 group
may solve the problem.
In regard to Common Lisp and Eulisp, I have to believe that Common Lisp's
position is very solid and the time will be on our side. If the community at
large can benefit from some accomodation of Eulisp issues, then we should make
an honest attempt to achieve some sort of integration and cleanup. While this
is progressing, I think we will see even more solid instantiation of CL with
embracement by the the Japanese. I believe this will influence the Europeans
to make concessions in our favor.
Ron
∂18-Aug-86 1153 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Help us Celebrate! The Forum broke a MILLION!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 11:53:03 PDT
Date: Mon 18 Aug 86 11:43:25-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Help us Celebrate! The Forum broke a MILLION!
To: csd.list@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-everyone@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12231843552.35.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
For the first time the Forum has brought in over one million dollars
in one fiscal year. Come help us celebrate in the ERL patio on
Friday, August 22, at 4:00 p.m.
Remember, the Forum is all of us, and it takes all of us to make
it a success.
Bill, Carolyn, Ann, Katie and the Forum Committee
-------
∂18-Aug-86 1206 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Seminar: Wu Wen-tsun, "Mechanization of Geometry"
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 12:06:26 PDT
Received: from sun.uucp by sun.com (3.2/SMI-3.0)
id AA09562; Mon, 18 Aug 86 12:03:00 PDT
Received: by sun.uucp (1.1/SMI-3.0)
id AA06264; Mon, 18 Aug 86 11:38:36 PDT
Received: by coraki.uucp (3.2/SMI-1.2)
id AA01155; Mon, 18 Aug 86 11:25:38 PDT
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 86 11:25:38 PDT
From: coraki!pratt@Sun.COM (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8608181825.AA01155@coraki.uucp>
To: aflb.all@su-score.arpa, friends@su-csli.arpa, logmtc@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Seminar: Wu Wen-tsun, "Mechanization of Geometry"
SPEAKER Professor Wu Wen-tsun
TITLE Mechanization of Geometry
DATE Thursday, August 21
TIME 2:00 pm
PLACE Margaret Jacks Hall, room 352
ABSTRACT
A mechanical method of geometry based on Ritt's characteristic set
theory will be described which has a variety of applications including
mechanical geometry theorem proving in particular. The method has been
implemented on computers by several researchers and turns out to be
efficient for many applications.
BACKGROUND
Professor Wu received his doctorate in France in the 1950's, and was a
member of the Bourbaki group. In the first National Science and
Technology Awards in China in 1956, Professor Wu was one of three
people awarded a first prize for their contributions to science and
technology. He is currently the president of the Chinese Mathematical
Society.
In 1977, Wu extended classical algebraic geometry work of Ritt to an
algorithm for proving theorems of elementary geometry. The method has
recently become well-known in the Automated Theorem Proving community;
at the University of Texas it has been applied it to the machine proof
of more than 300 theorems of Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry.
∂18-Aug-86 1210 gls@Think.COM X3J13 and issues
Received: from GODOT.THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 12:10:03 PDT
Received: from faustinus by Godot.Think.COM via CHAOS; Mon, 18 Aug 86 15:10:11 edt
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 86 15:11 EDT
From: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>
Subject: X3J13 and issues
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA, gls@AQUINAS
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12231806814.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-Id: <860818151103.4.GLS@FAUSTINUS.THINK.COM>
When we first set up the current technical committee, the officially
announced theory was that its purpose was to tide the world over until
X3J13 happened, and perhaps also get a substantial amount of the cleanup
work done. (We have not done the technical cleanup work, of course, but
it appears that we have done a great deal of political cleanup work.)
X3 does have procedures to prevent packing of committees; you can bet
that this problem was addressed long ago. Here is my inductive
understanding of the rules, based on observing X3J3 minutes and X3J11
meetings. In general anyone can attend and participate in discussion,
but each company only gets one vote. A company designates an official
representative and an alternate. Persons who are independent of a
company may attend as independent consultants. A person gets a vote
only if he (or his designated alternate) has attended at least two of
the last three meetings. This last rule puts a premium on attending the
first meeting: attendees of the initial meeting get votes right away,
but people who first attend at the second meeting don't get a vote until
the third or fourth meeting. It also requires a certain commitment and
prevents proxy fights: you must actually be there to get a vote.
In practice technical issues are resolved by subcommittees, including
"committee of the whole". Their reports are then referred to the main
committee for final votes. (This is often a rubber stamp, but not
always. In X3J11 we very often spent an entire day in committee of the
whole and voted for some set of features; then we would rise from
committee of the whole and the exact same set of people would vote to
turn down the proposal after all.)
At this stage I would not mess with Foderaro of anyone else. Let's sit
tight and see what happens in Washington. If Franz doesn't care enough
to have anyone at the Eulisp meeting, will they give a fig for X3J13?
It is an obvious opportunity for anyone complaining about the current
setup to put up or shut up.
--Guy
∂18-Aug-86 1211 gls@Think.COM X3J13 and issues
Received: from GODOT.THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 12:11:17 PDT
Received: from faustinus by Godot.Think.COM via CHAOS; Mon, 18 Aug 86 15:11:16 edt
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 86 15:12 EDT
From: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>
Subject: X3J13 and issues
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA, gls@AQUINAS
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12231806814.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-Id: <860818151209.5.GLS@FAUSTINUS.THINK.COM>
When we first set up the current technical committee, the officially
announced theory was that its purpose was to tide the world over until
X3J13 happened, and perhaps also get a substantial amount of the cleanup
work done. (We have not done the technical cleanup work, of course, but
it appears that we have done a great deal of political cleanup work.)
X3 does have procedures to prevent packing of committees; you can bet
that this problem was addressed long ago. Here is my inductive
understanding of the rules, based on observing X3J3 minutes and X3J11
meetings. In general anyone can attend and participate in discussion,
but each company only gets one vote. A company designates an official
representative and an alternate. Persons who are independent of a
company may attend as independent consultants. A person gets a vote
only if he (or his designated alternate) has attended at least two of
the last three meetings. This last rule puts a premium on attending the
first meeting: attendees of the initial meeting get votes right away,
but people who first attend at the second meeting don't get a vote until
the third or fourth meeting. It also requires a certain commitment and
prevents proxy fights: you must actually be there to get a vote.
In practice technical issues are resolved by subcommittees, including
"committee of the whole". Their reports are then referred to the main
committee for final votes. (This is often a rubber stamp, but not
always. In X3J11 we very often spent an entire day in committee of the
whole and voted for some set of features; then we would rise from
committee of the whole and the exact same set of people would vote to
turn down the proposal after all.)
At this stage I would not mess with Foderaro or anyone else. Let's sit
tight and see what happens in Washington. If Franz doesn't care enough
to have anyone at the Eulisp meeting, will they give a fig for X3J13?
It is an obvious opportunity for anyone complaining about the current
setup to put up or shut up.
--Guy
∂18-Aug-86 2032 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Wu's visit - appointments
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 20:32:18 PDT
Received: from sun.uucp by sun.com (3.2/SMI-3.0)
id AA14171; Mon, 18 Aug 86 20:29:14 PDT
Received: by sun.uucp (1.1/SMI-3.0)
id AA11416; Mon, 18 Aug 86 20:32:49 PDT
Received: by coraki.uucp (3.2/SMI-1.2)
id AA00396; Mon, 18 Aug 86 20:30:29 PDT
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 86 20:30:29 PDT
From: coraki!pratt@Sun.COM (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8608190330.AA00396@coraki.uucp>
To: logmtc@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Wu's visit - appointments
Cc: coraki!drake@Sun.COM
If you would like an appointment to meet with Professor Wu Wen-tsun on
Wednesday or Thursday, let me know by email, or call Mary Drake at
723-0872. His interests include algebra, geometry, theorem-provers,
analysis of algorithms, and of course mathematics in China (he is
president of the Chinese Mathematical Society).
-v
∂18-Aug-86 2305 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Theory day at Columbia - correction
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Aug 86 23:05:30 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 18 Aug 86 23:01:32-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 18 Aug 86 22:58:55-PDT
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 19 Aug 86 00:33:15 CDT
Return-Path: galil%taurus.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Sun, 17 Aug 86 01:46:24 CDT
Received: from (GALIL)TAURUS.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 08/17/86 at
01:46:21 CDT
Received: by taurus (4.12/ta.1.3.R)
id AA12856; Sun, 17 Aug 86 09:46:35 -0300
Return-Path: <galil@taurus.BITNET>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 86 09:46:35 -0300
From: Zvi Galil <galil%taurus.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: <8608170646.AA12856@taurus>
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: Theory day at Columbia - correction
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Aug 86 00:32:31 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
THE NINTH THEORY DAY
at Columbia University
Friday, September 26, 1986
10: 00 DR. LEO GUIBAS
DEC SRC and Stanford University
TOPOLOGICAL SWEEP METHODS IN COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY
11: 00 DR. MARTIN TOMPA
IBM Research
A NEW PEBBLE GAME THAT CHARACTERIZES PARALLEL COMPLEXITY CLASSES
2: 00 PROFESSOR STEPHEN A. COOK
University of Toronto
FEASIBLY CONSTRUCTIVE PROOFS
3: 00 PROFESSOR ODED GOLDREICH
Technion and MIT
PROOFS THAT YIELD NOTHING BUT THEIR VALIDITY
OR All NP LANGUAGES HAVE ZERO-KNOWLEDGE PROOFS
All lectures will be in the Kellogg Conference Center on the fifteenth
floor of the International Affairs Building, 118th Street and
Amsterdam Avenue.
The lectures are free and open to the public.
Call (212) 280-2736 for more information.
--------------
TN Message #69
--------------
∂19-Aug-86 0130 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #39
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Aug 86 01:30:36 PDT
Date: Monday, August 18, 1986 3:59AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #39
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 19 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 39
Today's Topics:
Announcement - AI and Law
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 86 20:36:33 EDT
From: MCCARTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: Conference on AI and Law
CALL FOR PAPERS:
First International Conference on
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LAW
May 27-29, 1987
Northeastern University
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
In recent years there has been an increased interest in the
applications of artificial intelligence to law. Some of this interest
is due to the potential practical applications: A number of
researchers are developing legal expert systems, intended as an aid to
lawyers and judges; other researchers are developing conceptual legal
retrieval systems, intended as a complement to the existing full-text
legal retrieval systems. But the problems in this field are very
difficult. The natural language of the law is exceedingly complex,
and it is grounded in the fundamental patterns of human common sense
reasoning. Thus, many researchers have also adopted the law as an
ideal problem domain in which to tackle some of the basic theoretical
issues in AI: the representation of common sense concepts; the process
of reasoning with concrete examples; the construction and use of
analogies; etc. There is reason to believe that a thorough
interdisciplinary approach to these problems will have significance
for both fields, with both practical and theoretical benefits.
The purpose of this First International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence and Law is to stimulate further collaboration between AI
researchers and lawyers, and to provide a forum for the latest
research results in the field. The conference is sponsored by the
Center for Law and Computer Science at Northeastern University. The
General Chair is: Carole D. Hafner, College of Computer Science,
Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston MA 02115,
USA; (617) 437-5116 or (617) 437-2462; hafner.northeastern@csnet.
Authors are invited to contribute papers on the following topics:
- Legal Expert Systems
- Conceptual Legal Retrieval Systems
- Automatic Processing of Natural Legal Texts
- Computational Models of Legal Reasoning
In addition, papers on the relevant theoretical issues in AI are also
invited, if the relationship to the law can be clearly demonstrated.
It is important that authors identify the original contributions
presented in their papers, and that they include a comparison with
previous work. Each submission will be reviewed by at least three
members of the Program Committee (listed below), and judged as to its
originality, quality and significance.
Authors should submit six (6) copies of an Extended Abstract (6 to 8
pages) by January 15, 1987, to the Program Chair: L. Thorne McCarty,
Department of Computer Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick NJ
08903, USA; (201) 932-2657; mccarty@rutgers.arpa. Notification of
acceptance or rejection will be sent out by March 1, 1987. Final
camera-ready copy of the complete paper (up to 15 pages) will be due
by April 15, 1987.
Conference Chair: Carole D. Hafner Northeastern University
Program Chair: L. Thorne McCarty Rutgers University
Program Donald H. Berman Northeastern University
Committee: Michael G. Dyer UCLA
Edwina L. Rissland University of Massachusetts
Marek J. Sergot Imperial College, London
Donald A. Waterman The RAND Corporation
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂19-Aug-86 2105 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA planlunch reminder -- Wednesday Aug. 20 -- Russ Greiner
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Aug 86 21:05:44 PDT
Date: Tue 19 Aug 86 21:00:44-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: planlunch reminder -- Wednesday Aug. 20 -- Russ Greiner
To: planlunch-reminder.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 19-Aug-86 21:00:44.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNING BY UNDERSTANDING ANALOGIES
Russell Greiner (greiner%ai.toronto.edu@csnet-relay)
University of Toronto
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, Aug. 20
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
This research describes a method for learning by analogy --- i.e., for
proposing new conjectures about a target analogue based on facts known
about a source analogue. After formally defining this process, we present
heuristics which efficiently guide it to the conjectures which can help
solve a given problem. These rules are based on the view that a useful
analogy is one which provides the information needed to solve the problem,
and no more. Experimental data confirms the effectiveness of this
approach.
-------
∂20-Aug-86 0128 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #40
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Aug 86 01:28:35 PDT
Date: Tuesday, August 19, 1986 2:38PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #40
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 20 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 40
Today's Topics:
Query - Errors & Typos,
Puzzle - Lemmas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 86 15:54:32 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: The Art of Prolog
Although the "Art of Prolog" came out only last week, MIT Press is
planning a second printing in two months time. We will appreciate
the help of anyone who has got the book in finding typos and errors,
so we can fix them for the second printing. For a bug report to make
the second printing, it should arrive before the end of September.
Please send them to me or to Leon:
ARPA: udi%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm
leon%case.csnet@csnet-relay
CSNet, uucp: udi@wisdom leon@case
Bitnet: udi@widom
Thank you,
-- Ehud Shapiro
------------------------------
Date: 17 Aug 86 23:10:59 GMT
From: Ran Ever-Hadani <raan@ucbvax.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Lemmas
It has been done - at least partialy. Theory + experiments for
Prolog with assert and retract, esp. for very large databases
of facts. The reference is:
Oded Shmueli, Hana Zfira, Shalom Tzur, Ran Ever-Hadani
"Dynamic Rule Support in Prolog"
Fifth Generation Computer Architectures, J.V. Woods (ed.)
Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland)
IFIC, 1986
-- Ran Ever-Hadani
------------------------------
Date: 17 Aug 86 17:30:38 GMT
From: Mario O. Bourgoin <mob@media-lab.mit.edu>
Subject: Lemmas
In article <1311@lsuc.UUCP>, dave@lsuc.UUCP writes:
> In article <292@mit-amt.MIT.EDU> mob@mit-amt.MIT.EDU writes:
> >
> >If Prolog refused to solve for goals already encountered,
> >this problem would not exist. ...
>
>I'd be interested in hearing the answer to this too. I believe this
>is what Kowalski describes as "lemmas" in Logic for Problem Solving -
>that is, whenever a goal is resolved (to either yes or no), that fact
>can be recorded.
I think that we aren't trying to solve the same problem. In my case,
if I solve for the goal "goal(A)" which I reduce to solving for the
goal "goal(B)" then I am no better off, especially since Prolog will
then reduce the last goal to solving for "goal(C)". I want Prolog to
refuse to solve for "goal(B)" whether or not "goal(A)" has been solved
already.
What you want appears to be what Suzanne Deitrich called "Extension
Tables" which is a form of dynamic programming. The problem of what is
current in the lemma hash table has been solved with what is called a
Truth Maintenance Systems (TMS). In such a system, an asserted fact
would include both it's current truth value (yes, no) ←and← a
dependancy record of how it was deduced. For your example, the
deduction that you are tired today would be removed from the lemma
table when the fact that netnews was read for 180 minutes yesterday
would be removed.
A better solution is to have the asserted lemmas keep track of ←both←
a dependancy record of how it was deduced ←and← the assumptions under
which it holds, in this case, yesterday's netnews reading time and the
rule used for goal reduction. Prolog then keeps track of which facts
are current as usual. These current facts form the context under which
deductions are made. When a goal is called, if it can be found in the
lemma table, its entry's context is checked against the current
context and if it is a subset of the current context, the conclusion
reached earlier can be used; otherwise the goal is resolved. For
efficiency reasons, the context of deduction of a fact is composed of
only those facts which the fact depends upon. This method is like what
Johann de Kleer proposed in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 28, No. 1.
1986.
Caveat: the above statements are a simplification of what would really
need to be done to make the algorythm work because they doesn't take
into account adding in new rules or facts under which the deduction
could be made.
As is usual, we are trading off processing time for space.
-- Mario O. Bourgoin
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂20-Aug-86 1629 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Aug 86 16:29:30 PDT
Date: Wed 20 Aug 86 16:02:46-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 20-Aug-86 16:02:46.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IS BELIEF REVISION HARDER THAN YOU THOUGHT?
Marianne Winslett (WINSLETT@SCORE)
Stanford University, Computer Science Department
11:00 AM, MONDAY, Aug. 25
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Suppose one wishes to construct, use, and maintain a database of
knowledge about the real world, even though the facts about that world
are only partially known. In the AI domain, this problem arises when
an agent has a base set of extensional beliefs that reflect partial
knowledge about the world, and then tries to incorporate new, possibly
contradictory extensional knowledge into the old set of beliefs. We
choose to represent such an extensional knowledge base as a logical
theory, and view the models of the theory as possible states of the
world that are consistent with the agent's extensional beliefs.
How can new information be incorporated into the extensional knowledge
base? For example, given the new information that "b or c is true,"
how can we get rid of all outdated information about b and c, add the
new information, and yet in the process not disturb any other
extensional information in the extensional knowledge base? The burden
may be placed on the user or other omniscient authority to determine
exactly which changes in the theory will bring about the desired set
of models. But what's really needed is a way to specify the update
intensionally, by stating some well-formed formula that the state of
the world is now known to satisfy and letting internal knowledge base
mechanisms automatically figure out how to accomplish that update. In
this talk we present semantics and algorithms for an operation to add
new information to extensional knowledge bases, and demonstrate that
this action of extensional belief revision is separate from, and
in practice must occur prior to, the traditional belief revision
processes associated with truth maintenance systems.
-------
∂21-Aug-86 1213 GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Philosophy Job in New Zealand
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Aug 86 12:12:28 PDT
Date: Thu 21 Aug 86 12:09:19-PDT
From: Robert Goldblatt <GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Philosophy Job in New Zealand
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, philosophy@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU,
logic@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Max Cresswell has written to advise that there is a lectureship in
Philosophy in his department at Wellington available from the
beginning of 1987.
The field is open, with applications from logicians, or people able to
teach logic courses, particularly welcome.
Salary is in the range NZ$30,500 - 35,000, which looks unattractive
when translated into US$, but is quite respectable relative to the
local cost of living.
Also, it is a permanent (tenured) position.
If interested, contact me, or write to
Prof. M.J. Cresswell
Philosophy Dept
Victoria University
Private Bag
Wellington
New Zealand
Applications will close around Oct 31.
-------
∂21-Aug-86 1221 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA A new tool is born.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Aug 86 12:21:16 PDT
Date: Thu 21 Aug 86 12:16:58-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: A new tool is born.
To: KSL-Explorer@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12232636090.68.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have just put a new tool into the Tools package. This tool adds/allows
to be added a number of new commands to Zmacs, the inspector and the window
debugger. A number of these commands are intended to integrate the tools
better. For instance they allow you to trace functions from within the
window debugger. The tool is called "New-Tool-Commands". The documentation
for it, which can be read with the Load-tools menu is shown below for
your information.
Any problems please contact me.
Rice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This system adds a number of new commands to Zmacs. These are all upwards
compatible extensions. They are as follows :-
C-Sh-I, M-Sh-I, M-X Inspect Region -
Calls the inspector for a region. If the region contains a number of
forms then a list of the forms is inspected. If no region is selected
then the next form on from the cursor is inspected.
M-X Tags Compile Macro Calls -
Prompts the user for the name of a macro and recompiles all forms which
reference that macro for a tag table.
C-Sh-L, M-X Rotate Buffer -
Rotates the buffer list.
M-Sh-L M-X Rotate Buffer-Backwards -
Rotates the buffer list backwards.
C-Sh-M, M-X Macro Expand Expression -
Modified to take a numeric arg, which if supplied causes it to
macroexpand the defined number of times.
C-Sh-T, M-Sh-T -
New key assignments for M-X Trace.
The following key assignment extensions are made in the Window Debugger :-
M-. -
New key assignment for the Edit command.
C-Sh-A -
New key assignment for the Arglist command.
The system gives a menu which allows the user to add the following commands to
the window debugger :-
DbgSg (Debug Stack Group) -
Allows the user to mouse on a process or stack group and invoke a new
window debugger frame looking at that.
Docmnt, M-Sh-D, C-Sh-D (Document) -
Allows the user to mouse on something and get full documentation for it.
Trace, C-Sh-T, M-Sh-T -
Allows the user to select a function or method and trace it.
ModInsp (Inspect Modify) -
Allows the user to modify things in the inspect pane.
FlavIns, H-F (Flavor Inspect) -
Allows the user to invoke the flavor inspector on a flavor or method.
Inspect with left button -
Modifies the behaviour of the mouse's left button so that it causes
things to be inspected.
If you want to define the behaviour of this system so that a constant set of
commands is switched on for the debugger you should define the variable
eh:*Window-Debugger-commands-to-add* to be a list of these command names.
The commands available can be found in eh:*new-window-debugger-commands*.
The system gives a menu which allows the user to add the following commands to
the inspector :-
Eval, C-Sh-E -
Allows the user to have mouse on something to eval and inspect the
result.
MacExp, C-Sh-M -
Allows the user to mouse on a form, macroexpand it and inspect the
result.
Compile, C-Sh-C -
Allows the user to mouse on a form and have it compiled.
Arglist, C-Sh-A -
Allows the user to mouse on a function denotation and display its
arglist.
Trace, C-Sh-T, M-Sh-T -
Allows the user to select a function or method and trace it.
Docmnt, M-Sh-D, C-Sh-D (Document) -
Allows the user to mouse on something and get full documentation for it.
FlavIns, H-F (Flavor Inspect) -
Allows the user to invoke the flavor inspector on a flavor or method.
Edit, M-. -
Allows the user to mouse on something and have its source edited.
If you want to define the behaviour of this system so that a constant set of
commands is switched on for the inspector you should define the variable
tv:*Inspector-commands-to-add* to be a list of these command names.
The commands available can be found in tv:*new-inspector-commands*.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
∂21-Aug-86 1843 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Aug 86 18:43:24 PDT
Received: from ames-io.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 21 Aug 86 18:37:59-PDT
Received: from JUP by IO with VMS ;
Thu, 21 Aug 86 18:11:16 PDT
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 86 18:11:16 PDT
From: WELCH%JUP@ames-io.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: @sig03.dis
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Wednesday, Sept. 3, 1986, 7:30 PM
Hilton Brown / IBM
The IBM 3090 Vector Facility: Architecture, Technology & Implementation
CYDROME (Formerly AXIOM Systems)
1589 Centre Pointe Drive, Milpitas
Near Montague & Capital, east of 17
For directions: 408/943-9460
Wheelchair Access
For more information: Mary Fowler, 415/972-6531, 839-6547
∂22-Aug-86 1001 CLT seminar on Kyoto Common Lisp
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-events@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Speaker: Masami Hagiya
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences,
Kyoto University
Time: Tuesday, August 26, noon (bring your lunch if you like).
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks (Stanford Computer Science Dept)
Topic: Kyoto Common Lisp
∂22-Aug-86 1513 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA NSF Proposal
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Aug 86 15:13:35 PDT
Date: Fri 22 Aug 86 15:09:56-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: NSF Proposal
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12232929723.23.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We have just received a program announcement from NSF for Engineering
Research Center proposals, Fiscal Year 1987. The deadline for receipt of
proposals at NSF is September 15, 1986.
I have put a copy of the program announcement in your mail slot.
-Anne
-------
∂23-Aug-86 1503 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA New arrival
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Aug 86 15:03:08 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 23 Aug 86 14:59:45-PDT
Date: Sat 23 Aug 86 14:57:09-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New arrival
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA, nail@DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12233189539.9.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Holly and I are very happy to announce the arrival of Jonathan Robert Ullman
at 1:33PM, Thursday 8/21. He weighed in at 8 lbs. 11 oz., 20.5",
and all appears to be well with mother and baby.
---jeff ullman
-------
∂23-Aug-86 1616 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: New arrival
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Aug 86 16:16:35 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 23 Aug 86 16:13:41-PDT
Received: from mimsy.umd.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 23 Aug 86 16:12:33-PDT
Received: by mimsy.umd.edu (5.9/4.7) id AA06844; Sat, 23 Aug 86 19:15:09 EDT
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 86 19:15:09 EDT
From: Jack Minker <minker@mimsy.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8608232315.AA06844@mimsy.umd.edu>
To: ULLMAN@su-score.arpa, aflb.all@su-score.arpa, csd@su-score.arpa,
nail@diablo.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: New arrival
Mazal Tov!
Jack Minker
∂23-Aug-86 1631 minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: New arrival
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Aug 86 16:31:10 PDT
Received: from mimsy.umd.edu by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Sat, 23 Aug 86 16:15:46 pdt
Received: by mimsy.umd.edu (5.9/4.7) id AA06844; Sat, 23 Aug 86 19:15:09 EDT
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 86 19:15:09 EDT
From: Jack Minker <minker@mimsy.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8608232315.AA06844@mimsy.umd.edu>
To: ULLMAN@su-score.ARPA, aflb.all@su-score.ARPA, csd@su-score.ARPA,
nail@diablo.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: New arrival
Mazal Tov!
Jack Minker
∂24-Aug-86 0939 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu The Second Symposium on Complexity of Approximately Solved Problems...
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Aug 86 09:39:48 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sun 24 Aug 86 09:35:39-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 24 Aug 86 09:34:51-PDT
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 21 Aug 86 22:42:07 CDT
Return-Path: MASER@cs.columbia.edu
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 21 Aug 86 12:43:00 CDT
Received: by crys.wisc.edu; Thu, 21 Aug 86 12:40:57 CDT
Date: Thu 21 Aug 86 13:41:45-EDT
From: "Susan A. Maser" <MASER@cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: The Second Symposium on Complexity of Approximately Solved Problems...
To: theory@CRYS.WISC.EDU
Message-Id: <12232618758.20.MASER@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 86 22:40:53 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
SECOND
SYMPOSIUM ON
COMPLEXITY OF
APPROXIMATELY SOLVED
PROBLEMS
APRIL 20 - 24, 1987
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
NEW YORK, NY 10027
SUPPORT: This symposium is supported by a grant from the System
Development Foundation.
SCHEDULE: April 20 will be a tutorial day with three lectures.
April 21 - 24 will feature some forty invited speakers.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE: R. Karp, S. Smale, J. Traub, H. Wozniakowski.
TUTORIAL LECTURES: The three tutorial lectures will be:
R. KARP, University of California, Berkeley
Probabilistic Analysis of Combinatorial Algorithms
S. SMALE, University of California, Berkeley
On the Efficiency of Algorithms for Solving Systems of Equations
H. WOZNIAKOWSKI, Columbia University
Basic Concepts of Information-Based Complexity
INVITED SPEAKERS: The following is a partial list of invited speakers:
Y. ABU-MOSTAFA, California Institute of Technology
I. BABUSKA, University of Maryland
L. BLUM, Mills College
B. BOJANOV, University of Sofia
T. BOULT, Columbia University
J. DEMMEL, New York University
Z. GALIL, Columbia University
D. JOHNSON, AT&T Bell Laboratories
Z. KACEWICZ, University of Warsaw
R. KARP, University of California, Berkeley
K. KO, SUNY Stony Brook
D. LEE, AT&T Bell Laboratories
V. LUMELSKY, Yale University
T. MARSCHAK, University of California, Berkeley
S. MICALI, MIT
C. MICHELLI, IBM
M. MILANESE, Politechnico di Torino
E. PACKEL, Lake Forest College
C. PAPADIMITRIOU, Stanford University
T. POGGIO, MIT
J. RENEGAR, Stanford University
T. RIVLIN, IBM
D. SAARI, Northwestern University
M. SCHULTZ, Yale University
M. SHUB, IBM
K. SIKORSKI, University of Utah
M. SIPSER, MIT
S. SMALE, University of California, Berkeley
F. STENGER, University of Utah
A. SUKHAREV, Moscow State University
J. TSITSIKLIS, MIT
L. VALIANT, Harvard University
G. WAHBA, University of Wisconsin
G. WASILKOWSKI, Columbia University
A. WERSCHULZ, Fordham University
H. WOZNIAKOWSKI, Columbia University
A. YAO, Princeton University
D. YLVISAKER, University of California, Los Angeles
J. YORKE, University of Maryland
All papers are by invitation. There will be no contributed paper sessions.
PUBLICATION: Many of the invited papers will appear in the JOURNAL OF
COMPLEXITY.
REGISTRATION: On April 20 - 21 the symposium will be held in the
Hammarskjold Lounge on the Sixth Floor of the International Affairs
Building, 118th Street and Amsterdam Avenue. On April 22 - 24 it will
be held in the Kellogg Conference Center on the Fifteenth Floor of the
same building. The conference schedule and paper abstracts will be
available at the registration desk. Registration for the tutorial day
and coffee begin at 9:00 a.m. on April 20th. Registration for the
symposium and coffee begin at 9:00 a.m. on April 21st. There is no
registration charge.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: The program schedule will be mailed by
about March 15th to those sending their name and address to Ms. Susan
Maser, the symposium's administrative coordinator. Ms. Maser may be
contacted electronically at MASER@@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU, or by mail at 450
Computer Science Building, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027.
If you have any questions, Ms. Maser's phone number is (212) 280-8832.
When requesting a program schedule, it would be most helpful if you
would notify us of your plans.
( ) I will attend the tutorial day.
( ) I may attend the tutorial day.
( ) I will attend the symposium.
( ) I may attend the symposium.
--------------
TN Message #71
--------------
∂24-Aug-86 2005 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Re: X3J13 and issues
Received: from B.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Aug 86 20:05:19 PDT
Date: 24 Aug 1986 20:03-PDT
Sender: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: X3J13 and issues
From: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[B.ISI.EDU]24-Aug-86 20:03:25.OHLANDER>
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12231806814.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Scott,
I don't like the idea of making the X3J13 committee the "Technical Committee."
There should certainly be an X3J13 committee with participation open to anyone
that wants to participate. However, I also firmly believe there will have to
be a highly competent, small Common LISP Technical Committee that takes care
of the language. I'm afraid that an X3J13 committee would be too unwieldly
and perhaps too politicized to operate effectively in keeping the language up
to date for the real users. These Ansi committees are often good, but it is
my experience that they move slowly. Another problem is that such a committee
may not sit forever and might not feel obliged to hand on the baton. My
recommendation is to go with both the X3J13 committee and the existing
technical committee until we see how things work out.
On a separate issue at least one vendor that things aren't happening quickly
enough in Common Lisp. TI is putting a major investment in their
next release of Common Lisp and would dearly love to know if an
object-oriented system is to be agreed on soon. In addition, they would like
to see a window standard and tell me a number of vendors feel strongly about
getting one. Apparently Intellicorp is willing to put theirs forward as a
standard.
Ron
∂24-Aug-86 2235 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Aug 86 22:35:32 PDT
Date: Sun 24 Aug 86 22:32:19-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder -- PLANLUNCH -- Marianne Winslett
To: planlunch-reminder.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 24-Aug-86 22:32:19.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IS BELIEF REVISION HARDER THAN YOU THOUGHT?
Marianne Winslett (WINSLETT@SCORE)
Stanford University, Computer Science Department
11:00 AM, MONDAY, Aug. 25
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
SUMMARY:
In this talk we present semantics and algorithms for an operation to add
new information to extensional knowledge bases, and demonstrate that
this action of extensional belief revision is separate from, and
in practice must occur prior to, the traditional belief revision
processes associated with truth maintenance systems.
-------
∂25-Aug-86 0110 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #41
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 86 01:10:31 PDT
Date: Saturday, August 23, 1986 7:02AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #41
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 25 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 41
Today's Topics:
Query - Fixed Points,
Implementation - Bagof,
Puzzle - Knights and Knaves
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 14 Aug 86 19:40:02-EDT
From: Paul G. Weiss <PGW@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Fixed Points
The familiar non-trivial LISP fixed point is:
((lambda (X) (list X (list (quote quote) X)))
(quote (lambda (X) (list X (list (quote quote) X)))))
What can be done for Prolog? Ideally, I would like to find a
one-clause predicate fixed/1, with the property that fixed(Term)
is true of the Term which is the clause that defines fixed/1.
So far the best I can do is a pair of predicates foo/0 and b/1, each
of one clause such that typing "foo" at the ?- prompt causes the two
defining clauses to be written out. I am unhappy with this since it
uses write and writeq:
foo :- b((
b(X) :-
writeq((foo :- b(X))), write('. '), nl,
writeq(X), write('. '), nl
)).
b(X) :-
writeq((foo :- b(X))), write('. '), nl,
writeq(X), write('. '), nl.
Can such a predicate be defined ?
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 86 14:10:37 GMT
From: Ramesh Krishnamurti <mcvax!ukc!cstvax!edcaad!ramesh@seismo>
Subject: Dave Plummer's bagof query
In reponse to Dave Plummer's query, the way bag←of(X,P,B) works
in C-Prolog and hence (?) ought to in DEC-10 Prolog is to
find to all instances of X such that P is provable with the
condition that any variables in P not X are bound.
Thus for the program,
p(1,2).
p(1,1).
p(2,←).
p(3,←).
p(4,4).
bagof(X,p(X,Y),B) will, on backtracking, successively generate
the lists
[3,2,1] with Y bound to 2
[1] with Y bound to 1
[4] with Y bound to 4
Ideally, it should produce the lists
[3,2,1] with Y bound to 2
[3,2,1] with Y bound to 1
[4,3,2] with Y bound to 4
But thats asking too much of Prolog !
If you want the variables in P not in X to remain free then
they must be explicitly bound by an existential quantifier ↑.
That is,
bagof(X,Y↑p(X,Y),B) will generate the list
[4,3,2,1,1] with Y bound to ←
If you don't want to be bothered with specifying the free
variables the following version of bagof works.
%-------------------------------------------------------------
bag(←,←,←):- asserta($bag(base,←)),
fail.
bag(X,P,B):- Pred,
asserta($bag(item,X)),
fail.
bag(←,←,B):- $gather([],B).
$gather(C,B):- retract($bag(Tag,X)),
!,
$gather(Tag,X,C,B).
$gather(base,←,B,B):- !.
$gather(item,X,C,B):- !,
$gather([X|C],B).
%-------------------------------------------------------------
However, for the database:
drinks(tom,lager).
drinks(dick,bitter).
drinks(harry,bitter).
drinks(bill,lager).
drinks(jack,lager).
drinks(bill,bitter).
bag(X,drinks(X,Y),B) will produce
B = [tom,dick,harry,bill,jack,bill] with Y bound to
whereas
bagof(X,drinks(X,Y),B) will successively produce
B = [jack,bill,tom] with Y = lager
B = [bill,harry,dick] with Y = bitter
Take your pick.
-- Ramesh
------------------------------
Date: 18 Aug 86 22:26:39 GMT
From: David Fiore <ucdavis!ucrmath!hope!fiore@Berkeley>
Subject: Knights and Knaves
This is an attempt at writting a Prolog program and I have come to a
point where I don't know why the program doesn't work and I have run
out of ideas on how to make it work. Could anyone help me out with
this?
Thank you,
-- David Fiore
/* This program is supposed to solve a logic puzzle I read in R.
Smullyn's book "What Is The Name Of This Book?". The problem
is as follows:
On a certain island in the pacific is an island
of knights and knaves. Now knights by nature allways
tell the truth, as far as they know it, while knaves
by nature allways tell lies, as far as they know it.
A visitor to the Island of Knights and Knaves comes
across three inhabitants of the island standing together
in a garden. We will call them Larry, Curly, and Moe.
The stranger says to Larry: "Are you a knight or a
knave?". Larry answers but, rather indistinctly, so the
stranger could not make out what Larry said. So the
stranger says to Curly: "What did Larry say?". Curly
says: "Larry said that he was a knave." At this point,
the third man Moe says: "Don't believe Curly, he's lying!"
The question is what are Curly and Moe?
It is immediately obvious that whatever Curly is, Moe is the
opposite. What is not immediately obvious to everyone is that
independant of Moe's statement, we can see that Curly is lying
because it is impossible for any inhabitant to claim to be a
knave. We can therefore deduce that Curly is a knave and Moe is
a knight.
*/
is←knight (X) :-
is←knave (X),!,false.
is←knight (X) :- /* Someone is a knight if he */
says (X, Y), Y. /* says something and that */
/* thing is true. */
is←knave (X) :-
is←knight (X), !, false.
is←knave (X) :- /* Someone is a knave is he */
says (X, Y), not (Y). /* says something and that */
/* thing is not true. */
legal (X, Y) :-
Y, is←knight (X).
legal (X, Y) :-
not (Y), is←knave (X).
says (larry, Z):- /* We don't know what he said */
legal (larry, Z).
/* Says larry claims knavehood */
says (curly, says (larry, is←knave (larry))).
/* Says curly is a knave */
says (moe, is←knave (curly)).
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂25-Aug-86 0946 RPG Various Issues
To: cl-steering@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Having X3J13 be the Technical Committee and the current members
of cl-technical be the Specification Committee seem to accomplish the
two goals of having a hardcore - real - technical committee and of
assuaging the minions who feel screwed at being left out of the
standarization process. However, this argument assumes that it is the
fact of being on the technical committee rather than the substance
of being on that committee that is the sticking point.
On object-oriented programming, things are progressing about as
fast as they can right now: Bobrow and Moon got together to agree
on a compromise in principle right after the Lisp conference. Currently
a PhD-level hacker-writer from Lucid, Gregor Kiczales, and I are meeting
for several hours every day writing the specification for this agreed-upon
standard. I expect that a preliminary draft will be ready by the end
of September. A more nearly well-proofread version should be ready for
`public' comment by the end of October. For the moment, if you think
`CommonLoops' you will be nearly right on target.
On the subject of window system specifications, you'll recall that
IntelliCorp and Lucid were working together on one. Lucid parted company
with IntelliCorp's Common Windows because it specified a user interface
rather than a user-interface-building window system. Lucid built, instead,
a set of tools from which Common Windows can be built. However, as Mike
Grandfield of LMI points out, neither the Lucid window toolset nor the
IntelliCorp specification are adequate to handle the display list
style and the distributed window systems rapidly approaching.
Moreover, Xerox pondered the IntelliCorp spec and criticized it along
the same lines Lucid did.
I think we would err if we adopted the IntelliCorp spec without
susbtantial thought.
-rpg-
∂25-Aug-86 0951 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 86 09:49:36 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Mon 25 Aug 86 12:49:28-EDT
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1986 12:49 EDT
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12233657781.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: X3J13 and issues
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Aug 1986 23:03-EDT from OHLANDER at B.ISI.EDU
Certainly things are not happening quickly enough on the "cleanup"
stuff. Things seem to be moving as fast as possible on the object stuff
-- anyone who wants to track this closely should get intot he loop on
the COmmonLoops activity.
As for windows, I have long felt that thiungs would not move forward
until we had a couple of concrete, detailed proposals on the table, with
implementations for some machine or other. Those can come from
anywhere. People who don't like the pace should get to work, not just
gripe.
-- Scott
∂25-Aug-86 1108 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA new arrival
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 86 11:08:37 PDT
Date: Mon 25 Aug 86 11:05:05-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: new arrival
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, staff@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12233671580.46.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm sorry, but apparently my earlier message did not reach
many of the people on the csd list.
Anyway, Holly delivered a baby boy, Johnathan Robert Ullman,
8 lbs., 11 oz., 20.5" at 1:33 PM Thursday 8/21.
All is well at home.
---jeff
-------
∂25-Aug-86 1352 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Parallel architectures
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Aug 86 13:52:42 PDT
Date: Mon 25 Aug 86 13:52:25-PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Parallel architectures
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12233702044.52.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
As you know, the recent issue of Comm. ACM (Aug. 86) contains a report
"Evaluating two massively parallel machines". It compares Connection Machines
and T Series (Floating Point Systems, Inc).
- Gitchang -
-------
∂25-Aug-86 1636 JJW New Alliant software
To: Alliant-Users@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We've received Concentrix 2.0 from Alliant and will install it this
week. The system will be taken down for several hours to do this.
There are two new manuals: FX/Series Scientific Library and Concentrix
C Handbook. Let me know if these are of interest to you. If you have
any copies of other Alliant manuals, please tell me which ones you
have and I'll send you copies of the changes.
Here is a brief list of the new features in Concentrix 2.0.
1. Network File System (NFS) - Costs some extra $, but it's probably
worth getting. We don't have it yet.
2. Detached CEs and tunable scheduler
3. Performance enhancements
4. Shared interprocess memory and locks
5. Mapped files for FX/Fortran I/O
6. Graphics device support
7. DR11-W bus support
8. Crash dump analysis
9. Sendbug - problem reporting utility
10. Mon enhancements
11. Help - On-line help facility (unsupported)
∂26-Aug-86 0151 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #42
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Aug 86 01:51:26 PDT
Date: Monday, August 25, 1986 7:43PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #42
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 26 Aug 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 42
Today's Topics:
Query - Apollo Implementation,
Performance - CProlog Speeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 Aug 86 (Mon) 11:20:40 EDT
From: Robert Goldman <rpg%brown.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: C-Prolog implementation on Apollo Workstations
I am bringing up C-Prolog 1.3 on Apollo workstations running Berkeley
4.2. Has anyone out there tried doing this? If so, would you please
let me know -- I'd like to correspond about the project.
Thank you,
-- Robert Goldman
Note: We'd like to use this prolog for a class to be offered this
term, so please, if you can help, write soon!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 86 17:26:57 PDT
From: Mike Newton <newton@vlsi.caltech.edu>
Subject: A random observation on CProlog speeds....
The Dhrystone benchmark is a popular one with the unix community.
While reading through the latest figures I was impressed with the
amazing similarity in units between that benchmark and the standard
'LIPS' benchmark -- naive reverse -- under my 'improved' (speeded
and bug fixed) version of C-Prolog.
A part of this can be attributed to the relative efficiency of the
machines, and also, part due to the nature that C maps into the
hardware of a particular machine. When there are lots of native
code generting compilers out there it would be real interesting
to see if similar figure hold (up to a constant factor)!
For naive reverse (10 times/ 30 elements) here are raw timings in
LIPS using CProlog 1.5n4 with 2048 K of local space:
Sun 2: 1250
Vax 11/780: ~1750
Sun 3: 3350
4341/12: 4510 (Uses my 'optimizer' to reduce index )
4381/2: 5615 (register usage in simple instructions)
Now excerpts from the latest version of the Dhrystone benchmarks:
DHRYSTONE 1.1 BENCHMARK SUMMARY -- Thu Aug 14 22:41:13 EDT 1986
MANUF MODEL PROC CLOCK NOREG REG OS,COMPILER,NOTES
----- ----- ---- ----- ----- --- -----------------
Sun 2 0.00 1034 1110 UNIX 4.2BSD,cc
Sun 2/120 68010 10.00 1058 1142 UNIX Sun 2.2,cc
DEC VAX 11/780 0.00 1417 1441 UNIX 4.2BSD,cc
DEC VAX 11/780 MA780 0.00 1428 1470 Mach 4.3,cc
Sun 3/160 68020 16.67 2843 3134 UNIX Sun 3.0,cc
Sun 3/160 68020 16.67 2946 3246 Sun 4.2 3.0A,cc
IBM 4341-12 0.00 3690 3690 Amdahl UTS V,cc 1.11
IBM 4341-12 0.00 3910 3910 Amdahl UTS V,cc 1.11,
Mike Newtons "optimzer"
HP Bobcat 68020 0.00 2464 2671 HP/UX 5.02 B 9000/320,
IBM 4381-2 0.00 6440 6440 Amdahl UTS V,cc 1.11
IBM 4381-2 0.00 6850 6850 Amdahl UTS V,cc 1.11
Mike Newtons "optimizer"
Amdahl 5860 0.00 28735 28846 UTS V,cc 1.22
IBM 3090/200 0.00 31250 31250
Attached, please find the 08/14/86 list of DHRYSTONE 1.1 benchmark
results. I'm sorry it took so long to get this list together. The
only excuse I can offer is that it took a lot more wining and dining
to convince Margo to get engaged to me than I initially thought :-)!
CLARIFICATION
There seems to have been a great deal of confusion over what this
benchmark measures, and how to use these results. Let me try to
clarify this:
1) DHRYSTONE is a measure of processor+compiler efficiency in
executing a 'typical' program. The 'typical' program was
designed by measuring statistics on a great number of
'real' programs. The 'typical' program was then written
by Reinhold P. Weicker using these statistics. The
program is balanced according to statement type, as well
as data type.
2) DHRYSTONE does not use floating point. Typical programs
don't.
3) DHRYSTONE does not do I/O. Typical programs do, but then
we'd have a whole can of worms opened up.
4) DHRYSTONE does not contain much code that can be optimized
by vector processors. That's why a CRAY doesn't look real
fast, they weren't built to do this sort of computing.
5) DHRYSTONE does not measure OS performance, as it avoids
calling the O.S. The O.S. is indicated in the results
only to help in identifying the compiler technology.
A SPECIAL THANKS
I didn't write the DHRYSTONE benchmark. Rheinhold Weicker did.
He has certainly provided us with a useful tool for benchmarking,
and is to be congratulated.
Rick Richardson
PC Research, Inc.
(201) 834-1378 (9-17 EST)
(201) 922-1134 (7-9,17-24 EST)
- mike
newton@cit-vax.caltech.edu
Caltech 256-80
Pasadena CA 91125
818-356-6771 (afternoons,nights)
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂26-Aug-86 1601 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Aug 86 16:00:59 PDT
Date: Tue 26 Aug 86 15:58:46-PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12233987188.88.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I got the contents of the Proceedings of the 1986 International
Conference on Parallel Processing and will post it to the BBoard at
the Lobby of Building A. I'm sorry that I have not a Proceeding.
- Gitchang -
-------
∂26-Aug-86 1828 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Aug 86 18:26:36 PDT
Date: Tue 26 Aug 86 18:11:45-PDT
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP) '86
To: Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12233987188.88.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12234011397.14.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
MORE ON PARALLEL PROCESSING:
THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE JOURNAL OF PARALLEL AND DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING
HAS COME IN. RELEVANT ARTICLES INCLUDE ONE BY HILLYER AND SHAW
(EXECUTION OF OPS5 PRODUCTION SYSTEMS ON A MASSIVELY PARALLEL
MACHINE) AND STOLFO AND MIRANKER (THE DADO PRODUCTION SYSTEM MACHINE).
IF YOU WANT TO BORROW THIS ISSUE, ASK NANCY JORDAN AT THE FRONT DESK,
AND SHE WILL ARRANGE IT.
ED FEIGENBAUM
-------
∂27-Aug-86 1019 BLAIR@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Goodbye
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Aug 86 10:15:36 PDT
Date: Wed 27 Aug 86 10:07:16-PDT
From: Ivan Blair <BLAIR@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Goodbye
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I am leaving today to return to the UK, so this is to say goodbye
to all of you at CSLI. I have had a thoroughly enjoyable time here,
and wish to thank all who helped to make it so.
Best wishes,
-- Ivan
-------
∂27-Aug-86 1024 OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU Re: X3J13 and issues
Received: from B.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Aug 86 10:22:58 PDT
Date: 27 Aug 1986 10:20-PDT
Sender: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: X3J13 and issues
From: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[B.ISI.EDU]27-Aug-86 10:20:50.OHLANDER>
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12233657781.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Scott,
I have heard of two potential standards for windows, one
from Intellicorp and one from DEC. DEC has taken the "X"
Window stuff from MIT (withsome modifications from CMU)
and is pushing it as a standard for, at least, UNIX systems. I
will try to find out more about these efforts and see if I
can get some specifications for review.
Ron
∂27-Aug-86 1054 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU X3J13 and issues
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Aug 86 10:54:07 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 27 Aug 86 13:50:25-EDT
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1986 13:50 EDT
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12234193167.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: OHLANDER@B.ISI.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: X3J13 and issues
In-reply-to: Msg of 27 Aug 1986 13:20-EDT from OHLANDER at B.ISI.EDU
I'd very much like to see a standard Common Lisp interface to X, since
that window system seems to be quite popular in the unix world. I
hadn't heard about DEC's efforts along these lines. We'll have to see
whether this makes sense as a Common Lisp standard (I doubt that it
would), but for people living on X or something similar, it would be
very nice if they all did their window hacking in a compatible way. If
this can be packaged up with public domain code that will implement X on
any vanilla Unix 4.2/4.3 (and Mach), then this would create a useful
standard for that part of the world.
-- Scott
∂28-Aug-86 1253 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA No PLANLUNCH next week -- Labor Day
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Aug 86 12:52:41 PDT
Date: Thu 28 Aug 86 12:45:13-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: No PLANLUNCH next week -- Labor Day
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 28-Aug-86 12:45:13.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
There will be no PLANLUNCH next week, due to the labor day weekend.
We will resume, however, on Monday September 8.
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂28-Aug-86 1416 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA TAO/ELIS
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Aug 86 14:15:48 PDT
Date: Thu 28 Aug 86 14:13:42-PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: TAO/ELIS
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12234492350.35.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Two TAO/ELIS system were installed in July and are running without any
troubles for about a month. Although the machines are standalone and
the software to connect them to the Ethertip is not completed yet, I
think that it's the time to demonstrate the TAO/ELIS system to all the
members of AAP. If you're interested in the system, please let me
know. I'll demonstrate it at S-101 in the Medical Center. The
demonstration takes about 30 minutes.
Thanks,
- Gitchang -
-------
∂28-Aug-86 1423 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: TAO/ELIS
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Aug 86 14:23:00 PDT
Date: Thu 28 Aug 86 14:21:00-PDT
From: John R Delaney <DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: TAO/ELIS
To: Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12234492350.35.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12234493679.41.DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
May I suggest that we take advantage of this offer at the time scheduled for
our usual Wednesday group meeting on Wednesday, September 3.
John
-------
∂28-Aug-86 1454 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The demonstration of TAO/ELIS
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Aug 86 14:53:52 PDT
Date: Thu 28 Aug 86 14:51:24-PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: The demonstration of TAO/ELIS
To: saraiya@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, delagi@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, delaney@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12234499214.35.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Thank your for your quick response and interest in TAO/ELIS.
Since John offered me his group meeting time, September 3, I'll
demonstrate the system at the following time:
Date: September 3 (Wednesday)
Time: 10:30 ~ 11:00
Place: S-101 (Medical Center)
Schedule:
10:30 explanation of hardware
10:40 software demonstration
including: Lisp programming with TAO specific features
Logic programming
Object Oriented programming
11:00 end of demonstration
Please let me know who will attend the meeting, because the space is
limited. Moreover, I'll demonstrate the TAO/ELIS system at any time.
Please feel free to ask me to do the demonstration.
Thanks,
- Gitchang -
-------
∂28-Aug-86 1809 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu bye bye diablo
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Aug 86 18:09:07 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 28 Aug 86 17:51:00 pdt
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 86 17:51:00 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: bye bye diablo
To: nail@diablo
Diablo is going to be shut down permanently on Sunday.
The nail list has (I hope) been moved to navajo, and can
be addressed as nail@navajo. I'll become ullman@navajo
or ullman@score, by the way.
I'm going to mail you all a message from navajo.
If you receive this and don't receive a second message that
says it's from navajo, please let me know.
---jeff
∂29-Aug-86 1001 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Aug 86 10:01:43 PDT
Received: by cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (5.53/1.16)
id AA05175; Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:02:02 PDT
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:02:02 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8608291602.AA05175@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU, cogsci-friends@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
Cc: admin@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
--PLEASE POST-- --PLEASE POST--
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, September 2, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Speech Perception by Ear and Eye: A Paradigm for Psychological Inquiry"
Dominic W. Massaro
Psychology Department, University of California, Santa Cruz
In face-to-face communication, the perceiver both sees and hears the
speaker. I will give a striking demonstration illustrating how
not only the speech sound but also the speaker's lip movements
influence perception of a spoken syllable. The goal of my
research has been to develop a psychological description of how
these two properties are evaluated and integrated to achieve per-
ceptual recognition. The research strategy follows the tenets of
falsification and strong inference in that alternative hypotheses
are developed and tested. The research utilizes the techniques
of information processing and information integration, in con-
junction with fine-grained analyses of quantitative models of
performance. A second goal, more ambitious than the goal of the
research, confronts fundamental issues in experimental psychology
and cognitive science, as well as the information and processes
supporting speech perception. One question has to do with the
uniqueness of the processes that have been uncovered in bimodal
speech perception. The hypothesis is that the processes involved
in bimodal speech perception are similar to those involved in a
number of other domains of perceptual and cognitive functioning.
After developing an understanding of speech perception by ear and
by eye, I consider several domains and ask whether similar or
analogous processes occur across these domains. The domains in-
clude person impression, learning of arbitrary categories, sen-
tence interpretation, probability judgments of possible events,
and judgments of category membership. Following Fodor's classif-
ication, these domains include both input modules and central
systems and it should not be possible to provide the same process
description across these domains. To the extent that we can pro-
vide a unified account of this broad range of phenomena, modular-
ity is not a reasonable guideline for psychological inquiry.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Sept 16: Jitendra Malik, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Sept 30: Paul Grice, Philosophy, UC Berkeley
Oct 14 : Daniel Kahneman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Oct 28 : Anne Triesman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please Note: In order to afford our Cognitive Science faculty and
students a more regular meeting time to discuss joint research,
we have decided to shift our public lecture series from a weekly
to an every-other-weekly basis.
∂29-Aug-86 1038 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Aug 86 10:34:17 PDT
Received: by cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (5.53/1.16)
id AA05175; Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:02:02 PDT
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:02:02 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8608291602.AA05175@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU, cogsci-friends@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar --Sept. 2
Cc: admin@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
--PLEASE POST-- --PLEASE POST--
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, September 2, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Speech Perception by Ear and Eye: A Paradigm for Psychological Inquiry"
Dominic W. Massaro
Psychology Department, University of California, Santa Cruz
In face-to-face communication, the perceiver both sees and hears the
speaker. I will give a striking demonstration illustrating how
not only the speech sound but also the speaker's lip movements
influence perception of a spoken syllable. The goal of my
research has been to develop a psychological description of how
these two properties are evaluated and integrated to achieve per-
ceptual recognition. The research strategy follows the tenets of
falsification and strong inference in that alternative hypotheses
are developed and tested. The research utilizes the techniques
of information processing and information integration, in con-
junction with fine-grained analyses of quantitative models of
performance. A second goal, more ambitious than the goal of the
research, confronts fundamental issues in experimental psychology
and cognitive science, as well as the information and processes
supporting speech perception. One question has to do with the
uniqueness of the processes that have been uncovered in bimodal
speech perception. The hypothesis is that the processes involved
in bimodal speech perception are similar to those involved in a
number of other domains of perceptual and cognitive functioning.
After developing an understanding of speech perception by ear and
by eye, I consider several domains and ask whether similar or
analogous processes occur across these domains. The domains in-
clude person impression, learning of arbitrary categories, sen-
tence interpretation, probability judgments of possible events,
and judgments of category membership. Following Fodor's classif-
ication, these domains include both input modules and central
systems and it should not be possible to provide the same process
description across these domains. To the extent that we can pro-
vide a unified account of this broad range of phenomena, modular-
ity is not a reasonable guideline for psychological inquiry.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Sept 16: Jitendra Malik, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Sept 30: Paul Grice, Philosophy, UC Berkeley
Oct 14 : Daniel Kahneman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Oct 28 : Anne Triesman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please Note: In order to afford our Cognitive Science faculty and
students a more regular meeting time to discuss joint research,
we have decided to shift our public lecture series from a weekly
to an every-other-weekly basis.
∂29-Aug-86 1155 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu NAIL test
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Aug 86 11:55:14 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 29 Aug 86 11:50:08 PDT
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 86 11:50:08 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: NAIL test
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
OK, I finally remembered to send the message from navajo.
This is the message you were supposed to get yesterday,
after my message from diablo saying this message was coming.
---jeff
∂30-Aug-86 1745 JJW Concentrix 2.0 now running
To: Alliant-Users@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We're now running Concentrix 2.0 on the Alliant. Everything seems to
pretty much work, but be on the alert just in case. (This morning I
found a rather obscure bug or misfeature in the loader, for instance.)
The nicest feature of this new system is that when the CEs are not
working as a cluster on a single multiprocessor job, they can be used
to work on separate single-processor jobs. So you can start a few
compilations going in the background and continue working with no
slowdown. If there is demand for both cluster and single-processor
work, the scheduler runs the CEs as a cluster 50% of the time. (This
is a parameter that we can easily change.) If you type "mon -c" you
get a good picture of what the machine is doing.
Another useful facility is the "help" program. Alliant still
considers this an experimental program, and the user interface is
subject to change. Its main difference from "man" seems to be that it
is more tree-structured.
For hackers, an important new feature is "shared-memory files", which
allow separate Unix processes to share memory in a controlled way.
There are also simple lock subroutines in the C library, as well as
routines to use the cluster in a single process, and to use the vector
hardware.
Joe
∂30-Aug-86 2349 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu PODC questionnaire
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Aug 86 23:49:24 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 30 Aug 86 23:43:16-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 30 Aug 86 23:41:32-PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 30 Aug 86 23:57:44 CDT
Return-Path: HALPERN@ibm.com
Received: from ibm.com by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 29 Aug 86 21:27:49 CDT
Date: 29 August 1986, 16:54:04 PDT
From: "Joseph Y. Halpern" <HALPERN@ibm.com>
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <082986.165406.halpern@ibm.com>
Subject: PODC questionnaire
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 86 23:57:27 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
PODC (ACM Conference on Principles of Distributed Computing)
QUESTIONNAIRE
The information provided here will be used to advise future program
committees and our informal coordinating committee. If you have
attended a PODC conference or are interested in attending one at some
in the future, please fill this out and send it back to me
at halpern@ibm.com (arpanet), halpern%ibm.com@csnet-relay (csnet),
or halpern@almvma (bitnet).
1. PODC has thus far been held in Canada. Would you prefer that:
←←← PODC remain in Canada
←←← PODC remain in North America, but not necessarily in Canada
←←← PODC be held in North America, Europe, and Israel
2. Part of the the problem in keeping PODC in Canada (or holding it
anywhere else, for that matter!) is finding organizers willing to chair
the general conference and take care of local arrangements. Do you know
anyone who could do the job? ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
3. If the number of submissions keeps increasing, we may end up
increasing the number of papers accepted. Would you prefer to:
←←← keep PODC as a two-and-a-half day conference with
half hour talks (thus not allowing the number of papers to
increase very much)
←←← keep PODC as a two-and-a-half day conference, but have
20 minute talks in order to accommodate more papers
←←← keep half hour talks, but have PODC as a three-day
conference
←←← have 10-minute talks as we did in the rump session, with
a few invited one-hour (mainly overview) talks
←←← other ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
4. This year we had a rump session for the first time. Do you
think we should keep having such rump sessions? ←←←←←←←
If yes, do you have any suggestions for the format of the
rump session? ←←←←←
5. Any other comments or suggestions?
6. How many previous PODC's have you attended?
Signature (optional) ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
--------------
TN Message #72
--------------
∂01-Sep-86 0123 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #46
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Sep 86 01:23:29 PDT
Date: Sunday, August 31, 1986 2:59PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #46
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 1 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 46
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Knights and Knaves,
Implementation - Bagof & Fixed Points
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 Aug 86 18:20:37 EDT
From: Jan Chomicki <CHOMICKI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: "Knights and Knaves": a solution
To solve the "Knights and Knaves" puzzle we construct a simple
theory of the island. Syntactically, the theory consists of
sentences:
"is(X,K)" and "says(X,A)"
where X is a person, K - his/her kind
(Knight or Knave) and A - a sentence. Only negation is allowed,
no conjunction etc. Hence every sentence looks like
"says(X1,says(X2,...says(Xn,is(Y,K))))",
with possibly interspersed negations. We are interested in the
models of this theory. Notice that the truth of a sentence
depends on who says it, and that's why it is enough to consider
the assignments to the predicate "is" of the form { is(larry,...),
is(curly,...), is(moe,...)} . My procedure true/2 determines the
truth of a sentence in a given model.
It is interesting to see that the models are only partially
determined. That's why the puzzle asks abour Curly and Moe, but
not about Larry.
I have also another solution of this puzzle which does not use "\+"
in the code. However, I had to make stronger assumptions about the
situation being modelled and the code is a bit longer.
/* "Knights and Knaves": a solution by Jan Chomicki. */
:-op(900,fy,[~]).
true(~A,T) :- \+ true(A,T).
true(is(X,K),T) :- member(is(X,K),T).
true(says(X,A),T) :- true(is(X,knight),T), !, true(A,T).
true(says(X,A),T) :- true(is(X,knave),T), !, \+ true(A,T).
solution([is(larry,A),is(curly,B),is(moe,C)]) :- oneof(A),oneof(B),
oneof(C).
oneof(knave).
oneof(knight).
member(X,[X|←]) :- !.
member(X,[Y|L]) :- X\==Y, member(X,L).
g(X) :- solution(X), true(says(curly,says(larry,is(larry,knave))),X),
true(says(moe,is(curly,knave)),X).
| ?- g(X).
X = [larry is knave,curly is knave,moe is knight] ;
X = [larry is knight,curly is knave,moe is knight] ;
no
------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 86 09:53:11 GMT
From: Chris Moss <mcvax!ukc!icdoc!cdsm@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Dave Plummer's bagof query
>Given the program:
>
>p(1,←). p(2,←). p(3,3). p(4,4).
>
>and the goal bagof(X, p(X,Y), S). Edinburgh DEC-10 Prolog
>returns,
>
>S = [1,2,3] X = ← Y = 3
>S = [4] X = ← Y = 4
>
>This behaviour doesn't agree with my reading of the
>documentation
Poplog produces the solutions:
S=[4] X =←1 Y=4
S=[3] X =←1 Y=3
S=[1,2] X=←1 Y=←2
which is ←slightly← more consistent.
The problem has been dealt with in:
Lee Naish: All solutions predicates in Prolog.
Techch Report 84/4, Dept of Comp. Sc., Univ of Melbourne.
He has a 'hard-line' solution which involves coroutining and
never returning variables if they can be subsequently bound.
-- Chris Moss
------------------------------
Date: Thu 28 Aug 86 13:53:54
From: Wlodek Drabent <enea!liuida!wdr@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Subject: Fixed Points
Here is a two-clause "fixed point" program:
fix( X, g(X) ) :- g( X ).
g(( fix( X, g(X) ) :- g( X ) )).
and an execution trace for it:
| ?- fix( X, Y ).
X = (fix(←162,g(←162)):-g(←162)),
Y = g((fix(←162,g(←162)):-g(←162))) ;
no
| ?- listing.
fix(←1,g(←1)) :-
g(←1).
g((fix(←1,g(←1)):-g(←1))).
yes
| ?-
The drawback of the program is that it accepts not only itself
but also every instance of itself. The second program is without
this disadvantage:
fix( X, (g(X,Y):-Y) ) :- g( X, Y ).
g(
( fix( X, (g(X,Y):-Y) ) :- g( X, Y ) ),
( var( X ), var( Y ), X\==Y )
) :- var( X ), var( Y ), X\==Y.
Here is an execution trace for the second program:
| ?- fix( X, Y ).
X = (fix(←163,(g(←163,←164):-←164)):-g(←163,←164)),
Y = (g((fix(←163,(g(←163,←164):-←164)):-g(←163,←164)),
(var(←163),var(←164),←163\==←164)):-var(←163),var(←164),←163\==←164)
yes
| ?- listing.
fix(←1,(g(←1,←2):-←2)) :-
g(←1,←2).
g((fix(←1,(g(←1,←2):-←2)):-g(←1,←2)),(var(←1)','var(←2)','←1\==←2)) :-
var(←1),
var(←2),
←1\==←2.
yes
-- Wlodek Drabent
------------------------------
Date: 31 Aug 86 12:24:39 GMT
From: Ran Ever-Hadani <techunix.BITNET!raan@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Answer to fixed-points query
In pure Prolog, it is not possible to construct a single clause,
self/1 with non-empty body that yields any answer to a query; it can
either fail or go into infinite loop. If the clause is Head:-Body
then the initial goal is Head, and no reduction can ever produce the
empty goal.
self/1 with no body is also not possible, since it will have to
contain itself.
The solution below is a procedure is self/2, which contains two
clauses and is true when fed these clauses as parameters.
self(Y,self(Y,0)) :- self(Y,0).
self((self(Y,self(Y,0)):-self(Y,0)),0).
This it not perfect, since if we ask ?- self(A,B). then apart from
A=.. clause1 .. B=.. clause2 .. which is the sollution we want,
we also get A=.. clause1 .. B=0 (by unifying directly to clause2).
This can only be avoided using a cut (which is not pure Prolog) as
shown in a slightly different version of self/2 below:
Script started on Sun Aug 31 14:58:20 1986
% cprolog
C-Prolog version 1.4a
| ?- [user].
|
| self(Y,self(Y,0)) :- self(Y,0), !.
|
| self((self(Y,self(Y,0)):-self(Y,0),!),0).
| ↑D
user consulted 416 bytes 0.116667 sec.
yes
| ?- self(A,B).
A = self(←9,self(←9,0)):-self(←9,0),!
B = self((self(←9,self(←9,0)):-self(←9,0),!),0) ;
no
| ?- ↑D
[ Prolog execution halted ]
%
Script done on Sun Aug 31 14:59:33 1986
-- Ran Ever-Hadani
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂02-Sep-86 0402 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Ida's thoughts on international standardization
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Sep 86 04:01:49 PDT
Date: 2 Sep 1986 04:00-PDT
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: Ida's thoughts on international standardization
Subject: [Masayuki Ida <a37078%ccut.u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet...]
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 2-Sep-86 04:00:57.MATHIS>
Thought you all might like to see this message from Ida,
particularly the later half. -- Bob
Begin forwarded message
Received: FROM RELAY.CS.NET BY USC-ISIF.ARPA WITH TCP ; 29 Aug 86 10:03:43 PDT
from utokyo-relay by csnet-relay.csnet id ab15969; 29 Aug 86 12:27 EDT
by u-tokyo.junet (4.12/4.9J-1[JUNET-CSNET])
id AA00231; Fri, 29 Aug 86 19:51:04+0900
by ccut.u-tokyo.junet (4.12/6.1Junet)
id AA12062; Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:08:00+0900
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 86 09:08:00+0900
From: Masayuki Ida <a37078%ccut.u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: MATHIS%ADA20.ISI.EDU@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET,
a37078%ccut.u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Cc: Mathis@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: ANSI Meeting
Return-Path: <a37078%ccut.u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Message-ID: <8608290008.AA12062@ccut.u-tokyo.junet>
Thank you for your letter.
Should I send $175 or so, which is necessesary to join ANSI ?
Or I can receive documents with free charge ?
I am ready to pay, of cause.
I have a desire to visit USA on December or Feb.'87.
Because, the school season is
for fall semester until 18 Dec.
I have winter semester schedule for Jan.8 to Feb.15.
Spring semester will start at April 5th or so.
So, If I want to spare all the time I have in USA,
Ican be in USA during 20 Dec to Jan7th,
Feb.17 to April 3rd.
In march, I may visit MIT AI-lab for a month for my personal research work, but not yet fixed.
JIS WG 2nd meeting will be held at Sept.5th.
It will determine the schedule forthe comming 3 years.
So, I think it is very important.
I already told them through junet, japan unix net, that,
ANSI will make Common Lisp as the official standard,
which is headed by you.
ANSI will do it , may be, in 1987.
ISO will start in 1987 and want to have a first DP in 1989 summer.
CommonLoops will be added into the Common Lisp spec.
(After the some polish up taking the staffs of newFlavors)
ISO will also be headed by you.
-----
I think Prof. Fahlman have not so interest in international standardization now.
I have got a contact from Jerome Chailloux by uucp unix net.
He want to seek a kind of 'compromise' with Common Lisp.
Because, Europeian computer companies already start to make
Common Lisp implementation,
with the assisit of Lucid, KCL, ...
I and rpg found we have a same opinion that Eulisp will naturally merged into CL or naturally disapper, if ISO will take a enough time to discuss.
In japan, there are several persons and companies, which
do not want to have a Common Lisp implementation.
But, I will discuss with them with my sincere.
JIS schedule will be,
the first year (1986 summer to 1987 summer) will make a basic understanding
that we will make a LISP official standard esspecially on CL.
Some questions or modification requests may arise and I will send them to the
technical committee.
The second year and the third year ( 1987 summer to 1989 summer) will amke
a draft for JIS which should conform to ISO standard.
The schedule I have in my mind will be done is I do not know.
Only God knows !
I pray God and I will do my best.
Best Regards,
Masayuki Ida
ida%utokyo-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
-----
--------------------
End forwarded message
∂03-Sep-86 1436 JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU 3rd Year Report
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 14:36:31 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Sep 86 14:33:49-PDT
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: 3rd Year Report
To: researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: jamie@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I have more copies of the Third Year Report to SDF now. If you
didn't get one earlier and would like to have a copy, let me know
and I'll see that you get one.
-- Jamie
-------
∂03-Sep-86 1459 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Devika Subramanian
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 14:58:18 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Sep 86 14:51:36-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Devika Subramanian
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 3-Sep-86 14:51:36.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTORIZATION IN EXPERIMENT GENERATION
Devika Subramanian
Stanford University, Computer Science Department
11:00 AM, MONDAY, September 8
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Experiment Generation is an important part of incremental concept
learning. One basic function of experimentation is to gather data
to refine an existing space of hypotheses. In this talk, we examine
the class of experiments that accomplish this, called discrimination
experiments, and propose factoring as a technique for generating
them efficiently.
-------
∂03-Sep-86 1510 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper available
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 15:09:30 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 29 Jul 86 10:37:36 pdt
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 86 10:37:36 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper available
To: nail@diablo
"Design Overview of the NAIL! System", K. Morris, J. Ullman, A. Van Gelder,
STAN-CS-86-1108. Please send mail to my secretary, Rosemary Napier,
rfn@sail, if you want a copy of this paper. It also appears in
the Proc. of 3rd ICLP.
---jeff
∂03-Sep-86 1531 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 15:31:20 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:53:32 pdt
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:53:32 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo, paco@diablo
"Logic Programming and Parallel Complexity", P. C. Kanellakis,
Dept. of CS, Brown Univ. (paris@mit-xx on ARPANET)
This is a survey of the topic mentioned in the title.
It also contains the result that boundedness is NP-hard
even for single, linear rules.
---jeff
∂03-Sep-86 1558 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 15:58:35 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:47:09 pdt
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:47:09 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo
"Reducing Linear Recursive Relations to Transitive Closure"
Linda Ness, UT Austin, Dept. of CS.
This paper is in draft form, but looks very interesting.
I *think* the intuitive idea is as follows:
If you have a single linear recursive rule and a basis rule,
you can apply the recursion repeatedly and watch what happens to the
arguments of the recursive predicate.
Initially, funny things can happen, for example, because the
same variable appears in two or more argument positions in
the recursive "call" e.g. p(X,Y,Z) :- r(W,X) & p(Y,Z,Y).
But as you continue, the funniness settles down, and
a cyclic behavior establishes itself.
That behavior can, apparently, always be expressed as a TC,
and the desired answer computed from it by finite means.
---jeff
∂03-Sep-86 1613 avg@diablo.stanford.edu local stratify challenge
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Sep 86 16:13:53 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Fri, 25 Jul 86 17:20:29 pdt
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 86 17:20:29 pdt
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: local stratify challenge
To: nail@diablo
Here are some programs that "do something." Are they locally stratified?
Notice that neither program really involves negation. I claim that you
don't need negation to make local stratification difficult to recognize.
THIS CODE WAS NOT TESTED.
Here '#' is an infix functor for list formation and
[] is a constant not in the EDB. Edit in your preferred notation.
Recall that each '←' denotes a distinct anonymous variable.
p(X#Y, X) :- e(←, X), r(Y, [], X#←, X).
p(X#Y, Z) :- e(U, X), p(U#(X#Y), Z).
r(A#[], C, A#C, ←).
r(A#B, C, R, X) :- not A=X, r(B, A#C, R, X).
Notice that I "forgot" to specify the EDB relation e.
r performs "3-argument" reverse, while rejecting lists with an element
(other than the last) equal to its 4th argument.
In the rule for p, this ensures that Y is a simple path whose last element
is X.
Is the r part locally stratified? A program to test this is not so easy.
p(V, X) means V is a path in the graph whose directed edges are specified
by relation e, such that V is part of a cycle from X to X.
Is the whole program
(a) locally stratified for all EDBs?
(b) locally stratified for no EDBs beyond some trivial ones?
(c) sometimes locally stratified? If so, when?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quick sort:
s([], T, T).
s(X#Y, Z, T) :- p(X#Y, V, W), s(V, Z, X#R), s(W, R, T).
p(X#[], [], []).
p(X#(A#B), A#V, W) :- A < X, p(X#B, V, W).
p(X#(A#B), V, A#W) :- A >= X, p(X#B, V, W).
p is "partition."
?- s(A, B, []) with A instantiated to a list should deliver B as the sorted
version of A.
In intermediate steps, the third argument is a "pointer to tail."
Cf. the "difference list" technique.
How do you test for local stratification?
PS: If you want to see an EDB on this, I will add the rules
edbsort(X, Y) :- edblist(0, X), s(X, Y, []).
edblist(N, X#[]) :- e(N, X, 0).
edblist(N, X#Y) :- e(N, X, M), M > N, edblist(M, Y).
and let e be the EDB relation. 0 marks beginnings and ends of lists in e.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
After we knock these problems off, we can go to work on the ones with
negation in them. :-)
∂04-Sep-86 1024 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: paper received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Sep 86 10:23:49 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 4 Sep 86 10:12:31 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 86 10:12:31 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: paper received
To: ullman@diablo.stanford.edu, vardi@ibm.com
Cc: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
well if not, we do now.
∂04-Sep-86 1602 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Database Theory and the Real World
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Sep 86 16:01:08 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 4 Sep 86 15:52:50 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 86 15:52:50 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Database Theory and the Real World
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
------- Forwarded Mail
From glacier!decwrl!amdcad!amdimage!prls!philabs!linus!raybed2!applicon!hdsvx1!hoffman Thu Sep 4 15:09:58 PDT 1986
Status: R
Article 379 of net.database:
Path: navajo!glacier!decwrl!amdcad!amdimage!prls!philabs!linus!raybed2!applicon!hdsvx1!hoffman
>From: hoffman@hdsvx1.UUCP (Richard Hoffman)
Newsgroups: net.database
Subject: Re: Problem with relational theory
Message-ID: <452@hdsvx1.UUCP>
Date: 25 Aug 86 23:26:37 GMT
References: <595@ur-tut.UUCP>
Organization: Schlumberger-HDS, Houston TX
Lines: 83
Eric Carleen at Univ. of Rochester Medical Center writes [edited slightly]:
> Suppose that I have 3 tables of names, call them t1, t2, and t3.
> The names in tables 2 or 3 may or may not be in t1.
> I would like to delete all those records in t1 that are already listed
> in the other two tables.
>
> If I give the command:
>
> delete t1 where t1.name = t2.name or t1.name = t3.name
>
> then I get what I was after: entries that match EITHER t2 OR t3
> are deleted.
>
> unless... t3 is empty. If t3 is empty, then nothing is deleted
> from t1, regardless of whether or not there are any matching entries
> in t2. (The work-around is obvious, but I thought unnecessary.)
>
> Technical support at Relational Technologies insists that this is the
> correct way for a deletion to occur.
And they are, unfortunately, right. This is because of the way that the
relational theory (upon which Ingres is based) works.
Relational theory starts with the assumption of sets, called domains,
which contain all the legal values for a given attribute. For instance,
the domain of sex = {male, female}. The domain of primary colors =
{red, blue, yellow}. The domain of the national debt is probably the
set containing all positive real numbers taken to two decimal places.
Any set may be a domain.
A table is defined as the subset of a cartesian product of domain sets.
So consider a family whose members are listed in the domain F = {Sara,
David, Jon}. Each of these members can be associated with a sex chosen
from S = {M, F}. The Cartesian product of FxS is {(Sara, M), (Sara, F),
(David, M), (David, F), (Jon, M), (Jon, F)}. However, a table which
gave the sexes of the members of these families would be a subset of
FxS, namely {(Sara, F), (David, M), (Jon, M)}.
This formulation sheds light on a number of practices common in relational
data bases, such as the use of domains for guaranteeing integrity (this
should be required, but is often allowed to default to meaninglessly broad
domains such as "all integers", "all strings", etc.) and the refusal of
most RDBs to safeguard order inside a table (the table is just a set, and
order is unimportant in a set). It also shows you why the Ingres way of
handling your query is correct.
What you are really doing when you run your query is forming a cartesian
product on the sets represented by t1.name, t2.name and t3.name. Then
you are removing the subset of this set in which t1.name = t2.name or
t1.name = t3.name. If t3 is empty, it is an EMPTY SET! The cartestian
product of any number of sets with an empty set MUST BE EMPTY! So there
is nothing to remove.
It's not that Ingres doesn't process your query
correctly, it's just that it abandons processing as soon as it spots the
empty set in the cartesian product. Sort of like a compiler whose optimizer
was clever enough to spot that hundreds of operations on x followed by
x = 0 meant that the hundreds of operations could be omitted. But the
compiler would probably flag this, and RTI probably errs slightly by not
pointing out joins involving empty sets.
I'm sure you know the two work-arounds: either make t3 non-empty,
with a dummy value, or make two queries, so that the emptiness of
either t2 or t3 does not effect the deletions based on
the other table. This last procedure will probably be more efficient
anyway (even for non-empty sets) for sufficiently large
tables, because the single query method will require on the order
of S1xS2xS3 operations (where Sn is the size in rows of table n),
while the double query method will only require on the order of
S1x(S2+S3) operations, plus a couple of extraneous file opens and
closes.
I hear that RTI has really cleaned up their join optimizer
in their most recent release, so the performance difference
between the two queries may be much smaller than I report.
Also, primary and secondary indexes may make a big difference. Still,
if the tables are large enough to obviate the extra file opens
and closes, you're always safe using the two-query method.
--
Richard Hoffman | "Oh life is a wonderful cycle of song,
Schlumberger Well Services | A medley of extemporanea.
hoffman%hdsvx1@slb-doll.csnet | And Love is a thing that can never go wrong
PO Box 2175, Houston, TX 77252 | ... And I am Marie of Roumania." --D. PARKER
------- End Forwarded Mail
∂04-Sep-86 1627 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu VLDB Proceedings
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Sep 86 16:27:26 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 4 Sep 86 16:21:42 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 86 16:21:42 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: VLDB Proceedings
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
The VLDB Proceedings have some papers of interest to the nail group.
I left my copy with Shuky Sagiv. You are welcome to brow.
Moshe
∂05-Sep-86 1455 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Call For Papers - LICS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Sep 86 14:54:19 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 5 Sep 86 14:50:55-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 5 Sep 86 14:38:19-PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 5 Sep 86 13:10:30 CDT
Return-Path: BH00%CLVMS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <8609041655.AA02730@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 4 Sep 86 11:55:18 CDT
Received: from (MAILER)CLVM.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 09/04/86 at
11:55:24 CDT
Received: from CLVMS(BH00) by CLVM (Mailer X1.23a) id 2493;
Thu, 04 Sep 86 12:53:20 EDT
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 86 12:50 EDT
From: BRAY DAVID <BH00%CLVMS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Subject: Call For Papers - LICS
To: <THEORY@rsch.wisc.edu>
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Fri, 05 Sep 86 13:10:08 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
22 - 25 June 1987
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
THE SYMPOSIUM will cover a wide range of theoretical and practical issues in
Computer Science that relate to logic in a broad sense, including algebraic
and topological approaches.
Suggested (but not exclusive) topics of interest include: abstract data types,
computer theorem proving, verification, concurrency, type theory and constructi
ve
mathematics, data base theory, foundations of logic programming, program logics
and semantics, knowledge and belief, software specifications, logic-based
programming languages, logic in complexity theory.
Organizing Committee
K. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A. Chandra (chair) D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
Program Committee
S. Brookes D. Gries (chair) J.-P. Jouannaud A. Nerode
L. Cardelli J. Goguen R. Ladner G. Plotkin
R. Constable Y. Gurevich V. Lifschitz A. Pnueli
M. Fitting D. Harel G. Longo P. Scott
PAPER SUBMISSION. Authors should send 16 copies of a detailed abstract
(not a full paper) by 9 DECEMBER 1986 to the program chairman:
David Gries -- LICS (607) 255-9207
Department of Computer Science gries@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Abstracts must 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. Abstracts
must be no more than 2500 words. Late abstracts or abstracts 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 be accepted.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 30 JANUARY 1987.
Accepted papers, typed on special forms for inclusion in the symposium
proceedings, will be due 30 MARCH 1987.
The symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, Technical Committee on
Mathematical Foundations of Computing and Cornell University, in cooperation wi
th
ACM SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS.
GENERAL CHAIRMAN LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS
Ashok K. Chandra Dexter C. Kozen
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Department of Computer Science
P.O. Box 218 Cornell University
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 Ithaca, New York 14853
(914) 945-1752 (607) 255-9209
ashok@ibm.com kozen@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
--------------
TN Message #73
--------------
∂05-Sep-86 1513 JJW IMSL for Alliant
To: Alliant-Users@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We've received a brochure saying that IMSL is available for the
Alliant. Would this be useful to anyone here?
Joe
∂05-Sep-86 1639 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Memorial Gathering
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Sep 86 16:39:39 PDT
Date: Fri 5 Sep 86 16:32:41-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Memorial Gathering
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
As many of you know, our dear friend, Dianne Kanerva, died last Sunday
night after a long illness. There will be a memorial gathering for
her on Saturday, September 13, at 4:00, in the Fireside Room of the
Unitarian Church at 505 Charleston in Palo Alto.
-------
∂07-Sep-86 2214 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA PLANLUNCH reminder
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Sep 86 22:14:32 PDT
Date: Sun 7 Sep 86 22:10:55-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: PLANLUNCH reminder
To: planlunch.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 7-Sep-86 22:10:55.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTORIZATION IN EXPERIMENT GENERATION
Devika Subramanian (SUBRAMANIAN@SCORE)
Stanford University, Computer Science Department
11:00 AM, MONDAY, September 8
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Experiment Generation is an important part of incremental concept
learning. One basic function of experimentation is to gather data
to refine an existing space of hypotheses. In this talk, we examine
the class of experiments that accomplish this, called discrimination
experiments, and propose factoring as a technique for generating
them efficiently.
-------
∂08-Sep-86 0106 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #47
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 01:06:50 PDT
Date: Friday, September 5, 1986 7:07PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #47
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 8 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 47
Today's Topics:
Query - IF/Prolog,
Implementation - Fixed Points,
Puzzle - Knaves Knights and Knaves
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 86 10:59:24 PDT
From: Mike Newton <newton@vlsi.caltech.edu>
Subject: IF/Prolog
Hello --
I just received IF/Prolog's information brochure and was
sufficiently interested to consider ordering it. Before
doing so, I would like to hear any comments from people
who have used it. [If I get enough interest I will
summarize the comments to this list]. Please either
send me net mail, or a post card to the below address
(with your phone number) and I will call you.
Any information would be appreciated!
-- mike
newton@cit-vax.caltech.edu
Caltech 256-80
Pasadena CA 91125
818-356-6771 (afternoons,nights)
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 86 06:48:13 GMT
From: Bjorn Danielsson <mcvax!enea!zyx!bd@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Fixed Points
I have found a solution, but it requires an extra predicate
that interprets a "represented" clause and melts it into a
lower level of representation. Using an extra predicate
might seem like cheating, especially if you write something
like:
fixed(X) :- cheat(X). cheat((fixed(X) :- cheat(X))).
However, the extra predicate in my solution contains no
information about the problem. The program follows:
fixed(X) :- Y = (-z = (fixed(quote(-x)) :- quote(-y) = build←quote(-y),
-y,
melt(quote(-z),quote(-x)))),
Z = (fixed(-x) :- -y = quote(Y),
Y,
melt(-z,-x)),
melt(Z,X).
% melt(X,Y) interprets the representation X of a clause fragment,
% and unifies Y with the most general term it represents.
% -(foo) represents the variable ←foo.
% quote(C) represents the constant C.
% build←quote(X) represents the term quote(Y), where X is a term
% that represents Y.
% Everything else has its usual meaning.
melt(X,Y) :- melt(X,Y,←).
melt(quote(X),X,←).
melt(build←quote(X),quote(Y),L) :- melt(X,Y,L).
melt(-X,V,L) :- member([X|V],L).
melt([A|B],[X|Y],L) :- melt(A,X,L), melt(B,Y,L).
melt([],[],←).
melt(A,X,L) :- A=..[F|B], melt(B,Y,L), X=..[F|Y].
melt(A,A,←).
member(X,[Y|Z]) :- X=Y; member(X,Z).
% End of program
-- Bjorn Danielsson
------------------------------
Date: 2 Sep 86 17:04:41 GMT
From: Jamie Andrews <ubc-vision!ubc-cs!andrews@uw-beaver.arpa>
Subject: Fixed Points
The original query was framed so loosely that even this
program works:
fixed(X).
I think Paul Weiss probably wanted to say "fixed(Term) is
true ONLY of Terms which are clauses defining a predicate
extensionally identical to fixed(Term)." Can the people
who proposed solutions prove that their solutions have
this property?
-- Jamie
------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 86 21:06:09 GMT
From: David Fiore <ucdavis!ucrmath!hope!fiore@ucbvax.Berkeley>
Subject: Knights and Knaves
I am posting this message to thank all of you who have been
kind enough to answer my call for help on the Knights and Knaves
problem.
Special thanks to Paul Kamsteeg for your in depth analysis and
explanation of the problem. Even though I don't understand all
of what you wrote, what I did understand has been very helpful.
Thanks again to everyone who contributed.
-- David Fiore
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 86 13:08:20 pdt
From: Paul Kamsteeg <Univ. of Amsterdam, Netherlands>
Subject: Knights and Knaves
Dear David,
You have certainly picked an awkward problem for your
*first* Prolog exercise, since it contains at least three
features at which the inference machine of Prolog balks.
The first two are quite well-known limitations of Prolog.
The third one I have never seen mentioned as a problem
(which isn't saying much).
1. You cannot simply state bidirectional implications
(like a<=>b ) in Prolog as:
a:- b.
b:- a.
since this tends to loop, especially if a and b are untrue.
(More specifically, the only way it does not loop is if
there is a non-backreferential clause for a or b *prior*
to the two above in the database, *and* the clause is
guaranteed not to backtrack). You can see why: to prove a,
prove b; to prove b, prove a; to prove a, .... (etc).
The same thing happens, by the way, if you state:
a:- not(b).
b:- not(a).
since to "prove" not(b), Prolog has first to try proving b
(see below). A often used solution is, to make two "layers",
one to prove facts and one of facts that are already known,
as in:
a:- b, assert( known (a) ).
b:- known(a).
thereby resolving the circularity.
2. You cannot depend on Prolog to prove definite negatives,
unless you are absolutely certain you can prove *all*
positives. That is, Prolog uses "negation by failure" which
means that in Prolog succeeding of not(a) only means that a
was not provable, i.e. "I don't know that a" instead of "I
know that not a". The last interpretation only applies if
you are certain that if a were true, Prolog would have proven
it. If you have to use a three←valued logic (true, false,
unknown or in your case knight, knave, unknown) you have to
state the two definite cases (true, false) explicitly and
add clauses to state that they are mutually exclusive, e.g.:
true(a):- true( true(a) ).
true(a):- false( false(a) ).
false(a):- true( false(a) ).
false(a):- false( true(a) ).
or, alternatively:
opposite( a,b ).
opposite( b,a ).
true(X):- opposite(X,Y), false(Y),!, assert( known(X) ).
false(X):- opposite(X,Y), known(Y).
( *not* "false(X):- opposite(X,Y), true(Y)" since this would
again loop)
3. Prolog does not check of itself for logical inconsistencies.
It is perfectly legal to state:
a:- true(b), false(b).
even when true and false are declared to be mutually exclusive
as above. The clause would always fail, either by true(b) not
being provable, or by false(b) not being provable, but Prolog
would not know that it *has* to fail, and could therefore never
conclude "false(a)" *of itself*. To make use of these logical
inconsistencies, you have to make them explicit. I fear this is
not easily accomplished in a general way. For the Knights-and
-Knaves problem I have found a way but it is rather ad-hoc.
I have got a working solution which you can have (it's written
in C-Prolog so probably the syntax needs checking), but I guess
you rather would have a try yourself first. If you need my code
feel free to ask.
Now for your program:
/* First, you only have clauses to represent facts and
* inferences, but you have no way to start up the thing
* (shell, inference machine, top-call) */
is←knight (X) :-
is←knave (X),!,false.
/* The above clause could as well be deleted, since it
* *always* fails. So it does not do anything.
* PS: in C-prolog "false" should be "fail", but I guess
* in your Prolog it's legal syntax. Also, in C-Prolog you
* cannot have a space between functor and arguments, but
* again, in your Prolog ... */
is←knight (X) :- /* Someone is a knight if he */
says (X, Y), Y. /* says something and that */
/* thing is true. */
/* In C-Prolog, you cannot directly call a variable. You have
* to use call(Y) instead of just "Y". Maybe it's legal in
* your Prolog. */
is←knave (X) :-
is←knight (X), !, false.
/* loops together with the first clause of is←knight. See
above (1) */
is←knave (X) :- /* Someone is a knave is he */
says (X, Y), not (Y). /* says something and that */
/* thing is not true. */
/* In Prolog, not(Y) does not mean "definitely not Y". See
above (2) */
legal (X, Y) :-
Y, is←knight (X).
legal (X, Y) :-
not (Y), is←knave (X).
says (larry, Z):- /* We don't know what he said */
legal (larry, Z).
/* You try to state a fact (Larry says something and it's legal).
Instead you state a procedure (Larry says something *if* it's
legal, i.e. larry says anything it's legal for him to say).
Should be says(larry,Z)&legal(larry,Z). or something like that.
Better still to include the legal test in a
really←says predicate */
/* Says larry claims knavehood */
says (curly, says (larry, is←knave (larry))).
/* Says curly is a knave */
says (moe, is←knave (curly)).
Much succes in your new attack at the problem, and good luck,
-- Paul Kamsteeg
Univ. of Amsterdam, Netherlands
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂08-Sep-86 1038 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>: CSLI RAships]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 10:38:37 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Sep 86 10:38:33-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>: CSLI RAships]
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA, tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12237336767.30.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
fyi
---------------
1) 2-Sep Tom Wasow CSLI RAships
2) 8-Sep To: WASOW@CSLI.STANF Re: CSLI RAships
Message 1 -- ************************
Return-Path: <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 2 Sep 86 17:07:52-PDT
Date: Tue 2 Sep 86 11:54:30-PDT
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI RAships
To: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Nils--
As in previous years, CSLI has some funds set aside for support of
CS graduate students working in appropriate areas. Please spread
the word. Incidentally, we are unlikely to fund masters students,
except when they are already working with someone at CSLI.
Thanks.
Tom
-------
Message 2 -- ************************
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 8-Sep-86 10:37:43
Date: Mon 8 Sep 86 10:37:43-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: CSLI RAships
To: WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 2 Sep 86 17:07:53-PDT
Message-ID: <12237336615.30.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks, Tom, for your news about possible CSLI funding of students.
I'll forward your msg to our faculty and to Carolyn Tajnai (our
fellowship committee chairperson). Faculty members who have
students doing work that they think is appropriate for CSLI should
respond directly to you (cc-ing Carolyn and me) so we can keep
track of student funding.
I, myself, have a student or two doing work closely related to the
RATAG work and would like to suggest them as candidates.
-Nils
-------
-------
∂08-Sep-86 1257 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu shall we meet?
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 12:56:05 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 8 Sep 86 12:42:39 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 86 12:42:39 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: shall we meet?
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
How about meeting at our "usual" time, 11AM this wednesday (9/10)
to exchange reports about what we've been donig this summer.
I'll assume 301 MJH is free then.
---jeff
∂08-Sep-86 1415 ullman@diablo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 14:15:01 PDT
Received: by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:53:32 pdt
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 86 09:53:32 pdt
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo, paco@diablo
"Logic Programming and Parallel Complexity", P. C. Kanellakis,
Dept. of CS, Brown Univ. (paris@mit-xx on ARPANET)
This is a survey of the topic mentioned in the title.
It also contains the result that boundedness is NP-hard
even for single, linear rules.
---jeff
∂08-Sep-86 1440 minker@mimsy.umd.edu Re: paper received
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 14:37:55 PDT
Received: from mimsy.umd.edu by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 3 Sep 86 16:54:24 pdt
Received: by mimsy.umd.edu (5.9/4.7) id AA25281; Wed, 3 Sep 86 19:52:26 EDT
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 86 19:52:26 EDT
From: Jack Minker <minker@mimsy.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8609032352.AA25281@mimsy.umd.edu>
To: nail@diablo.stanford.edu, ullman@diablo.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: paper received
I do not recall the preice results that Jean-Marie Nicolas
and I had, but it sounds very similar.
Jack Minker
∂08-Sep-86 1641 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Housing needed
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 16:41:34 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Sep 86 16:33:53-PDT
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Housing needed
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The Philosophy Department is looking for housing for a visiting professor
from the U.K. He will be here from late September throught mid-March, and
needs either a studio or small one-bedroom. If you happen to know of any-
thing available, could you send me a message or call me (723-2547)? Thanks
very much. Marti @ Philosophy
-------
∂08-Sep-86 2248 teodor%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Received: from DIABLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Sep 86 22:48:33 PDT
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA (relay.cs.net) by diablo.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Mon, 8 Sep 86 22:27:20 pdt
Received: from nmsu by csnet-relay.csnet id ao03433; 8 Sep 86 20:33 EDT
Received: from sparta (sparta.ARPA) by nmsu (4.12/)
id AA21665; Mon, 8 Sep 86 14:54:39 mdt
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 86 14:54:38 mdt
From: teodor%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Received: from pylos by sparta (1.1/)
id AA02064; Mon, 8 Sep 86 14:54:06 MDT
Received: by pylos (1.1/)
id AA04798; Mon, 8 Sep 86 14:54:01 MDT
To: nail%su-aimvax.arpa@NMSU.CSNET
The problem of how to recognize locally stratified programs is certainly
important and deserves carefull investigation. However, none of the examples
quoted by Allen in his Sept.3 memo causes any difficulty in this respect:
all of them are clearly stratified and therefore also locally stratified!
P.S. The predicate p in the first example does not do what it is supposed to
do: a check that X#Y is indeed a path in the graph is needed.
Teodor.
∂09-Sep-86 0924 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Call for Papers - LICS
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 09:24:44 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 9 Sep 86 09:14:18 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 09:14:18 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Call for Papers - LICS
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
22 - 25 June 1987
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
THE SYMPOSIUM will cover a wide range of theoretical and practical issues in
Computer Science that relate to logic in a broad sense, including algebraic
and topological approaches.
Suggested (but not exclusive) topics of interest include: abstract data types,
computer theorem proving, verification, concurrency, type theory and constructi
ve
mathematics, data base theory, foundations of logic programming, program logics
and semantics, knowledge and belief, software specifications, logic-based
programming languages, logic in complexity theory.
Organizing Committee
K. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A. Chandra (chair) D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
Program Committee
S. Brookes D. Gries (chair) J.-P. Jouannaud A. Nerode
L. Cardelli J. Goguen R. Ladner G. Plotkin
R. Constable Y. Gurevich V. Lifschitz A. Pnueli
M. Fitting D. Harel G. Longo P. Scott
PAPER SUBMISSION. Authors should send 16 copies of a detailed abstract
(not a full paper) by 9 DECEMBER 1986 to the program chairman:
David Gries -- LICS (607) 255-9207
Department of Computer Science gries@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Abstracts must 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. Abstracts
must be no more than 2500 words. Late abstracts or abstracts 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 be accepted.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 30 JANUARY 1987.
Accepted papers, typed on special forms for inclusion in the symposium
proceedings, will be due 30 MARCH 1987.
The symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, Technical Committee on
Mathematical Foundations of Computing and Cornell University, in cooperation wi
th
ACM SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS.
GENERAL CHAIRMAN LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS
Ashok K. Chandra Dexter C. Kozen
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Department of Computer Science
P.O. Box 218 Cornell University
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 Ithaca, New York 14853
(914) 945-1752 (607) 255-9209
ashok@ibm.com kozen@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
--------------
TN Message #73
--------------
------- End Forwarded Mail
∂09-Sep-86 1138 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 11:38:25 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 9 Sep 86 11:28:18 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 11:28:18 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
It was pointed out to me that we used to meet THURSDAY at 11AM.
(this by a person who prefers that date.
So if no one objects, lets meet on thursday 9/11 at 11AM in 301 MJH
instead of tomorrow.
---jeff
∂09-Sep-86 1221 WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 12:21:02 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Sep 86 12:18:38-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The following note from Nils raises an important question we should resolve.
The advantage of including outside groups is that many of them provide an
excellent environment for learning about research. The disadvantage is
removing students from the CSD environment even sooner than now happens with
students who get RAs from those places, l.leading to the potential of our
being a research-student clearinghouse, rather than a place people gather to
learn. Any comments? --t
---------------
Return-Path: <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 9 Sep 86 09:24:56-PDT
Date: Tue 9 Sep 86 09:19:17-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT
To: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 8 Sep 86 15:48:03-PDT
Message-ID: <12237584481.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Terry, are you thinking of allowing any off-campus research groups
(like Xerox, SRI, Schlumberger, etc.) to participate in the
process of mentoring (and providing support for) students? I presume
that you are sending your questionaire to such interdepartmental
activities as CIS, CSLI, SIMA, etc? -Nils
-------
-------
∂09-Sep-86 1236 berglund@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
Received: from PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 12:36:08 PDT
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 9 Sep 86 12:35:54 pdt
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 12:35:54 pdt
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@pescadero.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
To: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, phdcom@Sail
Interesting problem. Seems that off-campus people could be quite good
if they have some Stanford students or faculty involved who are both
attentive and good. And some departmental faculty could be quite bad if
they wouldn't mind getting students but don't have either the personal
time or the senior students to perform the mentoring functions. My
reaction is to not rule out off-campus groups but to be very skeptical
about them. A critical mass of Stanford people (or lots of contact with
people in the department) and a truly good research record should be
required before beginning students are encouraged to head away from the
department.
On the other hand, why legislate? As long as the new students are made
aware of the possible drawbacks, let them choose the course they think
best. Perhaps the committee should keep a special eye on any student
who's chosen a "suspicious" mentor--including certain faculty with a
history of advising failures?
--Eric
∂09-Sep-86 1559 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 15:59:00 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Sep 86 15:39:03-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12237653615.29.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a general faculty meeting followed by a senior faculty meeting
on Tuesday, September 30 at 2:30 in the conference room in Bldg. 170. (Please
note the room change.) Agenda items to follow.
-Anne
-------
∂09-Sep-86 1717 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar, September 16,1986
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 17:17:21 PDT
Received: by cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (5.53/1.16)
id AA01375; Tue, 9 Sep 86 15:24:39 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 15:24:39 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8609092224.AA01375@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU, cogsci-friends@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar, September 16,1986
Cc: admin@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
--PLEASE POST -- --PLEASE POST--
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, September 16, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``Recovering Three-Dimensional Shape from a Single Image of Curved Objects''
Jitendra Malik
Computer Science
It is widely accepted in the computational vision commun-
ity that the purpose of low and intermediate level vision is to
compute a description of the visible surfaces in the scene,
without making use of significant high level knowledge about
specific objects in the scene. This intermediate representation
has been called the 2 1/2-D sketch by Marr and intrinsic images
by Barrow and Tennenbaum. Of the various algorithms for comput-
ing the 2 1/2-D sketch, the most well-understood are shape-
from-stereo and shape-from-motion algorithms. Given multiple
images of a scene, these permit direct computation of depth.
In this talk, we consider the problem of recovering three--
dimensional shape of the visible surfaces in the scene from a
SINGLE two--dimensional image. We restrict our attention to
scenes composed of opaque solid objects bounded by piecewise
smooth surfaces with no markings or texture. Solutions for
simpler versions of this problem have been proposed by Sugihara
for the case of polyhedra, and by Horn et al for the case of a
single smooth surface given the surface orientation on the
patch boundary. This talk presents the first solution in the
general case.
The two sources of information about 3-D shape in the image of
such a scene are (a) the line drawing and b) the pixel bright-
ness values. We analyze the constraints from both of these and
then present an algorithm for solving this system of con-
straints.
This work builds on the past work of Malik(85) on 'labelling'
line drawings of curved objects and the work of Horn et al on
shape-from-shading. We'll briefly review this work in order to
make the talk self-contained. Also an attempt will be made to
make the talk understandable to a non-mathematical audience.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE
Cognitive Psychology Colloquium: Artld Lian from the University
of Oslo, Norway will speak on "Organization of Behavior and
Hemisphere Specialization" on Friday, September 12, from 4:00
to 6:00 in 3105 Tolman.
SESAME Colloquium: John Dalbey from SESAME will speak on
"Defective Strategy and Attitude on Learning a Computer Game"
on Monday, September 15, from 4:00 to 6:00 in 2515 Tolman.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Sept 30: Paul Grice, Philosophy, UC Berkeley
Oct 14: Daniel Kahneman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Oct 28: Anne Triesman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
∂09-Sep-86 2006 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 20:04:29 PDT
Received: from sun.uucp by sun.com (3.2/SMI-3.0)
id AA29135; Tue, 9 Sep 86 20:02:26 PDT
Received: by sun.uucp (1.1/SMI-3.0)
id AA16763; Tue, 9 Sep 86 20:02:26 PDT
Received: by coraki.uucp (3.2/SMI-1.2)
id AA05285; Tue, 9 Sep 86 20:02:06 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 20:02:06 PDT
From: coraki!pratt@Sun.COM (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8609100302.AA05285@coraki.uucp>
To: phdcom@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: Request for information from the faculty - DRAFT]
In-Reply-To: message of Tue 9 Sep 86 12:18:38-PDT.
<8609091921.AA25926@sun.com>
leading to the potential of our being a research-student
clearinghouse, rather than a place people gather to learn.
1. The existence of a career placement office gives one demonstration that
these two functions are not seen by Stanford as incompatible.
2. It *is* a shame that some of our students are rarely around because
they are off somewhere else doing research. However that's the price
paid for Stanford not covering all bases. If the resources a student
needs to pursue a line of research are elsewhere it is unreasonable to expect
the student to be around as much as those whose needs can be locally
met. The bigger concern is whether they're getting adequate freedom to
pursue their research, and adequate supervision.
Outside mentoring on the other hand strikes me more as an opportunity
for an outside lab to get a student interested in their work. If this
calls for any substantial time off campus then I'm not at all enthusiastic.
Proselytizing by outside labs is fine in small doses but it should not
put any heavy off-campus demand on students. Mentoring should begin
at home.
-v
∂09-Sep-86 2307 keller@utah-cs.ARPA SLP '86
Received: from UTAH-CS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Sep 86 23:07:00 PDT
Received: by utah-cs.ARPA (5.31/4.40.2)
id AA06970; Tue, 9 Sep 86 23:50:34 MDT
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 23:50:34 MDT
From: keller@utah-cs.arpa (Bob Keller)
Message-Id: <8609100550.AA06970@utah-cs.ARPA>
To: 86-slp-mailing@utah-cs.ARPA
Subject: SLP '86
We have requested, and the IEEE has agreed, that
Symposium registrations be accepted at the "early" fee for a
couple of more days, so please act immediately by sending
the enclosed coupon if you wish to exploit this rate.
Hotel Reservations: phone 801-531-1000, telex 389434
The (nearly) final schedule:
SLP '86
Third IEEE Symposium on
LOGIC PROGRAMMING
September 21-25, 1986
Westin Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah
SUNDAY, September 21
19:00 - 22:00 Symposium and tutorial registration
MONDAY, September 22
08:00 - 09:00 Symposium and tutorial registration
09:00 - 17:30 TUTORIALS (concurrent) Please see abstracts later.
George Luger Introduction to AI Programming in Prolog
University of New Mexico
David Scott Warren Building Prolog Interpreters
SUNY, Stony Brook
John Conery Theory of Parallelism, with Applications to
University of Oregon Logic Programming
12:00 - 17:30 Exhibit set up time
18:00 - 22:00 Symposium registration
20:00 - 22:00 Reception
TUESDAY, September 23
08:00 - 12:30 Symposium registration
09:00 Exhibits open
09:00 - 09:30 Welcome and announcements
09:30 - 10:30 INVITED SPEAKER:
W. W. Bledsoe, MCC
Some Thoughts on Proof Discovery
11:00 - 12:30 SESSION 1: Applications
(Chair: Harvey Abramson)
The Logic of Tensed Statements in English -
an Application of Logic Programming
Peter Ohrstrom, University of Aalborg
Nils Klarlund, University of Aarhus
Incremental Flavor-Mixing of Meta-Interpreters for
Expert System Construction
Leon Sterling and Randall D. Beer
Case Western Reserve University
The Phoning Philosopher's Problem or
Logic Programming for Telecommunications Applications
J.L. Armstrong, N.A. Elshiewy, and R. Virding
Ericsson Telecom
14:00 - 15:30 SESSION 2: Secondary Storage
(Chair: Maurice Bruynooghe)
EDUCE - A Marriage of Convenience:
Prolog and a Relational DBMS
Jorge Bocca, ECRC, Munich
Paging Strategy for Prolog Based Dynamic Virtual Memory
Mark Ross, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
K. Ramamohanarao, University of Melbourne
A Logical Treatment of Secondary Storage
Anthony J. Kusalik, University of Saskatchewan
Ian T. Foster, Imperial College, London
16:00 - 17:30 SESSION 3: Compilation
(Chair: Richard O'Keefe)
Compiling Control
Maurice Bruynooghe, Danny De Schreye, Bruno Krekels
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Automatic Mode Inference for Prolog Programs
Saumya K. Debray, David S. Warren
SUNY at Stony Brook
IDEAL: an Ideal DEductive Applicative Language
Pier Giorgio Bosco, Elio Giovannetti
C.S.E.L.T., Torino
17:30 - 19:30 Reception
20:30 - 22:30 Panel (Wm. Kornfeld, moderator)
Logic Programming for Systems Programming
Panelists: Steve Taylor, Weizmann Institute
Steve Gregory, Imperial College
Bill Wadge
A researcher from ICOT
(sorry this is incomplete)
WEDNESDAY, September 24
09:00 - 10:00 INVITED SPEAKER:
Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
Logic Programming - A Logical View
10:30 - 12:00 SESSION 4: Theory
(Chair: Jean-Louis Lassez)
A Theory of Modules for Logic Programming
Dale Miller
University of Pennsylvania
Building-In Classical Equality into Prolog
P. Hoddinott, E.W. Elcock
The University of Western Ontario
Negation as Failure Using Tight Derivations
for General Logic Programs
Allen Van Gelder
Stanford University
13:30 - 15:00 SESSION 5: Control
(Chair: Jacques Cohen)
Characterisation of Terminating Logic Programs
Thomas Vasak, The University of New South Wales
John Potter, New South Wales Institute of Technology
An Execution Model for Committed-Choice
Non-Deterministic Languages
Jim Crammond
Heriot-Watt University
Timestamped Term Representation in Implementing Prolog
Heikki Mannila, Esko Ukkonen
University of Helsinki
15:30 - 22:00 Excursion
THURSDAY, September 25
09:00 - 10:30 SESSION 6: Unification
(Chair: Uday Reddy)
Refutation Methods for Horn Clauses with Equality
Based on E-Unification
Jean H. Gallier and Stan Raatz
University of Pennsylvania
An Algorithm for Unification in Equational Theories
Alberto Martelli, Gianfranco Rossi
Universita' di Torino
An Implementation of Narrowing: the RITE Way
Alan Josephson and Nachum Dershowitz
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
11:00 - 12:30 SESSION 7: Parallelism
(Chair: Jim Crammond)
Selecting the Backtrack Literal in the
AND Process of the AND/OR Process Model
Nam S. Woo and Kwang-Moo Choe
AT & T Bell Laboratories
Distributed Semi-Intelligent Backtracking for a
Stack-based AND-parallel Prolog
Peter Borgwardt, Tektronix Labs
Doris Rea, University of Minnesota
The Sync Model for Parallel Execution of Logic Programming
Pey-yun Peggy Li and Alain J. Martin
California Institute of Technology
14:00 - 15:30 SESSION 8: Performance
Redundancy in Function-Free Recursive Rules
Jeff Naughton
Stanford University
Performance Evaluation of a Storage Model for
OR-Parallel Execution
Andrzej Ciepelewski and Bogumil Hausman
Swedish Institute of Computer Science (SICS)
MALI: A Memory with a Real-Time Garbage Collector
for Implementing Logic Programming Languages
Yves Bekkers, Bernard Canet, Olivier Ridoux, Lucien Ungaro
IRISA/INRIA Rennes
16:00 - 17:30 SESSION 9: Warren Abstract Machine
(Chair: Manuel Hermenegildo)
A High Performance LOW RISC Machine
for Logic Programming
J.W. Mills
Arizona State University
Register Allocation in a Prolog Machine
Saumya K. Debray
SUNY at Stony Brook
Garbage Cut for Garbage Collection of Iterative Programs
Jonas Barklund and Hakan Millroth
Uppsala University
EXHIBITS:
An exhibit area including displays by publishers, equipment
manufacturers, and software houses will accompany the Symposium.
The list of exhibitors includes: Arity, Addison-Wesley, Elsevier,
Expert Systems, Logicware, Overbeek Enterprises, Prolog Systems,
and Quintus. For more information, please contact:
Dr. Ross A. Overbeek
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Ave.
Argonne, IL 60439
312/972-7856
ACCOMODATIONS:
The Westin Hotel Utah is a gracious turn of the century hotel
with Mobil 4-Star and AAA 5-Star ratings. The Temple Square
Hotel, located one city block away, offers basic comforts for
budget-conscious attendees.
MEALS AND SOCIAL EVENTS:
Symposium registrants (excluding students and retired members)
will receive tickets for lunches on September 23, 24, and 25,
receptions on September 22 and 23, and an excursion the afternoon
of September 24. The excursion will comprise a steam train trip
through scenic Provo Canyon, and a barbeque at Deer Valley
Resort, Park City, Utah.
Tutorial registrants will receive lunch tickets for September 22.
TRAVEL:
The Official Carrier for SLP '86 is United Airlines, and the
Official Travel Agent is Morris Travel (361 West Lawndale Drive,
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115, phone 1-800-621-3535). Special
airfares are available to SLP '86 attendees. Contact Morris
Travel for details.
A courtesy limousine is available from Salt Lake International
Airport to both symposium hotels, running every half hour from
6:30 to 23:00. The taxi fare is approximately $10.
CLIMATE:
Salt Lake City generally has warm weather in September, although
evenings may be cool. A warm jacket should be brought for the
excursion. Some rain is normal this time of year.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SLP '86 Symposium and Tutorial Registration Coupon:
Advance symposium and tutorial registration is available until
September 1, 1986. No refunds will be made after that date. Send
a check or money order (no currency will be accepted) payable to
"Third IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming" to:
Third IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming
IEEE Computer Society
1730 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-1903
Your Name ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Affiliation ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Full mailing address ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
IEEE Computer Society membership number (if applicable) ←←←←←←←←
Educational institution (for students) ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Circle applicable items:
Symposium Registration: Advance On-Site
IEEE Computer Society members $185 $215
Non-members $230 $270
Full-time student members $ 50 $ 50
Full-time student non-members $ 65 $ 65
Retired members $ 50 $ 50
Tutorial Registration:
(circle which tutorial: "Luger", "Warren", or "Ostlund")
Advance On-Site
IEEE Computer Society members $140 $170
Non-members $175 $215
Total enclosed ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SLP '86 Hotel Reservation Coupon:
Mail or Call: phone 801-531-1000, telex 389434
Westin Hotel Utah
Main and South Temple Streets
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Your Name ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Affiliation ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Full mailing address ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Date of arrival ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← Date of departure ←←←←←←←←←←←←
Total enclosed ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A deposit of one night's room or credit card guarantee is
required for arrivals after 6pm.
Room Rates (circle your choice):
Westin Hotel Utah Temple Square Hotel
single room $60 $30
double room $70 $36
Reservations must be made mentioning SLP '86 by August 31, 1986
to guarantee these special rates.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SLP '86 TUTORIAL ABSTRACTS
IMPLEMENTATION OF PROLOG INTERPRETERS AND COMPILERS
DAVID SCOTT WARREN
SUNY AT STONY BROOK
Prolog is by far the most used of various logic programming
languages that have been proposed. The reason for this is the
existence of very efficient implementations. This tutorial will
show in detail how this efficiency is achieved.
The first half of this tutorial will concentrate on Prolog
compilation. The approach is first to define a Prolog Virtual
Machine (PVM), which can be implemented in software, microcode,
hardware, or by translation to the language of an existing
machine. We will describe in detail the PVM defined by D.H.D.
Warren (SRI Technical Note 309) and discuss how its data objects
can be represented efficiently. We will also cover issues of
compilation of Prolog source programs into efficient PVM
programs.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND PROLOG:
AN INTRODUCTION TO THEORETICAL
ISSUES IN AI WITH PROLOG EXAMPLES
GEORGE F. LUGER
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO
This tutorial is intended to introduce the important concepts of
both Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. To
accomplish this task, the theoretical issues involved in AI
problem solving are presented and discussed. These issues are
exemplified with programs written in Prolog that implement the
core ideas. Finally, the design of a Prolog interpreter as
Resolution Refutation system is presented.
The main ideas from AI problem solving that are presented
include: 1) An introduction of AI as representation and search.
2) An introduction of the Predicate Calculus as the main
representation formalism for Artificial Intelligence. 3) Simple
examples of Predicate Calculus representations, including a
relational data base. 4) Unification and its role both in
Predicate Calculus and Prolog. 5) Recursion, the control
mechanism for searching trees and graphs, 6) The design of search
strategies, especially depth first, breadth first and best first
or "heuristic" techniques, and 7) The Production System and its
use both for organizing search in a Prolog data base, as well as
the basic data structure for "rule based" Expert Systems.
The above topics are presented with simple Prolog program
implementations, including a Production System code for
demonstrating search strategies. The final topic presented is an
analysis of the Prolog interpreter and an analysis of this
approach to the more general issue of logic programming.
Resolution is considered as an inference strategy and its use in
a refutation system for "answer extraction" is presented. More
general issues in AI problem solving, such as the relation of
"logic" to "functional" programming are also discussed.
PARALLELISM IN LOGIC PROGRAMMING
JOHN CONERY
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON
The fields of parallel processing and logic programming have
independently attracted great interest among computing
professionals recently, and there is currently considerable
activity at the interface, i.e. in applying the concepts of
parallel computing to logic programming and, more specifically
yet, to Prolog. The application of parallelism to Logic
Programming takes two basic but related directions. The first
involves leaving the semantics of sequential programming, say
ordinary Prolog, as intact as possible, and uses parallelism,
hidden from the programmer, to improve execution speed. This has
traditionally been a difficult problem requiring very intelligent
compilers. It may be an easier problem with logic programming
since parallelism is not artificially made sequential, as with
many applications expressed in procedural languages. The second
direction involves adding new parallel programming primitives to
Logic Programming to allow the programmer to explicitly express
the parallelism in an application.
This tutorial will assume a basic knowledge of Logic Programming,
but will describe current research in parallel computer
architectures, and will survey many of the new parallel machines,
including shared-memory architectures (RP3, for example) and
non-shared-memory architectures (hypercube machines, for
example). The tutorial will then describe many of the current
proposals for parallelism in Logic Programming, including those
that allow the programmer to express the parallelism and those
that hide the parallelism from the programmer. Included will be
such proposals as Concurrent Prolog, Parlog, Guarded Horn Clauses
(GHC), and Delta-Prolog. An attempt will be made to partially
evaluate many of these proposals for parallelism in Logic
Programming, both from a pragmatic architectural viewpoint as
well as from a semantic viewpoint.
Conference Chairperson
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah
Program Chairperson
Robert M. Keller, University of Utah
Local Arrangements Chairperson
Thomas C. Henderson, University of Utah
Tutorials Chairperson
George Luger, University of New Mexico
Exhibits Chairperson
Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Program Committee
Francois Bancilhon, MCC
John Conery, U. of Oregon
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich
Seif Haridi, SICS, Stockholm
Lynette Hirschman, SDC
Peter Kogge, IBM, Owego
William Kornfeld, Quintus Systems
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah
George Luger, University of New Mexico
Rikio Onai, ICOT/NTT, Tokyo
Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Mark Stickel, SRI International
Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
∂10-Sep-86 0123 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu STOC87 CALL FOR PAPERS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 86 01:22:55 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Sep 86 01:17:02-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Sep 86 01:16:56-PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 9 Sep 86 22:27:51 CDT
Return-Path: ava.mrkos%btl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <8609100137.AA09346@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 9 Sep 86 20:37:20 CDT
Received: from btl by csnet-relay.csnet id ap05049; 9 Sep 86 14:23 EDT
To: theory%rsch.wisc.edu@relay.cs.net
From: ava.mrkos%btl.csnet@relay.cs.net
Date: Tue 9 Sep EDT 1986 12:36
Subject: STOC87 CALL FOR PAPERS
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 86 22:27:27 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
............................................................
CALL FOR PAPERS
1987 ACM SYMPOSIUM ON THEORY OF COMPUTING
The Nineteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing,
sponsored by the ACM Special Interest Group for Automata and
Computability Theory, will be held in New York City on May
25-27, 1987. Papers presenting original research on
theoretical aspects of computer science are being sought.
Typical, but not exclusive, topics include the theory of:
- Algorithms and Data Structures
- Computability and Complexity
- Cryptography
- Data Bases
- Formal Languages and Automata
- Logic of Programs
- Parallel and Distributed Computation
- Robotics
- Semantics of Programming Languages
- VLSI, Layout and Logical Design
PAPER SUBMITTAL
Authors should send ten copies of a detailed abstract (not a
full paper) by November 21, 1986 to the program committee
chair:
Alfred V. Aho
Computing Science Research Center, Room 2C-326
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
The abstract must provide sufficient detail to allow the
program committee to assess the merits of the paper and
should include appropriate references and comparisons with
extant work. It is recommended that each submission begin
with a succinct statement of the problem, a summary of the
main results, and a brief explanation of the significance of
the work suitable for a nonspecialist. Technical
development of the work, directed to the specialist, should
follow as appropriate. In all cases, the submission should
not exceed ten double-spaced pages (at most 2,500 words).
Submissions that arrive late or that deviate from the
prescribed format risk rejection without consideration of
their merits.
The program committee consists of Alfred Aho, Manuel Blum,
Joseph Halpern, Ravi Kannan, Dexter Kozen, Andrea LaPaugh,
Michael Luby, Christos Papadimitriou, Michael Sipser, and
Frances Yao.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by
January 29, 1987. A copy of each accepted paper, typed on
special forms for inclusion in the symposium proceedings,
will be due by March 9, 1987.
The local arrangements chair is:
Dana May Latch
CIS Department
Brooklyn College
City University of New York
Brooklyn, NY 11210
............................................................
--------------
TN Message #74
--------------
∂10-Sep-86 1507 WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>: Comprehensive Reading List ]
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 86 15:07:43 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Sep 86 15:02:52-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: [Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>: Comprehensive Reading List ]
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA,
compCommittee: ;
cc: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Return-Path: <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Sep 86 08:55:12-PDT
Date: 10 Sep 86 0857 PDT
From: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Comprehensive Reading List
To: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Terry, could you redistribute this? Also, if you prefer me mailing
directly, what is the properly qualified address for it?
Concerning:
Harold Abelson and Gerald Sussman, Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs, MIT, 1985.
I believe that some of the contents of this book should be required.
I'm not sure that this book or even some chapters from it are the
best way to get that material, in the intellectual sense. The
Scheme papers by Steele and Sussman contain the important information
and more, in better depth, and presented in a manner congruent with
graduate study. On the other hand, these papers are very hard to get a hold
of, and so might not be the best way to get that material, in the
logistical sense.
I'll look over the book once more and make a recommendation
Concerning:
Terrence W. Pratt, Programming Languages: Design and
Implementation, Second edition, Prentice-Hall, 1984.
I would specifically leave out the Lisp chapter. It is maniacally
bad.
Concerning:
John McCarthy and Carolyn Talcott, LISP: Programming and
Proving, (available from McCarthy's secretary) 1980, Chapters
1--3.
I've not read this in years and have no copy. What do chapters 1 - 3
cover? If proving, ok, if Lisp, that's not so good. I would prefer,
though not by much, the student skimming Winston or Brooks, then reading
the Scheme papers carefully, and then finally going over the
proving-properties-of-Lisp section of this.
Perhaps the John Allen book is better than these. He gives some implementational
insight, which I think would be useful to know. The techniques of Lisp
implementation address the implementation issues of most programming languages
and some aspects of operating systems.
-------
∂10-Sep-86 1509 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Aviv Bergman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 86 15:08:53 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Sep 86 15:00:22-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Aviv Bergman
To: planlunch.dis:
Cc: halpern@IBM.COM
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 10-Sep-86 15:00:22.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
ALSO: NOTE TIME CHANGE!!! (10:30 rather than 11:00 -- this week only)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE EVOLUTION OF COMPUTATIONAL CAPABILITIES
IN POPULATIONS OF COMPETING AUTOMATA
Aviv Bergman (BERGMAN@SRI-AI)
SRI International
and
Michel Kerszberg
IFF der KFA Julich, W.-Germany
10:30 AM, MONDAY, September 15
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
The diversity of the living world has been shaped, it is believed, by
Darwinian selection acting on random mutations. In the present work,
we study the emergence of nontrivial computational capabilities in
automata competing against each other in an environment where
possession of such capabilities is an advantage. The automata are
simple cellular computers with a certain number of parameters -
characterizing the "Statistical Distribution" of the connections -
initially set at random. Each generation of machines is subjected to a
test necessitating some computational task to be performed, e.g
recognize whether two patterns presented are or are not translated
versions of each other. "Adaptive Selection" is used during the task
in order to "Eliminate" redundant connections. According to its
grade, each machine either dies or "reproduces", i.e. it creates an
additional machine with parameters almost similar to its own. The
population, it turns out, quickly learns to perform certain tests.
When the successful automata are "autopsied", it appears that they do
not all complete the task in the same way; certain groups of cells are
more active then others, and certain connections have grown or decayed
preferentially, but these features may vary from individual to
individual. We try to draw some general conclusions regarding the
design of artificial intelligence systems, and the understanding of
biological computation. We also contrast this approach with the usual
Monte-Carlo procedure.
-------
∂10-Sep-86 1549 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rich's Surgery
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Sep 86 15:49:54 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Sep 86 15:40:03-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Rich's Surgery
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Rich Cower had back surgery on Saturday. He's seems to be healing
very well and will be leaving Stanford Hospital later today. However,
his doctor thinks that it will be 3 to 4 weeks before he can return to
work.
Rich will be reading mail and working as much as possible from home,
but it would be a good idea to send copies of your messages to Brad
Horak as well. Brad will return from vacation on Monday, and will be
filling in for Rich.
Betsy
-------
∂11-Sep-86 0143 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #48
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 86 01:43:21 PDT
Date: Wednesday, September 10, 1986 3:38AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #48
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 11 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 48
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Logic In Computer Science Call For Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 86 21:34:46 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Call for Papers
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
22 - 25 June 1987
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
THE SYMPOSIUM will cover a wide range of theoretical and practi-
cal issues in Computer Science that relate to logic in a broad
sense, including algebraic and topological approaches.
Suggested (but not exclusive) topics of interest include:
abstract data types, computer theorem proving, verification, con-
currency, type theory and constructi ve mathematics, data base
theory, foundations of logic programming, program logics and se-
mantics, knowledge and belief, software specifications, logic-
based programming languages, logic in complexity theory.
Organizing Committee
K. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A. Chandra (chair) D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
Program Committee
S. Brookes D. Gries (chair) J.-P. Jouannaud A. Nerode
L. Cardelli J. Goguen R. Ladner G. Plotkin
R. Constable Y. Gurevich V. Lifschitz A. Pnueli
M. Fitting D. Harel G. Longo P. Scott
PAPER SUBMISSION. Authors should send 16 copies of a detailed
abstract (not a full paper) by 9 DECEMBER 1986 to the program
chairman:
David Gries -- LICS (607) 255-9207
Department of Computer Science gries@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Abstracts must 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. Abstracts must be no more than 2500 words.
Late abstracts or abstracts 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 be accepted.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 30 JANUARY
1987. Accepted papers, typed on special forms for inclusion in
the symposium proceedings, will be due 30 MARCH 1987.
The symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, Techni-
cal Committee on Mathematical Foundations of Computing and Cor-
nell University, in cooperation wi th ACM SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS.
GENERAL CHAIRMAN LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS
Ashok K. Chandra Dexter C. Kozen
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Dept. of Computer Science
P.O. Box 218 Cornell University
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 Ithaca, New York 14853
(914) 945-1752 (607) 255-9209
ashok@ibm.com kozen@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂12-Sep-86 0338 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #49
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Sep 86 03:38:05 PDT
Date: Thursday, September 11, 1986 5:25PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #49
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 12 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 49
Today's Topics:
Query - Proceedings & Control Structures and Parallelism,
Puzzle - Knights and Knaves
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 86 18:41:52 CDT
From: Will Winsborough <winsboro@crys.wisc.edu>
Subject: Proceedings
Does anyone know how I can get a copy of the proceedings
of last July's International Logic Programming Conference
in London?
Thank you.
-- Will Winsborough
------------------------------
Date: 10 Sep 86 15:14:58 GMT
From: Douglas Baldwin <baldwin@rochester.arpa>
Subject: Question - Control Structures and Parallelism
I'm comparing Prolog to another, somewhat more elaborate,
logic/constraint language called CONSUL, particularly
with regard to potential parallelism (CONSUL is supposed
to be a source language for parallelizing compilers, the
question is how much of what CONSUL provides could be
equally well provided by a parallelizing Prolog compiler).
One of the big differences between CONSUL and Prolog is
that CONSUL has a "forall" form that can be viewed as
parallel satisfaction of a constraint for all elements
of a set, i.e., "forall X in S, <something>" is true iff
<something> is true (or can be made true by suitable
bindings) for all elements of S. CONSUL also provides
precise enough control over the scope of a name that one
can tell whether names other than X in <something> can be
given independent bindings for each element of S or
whether a single binding has to suffice for all
elements.
It's easy to see how to write iterative clauses in Prolog
that (almost) have the same effect as "forall". In C-Prolog,
it looks something like
forall( ... ) :- setof( X, in←S(X), Xs), body←driver( Xs, ... ).
body←driver( [], ... ).
body←driver( [X|Xs], ... ) :- body( X, ... ), body←driver( Xs, ... ).
body( X, ... ) :- /* Prolog implementation of <something>. */
The dots above indicate the presence of auxiliary arguments
that represent the other variables used in <something>. The
problem with this solution is that by explicitly iterating,
the potential parallelism gets much harder to detect - there
will in general be data dependencies between the auxiliary
arguments to body←driver and the recursive call, and it can
be quite difficult to tell whether these data dependencies
are "real", or are spurious ones introduced by the iterative
implementation. (For purists, this has another problem that
the C-Prolog forall will fail if the set S is empty, whereas
the CONSUL one will succeed vacuously, but for now I don't
care).
The question is, can anybody come up with a Prolog
implementation of "forall" that DOESN'T iterate explicitly
(for example, that uses clever control of backtracking to
enumerate the elements of S), and which might thus be easier
to detect parallelism in? (To save some wrong starts, the
simple
forall(...) :- in←S(X), body(X,...), fail.
doesn't work because if "body" fails for some element of S
it will just backtrack to the next instead of the whole
"forall" failing. Simple uses of cut don't seem to fix this
because they make Prolog commit to a single element of S
instead of trying all.)
Thank you.
-- Doug Baldwin
------------------------------
Date: 10 Sep 86 19:05:55 +1000 (Wed)
From: Lee@mulga.OZ
Subject: Knights and Knaves
I have been away and have missed some of this discussion -
please ignore this if apropriate.
I have a solution to the Knights and Knaves class of
problems in the case when there is no assumption about
perfect knowledge of what people have said. ie, nothing
can be concluded from a knave saying someone said something.
Warning: there may be bugs.
MU-PROLOG Version 3.2
1?- [knaves].
consulting knaves
done
true.
2?- Curly says Larry says Larry is a knave and
Moe says Curly is a knave.
Larry = Larry←177,
Moe = a knight,
Curly = a knave ;
fail.
3?-
End of session
;;; here is the program
?- hide([is(2), or(2), and(2)]). % MU-Prolog hack to hide
% definitions
?- op(750, xfy, says). % allow nice input
?- op(600, fx, a).
?- op(700, xfx, is).
?- op(780, xfy, or).
?- op(760, xfy, and).
a knight is a knight. % the rest is obvious
a knave is a knave.
a knight says A :- A.
a knave says A :- false(A).
A and B :- A, B.
A or B :- A ; B.
false(a knight is a knave).
false(a knave is a knight).
false(A and B) :- false(A) ; false(B).
false(A or B) :- false(A), false(B).
false(A says B). % except this
-- Lee Naish
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂12-Sep-86 1124 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Ralph Gorin <G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>: Nominations for the LOTS UNIX Advisory Committee]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Sep 86 11:22:32 PDT
Date: Fri 12 Sep 86 11:01:18-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Ralph Gorin <G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>: Nominations for the LOTS UNIX Advisory Committee]
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12238389484.21.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Any volunteers? -Nils
---------------
Return-Path: <G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Received: from OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 12 Sep 86 10:02:32-PDT
Date: Fri 12 Sep 86 09:57:11-PDT
From: Ralph Gorin <G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Nominations for the LOTS UNIX Advisory Committee
To: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, White@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: S.Street@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU, G.Gorin@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12238377814.200.G.GORIN@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Dear Bob and Nils,
Several faculty in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
(Software Engineering) argued persuasively that particular
characteristics of UNIX (and/or the software available exclusively on
UNIX systems) were germane to various courses in these disciplines.
In response, ACIS has acquired a Digital Equipment Corporation VAX
8650 system, operated by LOTS as ``Portia''.
At ACIS we desire first, that the Portia system be devoted to
classwork and other academic persuits responsive to the
already-articulated requirements; second, that orderly planning for
growth of facilities be undertaken to accomodate both allied use and
other use, as yet not articulate. To this end, we believe that a
faculty UNIX Advisory Committee should be formed to advise ACIS and
LOTS as to appropriate policies and procedures to achieve these
academic purposes. (Although the attention of this committee will
initially be directed towards the 8650 and mainframe services,
this committee may come to influence trends in the acquistion of
UNIX PCs and workstations.)
Although Bob Street and I have yet to formulate the precise charge to
this committee, we think it timely to invite each of you to nominate
two faculty who could serve on this committee.
Thank you,
Ralph Gorin
-------
-------
∂12-Sep-86 1131 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tuesday lunches
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Sep 86 11:29:22 PDT
Date: Fri 12 Sep 86 11:16:06-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tuesday lunches
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12238392178.21.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm collecting suggestions for discussion topics for our
Tuesday faculty lunches. -Nils
-------
∂15-Sep-86 0001 @SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu computational geometry day
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 86 00:01:41 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Sun 14 Sep 86 21:50:44-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 14 Sep 86 21:49:32-PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 10 Sep 86 20:43:46 CDT
Return-Path: sharir@nyu-acf8.arpa
Received: from NYU-ACF8.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 10 Sep 86 15:10:57 CDT
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 86 16:08:05 edt
From: sharir@NYU-ACF8.ARPA (Micha Sharir)
Message-Id: <8609102008.AA03761@nyu-acf8.arpa>
Received: by nyu-acf8.arpa; Wed, 10 Sep 86 16:08:05 edt
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: computational geometry day
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list:;
Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 86 20:43:29 -0500
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
This is to announce a series of "Computational Geometry Days"
intended to bring together researchers from the greater New York -
New Jersey area working in this field (whose number has increased
significantly this year). The next meeting is tentatively planned
for November. For more information contact
Micha Sharir, Courant Institute, 251 Mercer st., NY NY 10012
(Arpanet: sharir@nyu-acf8.arpa) (Tel: (212) 460-7463)
Following is the program of the first day:
THE FIRST COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY DAY
at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
New York University
will be held on Friday, September 19, 1986
Room 1302, Warren Weaver Hall
251 Mercer Street, New York, NY 10012
10:30-11:15 Kenneth Clarkson, AT&T Bell Labs,
Random Sampling in Computational Geometry.
11:30-12:15 Raimund Seidel, University of California at Berkeley,
On Voronoi Diagrams in Higher Dimensions.
2:00-3:00 Free Discussion, Open Problems
3:00-3:45 Joseph O'Rourke, The Johns Hopkins University,
A Collection of Problems and Results in Computational Geometry.
--------------
TN Message #75
--------------
∂15-Sep-86 0028 LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA PLANLUNCH reminder: Aviv Bergman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 86 00:28:29 PDT
Date: Mon 15 Sep 86 00:23:46-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: PLANLUNCH reminder: Aviv Bergman
To: planlunch-reminder.dis:
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 15-Sep-86 00:23:46.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
ALSO: NOTE TIME CHANGE!!! (10:30 rather than 11:00 -- this week only)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE EVOLUTION OF COMPUTATIONAL CAPABILITIES
IN POPULATIONS OF COMPETING AUTOMATA
Aviv Bergman (BERGMAN@SRI-AI)
SRI International
and
Michel Kerszberg
IFF der KFA Julich, W.-Germany
10:30 AM, MONDAY, September 15
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
-------
∂15-Sep-86 0123 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #50
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 86 01:23:29 PDT
Date: Saturday, September 13, 1986 4:51PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #50
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 15 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 50
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Parallel Inference System
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 86 17:08:33 EDT
From: Jack Minker <minker@mimsy.umd.edu>
Subject: Parallel Inference System at Maryland
AI and Database Research Laboratory
at the
University of Maryland
Jack Minker - Director
The AI and Database Research Laboratory at the Univer-
sity of Maryland is pleased to announce that a parallel
logic programming system (PRISM) is now operational on the
McMOB multiprocessosor. The system uses up to sixteen pro-
cessors to exploit medium grained parallelism in logic pro-
grams. The underlying ideas behind PRISM appeared in [Eis-
inger et. al., 1982] and [Kasif et. al., 1983].
The McMOB multiprocessor is a direct offspring of ZMOB
[Reiger et. al.,1980]. It consists of sixteen Motorola
MC68010 processors interconnected via a high speed belt.
PRISM consists of several parts: a user host interface
that exists on the host machine; a set of machines (moblets)
designated as problem solvers (PSMs); a set of machines
designated as Extensional Database Machines (EDB) that store
ground atomic formulae (relational database tables); and, a
set of machines designated as Intensional Database Machines
(IDB) that store procedures (the general rules in the sys-
tem). The system can also optionally include Constraint
Machines (CM) that use user-supplied constraints to prune
unsatisfiable paths in the proof tree.
The system supports both AND and OR parallelism. The
user can specify control in terms of the sequence of atoms
to be executed in a set of problems to be solved. Atoms can
be executed in parallel, sequentially, or as specified by a
partial ordering. Similarly procedures can be specified as
being executed sequentially, in parallel, or as specified by
a partial order. The PSM has been written in a modular
fashion to permit alternative control structure programs to
be incorporated in the system. Alternative node and literal
selection algorithms may be incorporated as part of the con-
trol structure. The user may specify the configuration
(i.e., the number of moblets required as a minimum) in which
a problem is to be run. If additional moblets are avail-
able, the PRISM will automatically take advantage of them.
A large number of problems are currently being pro-
grammed in PRISM and experiments will be run with these to
determine the effectiveness of PRISM as a problem solving
system.
The major research directions in the laboratory over
the coming year will be devoted to the following areas:
(1) Experimentation Using PRISM
(2) Control Structure Investigations
(3) Expert systems and PRISM
(4) Parallel problem solving and Architecture Issues
If you would like further information on PRISM, please
contact MINKER@MARYLAND or MADHUR@MARYLAND. We would also
be very interested in hearing from people who may have prob-
lems we could run on PRISM.
References:
1. Eisinger, N., Kasif, S., and Minker, J., "Logic Pro-
gramming: A Parallel Approach", in Proceedings of the
First International Logic Programming Conference, Mar-
seilles, France, 1982.
2. Kasif, S., Kohli, M., and Minker, J., "PRISM - A Paral-
lel Inference System for Problem Solving", in IJCAI-83,
Karlsruhe, Germany, 1983.
3. Rieger, C., Bane, j., and Trigg, R., "ZMOB: A Highly
Parallel Multiprocessor", University of Maryland, TR-
911, May 1980
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂15-Sep-86 1044 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Poligon Release and New Manual.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 86 10:44:20 PDT
Date: Mon 15 Sep 86 10:43:01-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Poligon Release and New Manual.
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12239172587.22.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I made a new release of Poligon on Friday evening. This should
have a number of bug fixes and a number of new operators, including
one for manipulating timestamps.
The new manual is sitting on my desk waiting for the xerox to come
up. Readers are encouraged to read the following pages, where the
changes from the previous version are most significant.
45-47 : New update operators.
79 : Poligon defined extensions to the Type lattice.
80 : Functions for manipulating types.
85 : Access to timestamps - the new AT timestamping operator.
97-99 : New table of operators.
101 : New higher order functions.
I'll have a few copies made up. If you'd like one please say.
Rice.
-------
∂15-Sep-86 1410 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA The Poligon manual is V5.2 F.Y.I.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Sep 86 14:10:53 PDT
Date: Mon 15 Sep 86 14:09:27-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: The Poligon manual is V5.2 F.Y.I.
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12239210168.22.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Rice.
-------
∂16-Sep-86 1436 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Secretary-Treasurer
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Sep 86 14:36:07 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Sep 86 14:28:29-PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Secretary-Treasurer
To: officers: ;
cc: aaAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12239475776.35.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I'm pleased to announce the appointment of Bruce Buchanan as the AAAI's
new Secretary-Treasurer. His appointment begins immediately.
I think we all want to thank Richard Fikes for doing a tremendous job
the last three years.
Claudia
-------
∂16-Sep-86 1716 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Research Associate Candidate Igor Rivin
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Sep 86 17:16:08 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 16 Sep 86 16:20:02-PDT
Date: 16 Sep 86 1235 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Research Associate Candidate Igor Rivin
To: ac@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
The Formal Reasoning Research Group plans to appoint Igor Rivin as a
Research Associate, to work on the Qlisp project (see attached biography).
Any faculty comments should be sent to John McCarthy (JMC@SAIL) and should
be received not later than Tuesday, September 23.
Les Earnest
-------------------------------------------
Igor Rivin Birthdate: August 19, 1961
Symbolics Citizenship: Canadian
Cambridge Center Permanent Resident, USA
Cambridge, MA 02142 Marital Status: Single
Home Phone: (617)-492-3654
Office Phone: (617)-577-7741
Email Address: rivin@scrc-pegasus.arpa
Education:
Princeton University
Ph.D. in Mathematics, June 1986.
Thesis research on Hyperbolic Geometry and
Low-Dimensional Topology, advised by Professor William Thurston.
Thesis title: ``Geometry of Convex Polyhedra in Hyperbolic Space''.
University of Toronto
B.Sc Mathematics (Honors), 1981.Graduated with highest honors.
Overseas School of Rome.
Mathematics and Physics School (no. 2), Moscow, USSR.
Awards and Fellowships:
Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada Postgraduate Fellowship,
1983-85
Princeton University Honors Graduate Fellowship, 1981-82.
Award for best academic performance at University College (U.of Toronto)
1980-1981.
S. Beatty award in Mathematics, Physics and Computer Science,
1978-79 and 1980-81
N.S.E.R.C Summer Undergraduate Fellowship 1980, 1981.
First Prize, Canadian Mathematics Olympiad, 1977
Teaching Experience:
Teaching Assistant at U. of Toronto (1978-81) and Princeton (1982-83, 84-85)
for calculus (honors and general), linear algebra (honors),
Analysis on Manifolds.
Professional Experience:
July 1986 - present, Member of Technical Staff, Symbolics Inc. Computer Aided
Mathematics Group. Presently working on the developement of a comprehensive
package for advanced analysis, to wit: Special functions, and their
identities, Distributions, Integral transforms, Solution and Asymptotics
for ODE and PDE, etc.
February 1986 - present, Consultant on Computer Algebra to the Advanced
Computing Group, Los Alamos National Laboratory.
September 1985 - June 1986, Research Fellow, Institut des Hautes Etudes
Scientifiques, Bures-sur-Yvette, France.
May 1983- July 1985, Consultant at Symbolics, Inc. Cambridge, MA Research Center
(MACSYMA group). Position entailed design and implementation of
new algorithms for MACSYMA as well as maintentance of the existing system.
Invited Talks:
Harvard University, Algebraic Geometry Seminar
``On Variation of Hodge Structure'', Summer 1983
``The Mapping Class Groups of Surfaces'', seminar series, Summer 1984
Institute for Advanced Study, Topology Seminar
``Geometry of Polyhedra in H↑3'', April 1985
Universite de Paris-Sud, Orsay
``On Geometry of Convex Polyhedra'', February 1986
Publication:
``On Geometry of Polyhedra in 3-dimensional Space Forms,'' IHES preprint,
submitted to Topology.
∂16-Sep-86 2247 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU course announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Sep 86 22:47:54 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Sep 86 22:40:47-PDT
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: course announcement
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
TOPICS IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF LINGUISTICS
LINGUISTICS 203 / PHILOSOPHY 264
AUTUMN 1986
TUESDAYS, 10-11:50
BUILDING 60, ROOM 62J
TOM WASOW
The study of language in this century has been an intensely introspective
endeavor. Modern linguists and philosophers of language have debated not only
the nature of language, but also how language should be studied and to what
end. The issues in the philosophy of linguistics can be subsumed under two
general questions:
What are (or should be) the goals of linguistic research?
What are the best methods for attaining those goals?
This seminar will be devoted to discussion of various more specific issues
stemming from these general questions, such as the relationship between
linguistics and psychology, the notion of explanation in linguistics, the
relationship of theory to data, and the role of simplicity in linguistic
argumentation. It will draw on writings of both linguists and philosophers,
including some work in the philosophy of science that is not directly about
linguistics at all. Since in recent decades, Chomsky's ideas have been the
focal point of most debates in the philosophy of linguistics, a good deal of
the literature examined in the seminar will deal with them. However, it will
also include discussion of pre-Chomskyan structuralists, as well as
contemporary work that takes a radically different approach.
Readings include work by: Bloomfield, Chomsky, (Jerry) Fodor, Hacking,
Higginbotham, Hjelmslev, Katz, Kuhn, Sapir, de Saussure, and Soames.
I will have a detailed syllabus available next week.
-------
∂17-Sep-86 1122 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 86 11:19:19 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 17 Sep 86 10:43:41 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 86 10:43:41 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Let's those of us around meet tomorrow, 9/18, 11AM in 301 MJH.
I'll talk about some lessons I learned implementing the ICODE->SQL
translator.
---jeff
∂17-Sep-86 1130 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Special talk
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 86 11:29:52 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 17 Sep 86 11:15:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 86 11:15:42 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Special talk
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
The following talk will be held in 352 MJH on Monday Sept. 22.
---jeff
***********************************************
On the Efficient Evaluation of Datalog Programs.
Catriel Beeri
Department of Computer Science
The Hebrew University
One of the interesting research topics today is the use of
Logic Programming based languages for database interaction.
An important subject that has received a lot of attention is
that of efficient evaluation of queries based on recursive
definitions. If the query contains constants, it is desir-
able to use them to restrict the database search. This can
be done in top-down evaluation methods, but these are usu-
ally interpretive, hence unsuitable for a database environ-
ment. The bottom-up approach is more suited for database
applications, however, in its simple forms it can not take
advantage of the given constants.
The talk will describe a fairlly general method for
transforming a recursive definition and a query with con-
stants, so that the resulting program can be efficiently
computed bottom-up, and the search space is appropriately
restricted. The method generalizes the so called "magic set"
approach, and it will be shown that in a sense it is a good
as any method that uses sideway information passing to res-
trict the search. That includes the method used by Prolog,
as well as most of the other published methods.
∂17-Sep-86 1342 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa Next week's PLANLUNCH -- 11am TUESDAY -- Rina Dechter
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 86 13:42:04 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Wed, 17 Sep 86 13:36:44-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA01892; Wed,
17 Sep 86 13:39:08 PDT
Date: Wed 17 Sep 86 13:39:03-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: Next week's PLANLUNCH -- 11am TUESDAY -- Rina Dechter
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 17-Sep-86 13:39:03.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
ALSO: NOTE DAY CHANGE!!! (Tuesday -- this week only)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPROVING BACKTRACK SEARCH ALGORITHMS
FOR CONSTRAINT-SATISFACTION PROBLEMS
Rina Dechter (DECHTER@CS.UCLA.EDU)
Cognitive System Laboratory, Computer Science Department, U.C.L.A.
and
Artificial Intelligence Center, Hughes Aircraft Company
11:00 AM, TUESDAY, September 23
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
The subject of improving search efficiency has been on the agenda of
researchers in the area of Constraint-Satisfaction- Problems (CSPs)
for quite some time. A recent increase of interest in this subject,
concentrating on backtrack search, can be attributed to its use as the
control strategy in PROLOG, and in Truth-Maintenance-Systems (TMS).
The terms ``intelligent backtracking'', ``selective backtracking'',
and ``dependency- directed backtracking'' describe various efforts for
producing improved dialects of backtrack search in these systems. In
this talk I will review the common features of these attempts and will
present two schemes for enhancing backtrack search in solving CSPs.
The first scheme, a version of "look-back", guides the decision of
what to do in dead-end situations. Specifically, we concentrate on
the idea of constraint recording, namely, analyzing and storing the
reasons for the dead-ends, and using them to guide future decisions,
so that the same conflicts will not arise again. We view constraint
recording as a process of learning, and examine several possible
learning schemes studying the tradeoffs between the amount of learning
and the improvement in search efficiency.
The second improvement scheme exploits the fact that CSPs whose
constraint graph is a tree can be solved easily, i.e., in linear time.
This leads to the following observation: If, in the course of a
backtrack search, the subgraph resulting from removing all nodes
corresponding to the instantiated variables is a tree, then the rest
of the search can be completed in linear time. Consequently, the aim
of ordering the variables should be to instantiate as quickly as
possible a set of variables that cut all cycles in the
constraint-graph (cycle-cutset). This use of cycle-cutsets can be
incorporated in any given "intelligent" backtrack and is guaranteed to
improve it (subject to minor qualifications).
The performance of these two schemes is evaluated both theoretically
and experimentally using randomly generated problems as well as
several "classical" problems described in the literature.
-------
∂17-Sep-86 1539 LINK@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU BYe
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Sep 86 15:39:36 PDT
Date: Wed 17 Sep 86 15:29:29-PDT
From: Godehard Link <LINK@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: BYe
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: link@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I'd like to say good bye now to everybody and thank for the hospitality
and the stimulating atmosphere at the CSLI.Godehard
-------
∂18-Sep-86 0321 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #51
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 03:20:22 PDT
Date: Wednesday, September 17, 1986 3:48AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #51
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 18 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 51
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Forall X in P Q,
Announcement - HP Contest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 15 Sep 86 19:56:41-PDT
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Forall X in P, Q
The standard solution for the for all problem suggested
by CONSUL is to use the logical equivalence
forall X in P, Q <=> not (exists X in P st. not Q)
and use negation as failure for the negations:
forall(X, P, Q) :- \+ (P, \+ Q).
This translation assumes that all free variables in Q are bound
by any call to P, and that \+ is the standard not-quite-sound
``negation'' of Edinburgh Prolog so that the unbound variables
in P are implicitly existentially quantified inside \+.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 86 12:37:15 pdt
From: hpfclp!hpai@hplabs.HP.COM
Subject: New HP contest
Hewlett-Packard
AI Programming Contest
Hewlett-Packard is sponsoring a programming contest to collect
symbolic computing and artificial intelligence software.
Submit your public domain programs by February 1, 1987 to be
considered for the following prizes:
First prize: One HP72445A computer (Vectra)
Second prize: One HP45711B computer (Portable Plus)
Third prize: One HP16C calculator (Computer Scientist)
Complete rules follow.
1. All entries must be programs of interest to the symbolic
computing or artificial intelligence communities. They must be
executable on HP9000 Series 300 computers running the HP-UX
operating system. This includes programs written in the Common
LISP, C, Pascal, FORTRAN, or shell script languages, or in any of
our third party AI software.
2. All entries must include source code, machine-readable
documentation, a test suite, and any special instructions
necessary to run the software. Entries may be submitted by
electronic mail or shipped on HP formatted 1/4" Certified Data
Cartridge tapes.
3. All entries must be in the public domain and must be
accompanied by an entry form signed by the contributor(s).
Entries must be sent on or before February 1, 1987.
4. Only residents of the U.S. may enter. HP employees and
their dependents are ineligible to receive prizes, but are
welcome to submit software. In the case of team entries, each
member of the team must be eligible. No duplicate prizes will be
awarded. Disposition of the prize is solely the responsibility
of the winning team.
5. Entries will be judged on the basis of originality, relevance
to our user community, complexity, completeness, and ease of use.
The date of receipt will be used as a tie-breaker. Decision of
the judges will be final.
6. HP cannot return tape cartridges.
7. Selected entries will be distributed by HP on an unsupported
software tape. This tape will be available from HP for a
distribution fee. The contributor(s) of each entry which is
selected for this tape will receive a complimentary copy.
To enter:
Print and complete the following entry form and mail it to:
AI Programming Contest M.S. 99
Hewlett-Packard
3404 E. Harmony Road
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Send your software on HP formatted 1/4"tape to the same address,
or send it via electronic mail to:
hplabs!hpfcla!aicontest or ihnp4!hpfcla!aicontest
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Hewlett-Packard
AI Programming Contest
ENTRY FORM
See the accompanying contest rules. Please type or print. Mail
the completed form to:
AI Programming Contest M.S. 99
Hewlett-Packard
3404 E. Harmony Road
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Send your software on HP formatted 1/4"tape to the same address,
or send it via electronic mail to:
hplabs!hpfcla!aicontest or ihnp4!hpfcla!aicontest
PROGRAM TITLE:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION (75 word maximum):
CONFIGURATION REQUIREMENTS (both hardware and software):
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Contributor(s)
Company (if applicable):
Telephone:
Address:
City: State: Zip:
Electronic mail address (starting with either hplabs or ihnp4):
This software is ( ) original
( ) ported from ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← .
Are you the author of this software?
If not, please furnish the name, phone number, and addresses of
the author(s) as well.
Acknowledgment and Agreement
To the best of my knowledge, I have the right to contribute this
program material without breaching any obligation concerning
nondisclosure of proprietary or confidential information of other
persons or organizations. I am contributing this program
material on a nonconfidential nonobligatory basis to
Hewlett-Packard Company ("HP") for possible use on an unsupported
software tape, and I agree that HP may use, duplicate, modify,
publish, and sell the program material, and authorize others to
do so without obligation or liability of any kind. HP may
publish my name and address, as the contributor, to facilitate
user inquiries pertaining to this program material.
I ( ) am
( ) am not
an HP employee or the dependent of an HP employee.
Signature ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← Date ←←←←←←←←←←←←
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂18-Sep-86 0830 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Student Brunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 08:30:12 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 08:29:38-PDT
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New Student Brunch
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12239934738.16.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Gene Golub has asked me to extend to you an invitation to the New Student
Brunch which will be held at his home on Sunday, September 28, from
11:00 - 1:00 p.m.
LaDonna
-------
∂18-Sep-86 1022 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Committee mailing lists
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 10:22:34 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 10:15:26-PDT
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Committee mailing lists
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Jacks Hall, Stanford; +1 (415) 725-5555
Message-ID: <12239953999.37.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Committee Chairs:
If you would like to have an electronic mailing list and message
archive file set up on SCORE for your committee, please send me a
note.
-J
-------
∂18-Sep-86 1211 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA bboards for new students
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 12:10:45 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 12:03:00-PDT
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: bboards for new students
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Jacks Hall, Stanford; +1 (415) 725-5555
Message-ID: <12239973582.21.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Bboards have been set up on Sushi for incoming CS grad students.
Here is the announcement posted to SYSTEM@SUSHI:
> Bulletin boards have been set up on Sushi for incoming PHD, MSAI, and
> MSCS students. New students are encouraged to watch these bulletin
> boards for announcements and to post questions and comments that would
> be of interest to other incoming students. To read them, use one of
> the following:
> @BBOARD NEW-PHD (read the new PhD bboard)
> @BBOARD NEW-MSAI (read the new MSAI bboard)
> @BBOARD NEW-MSCS (read the new MSCS bboard)
> @BBOARD NEW-*/ACTION (read ALL of the above)
>
> To post a message, use one of these:
> @MAIL NEW-PHD (post to the new PhD bboard)
> @MAIL NEW-MSAI (post to the new MSAI bboard)
> @MAIL NEW-MSCS (post to the new MSCS bboard)
> @MAIL NEW-STUDENTS (post to ALL of the above)
>
> See HELP BBOARD for more information about reading bboards.
All of the above addresses are on SUSHI, (e.g. to send a message to
the new MSAI bboard, address it to NEW-MSAI@SUSHI).
-------
∂18-Sep-86 1510 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA changes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 15:09:14 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 15:08:59-PDT
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: changes
To: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA, gnelson@DECWRL.DEC.COM
Message-ID: <12240007439.25.MODICA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
CS309A (instructor: Nelson) has changed time and place.
The new time is TTh 2:45-4:00. New place is 160-161K.
-Gina
-------
∂18-Sep-86 1513 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU visitor from Argonne
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 15:13:01 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Thu 18 Sep 86 15:11:42-PDT
Date: 18 Sep 86 1511 PDT
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: visitor from Argonne
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Jim Boyle from Argonne National Labs will be here on Monday, October 6.
He has done some interesting work using automatic program
transformations to produce parallel lisp in parallel fortran
from pure lisp code. He's also done some interesting things
regarding instrumentation of parallel programs to locate
sources of contention etc. He will give a public seminar
(probably at 4). We plan to have an informal session
with him earlier in the day (probably around 2)
to discuss parallel lisp implementations and such.
If anyone is interested in joining us for the discussion
let me know. I can send copies of papers describing
the work mentioned above if anyone wants to know more.
∂18-Sep-86 1539 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Assignment of new PhD students to research groups
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 15:39:47 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 18 Sep 86 15:33:45-PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 15:08:48-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Assignment of new PhD students to research groups
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The assignment of new students to assistantships this year is being
handled differently, as part of our revision of the PhD program. Part of
the new requirements recently approved by the faculty included the
concept of a research mentor for all entering PhD students. The idea is
to have a more cohesive system for getting all new students involved in
some kind of research, regardless of how they are financially supported.
We want them to be associated with a research group that includes
experienced students as well as faculty and/or full-time researchers.
The connection of the student with the group may be in the form of a RA,
where a student is doing a substantial amount of research work with that
group. It may also be that the student is supported by the group, but
devoting primary effort to studying for the Comprehensive Exam. In
still other cases, there will be no money involved (e.g., the student
has a fellowship, or is being supported by departmental funds), but the
group will provide facilities and connections.
It is not assumed that the student's eventual research work will be with
the initial group or faculty member; this is considered a one-year
initial period for finding out what research here is like. On the other
hand, we expect that many students will initially select a group in
their interest area and end up doing research within it.
Soon after the beginning of the quarter, the new students will be given
a packet describing the potential mentors and groups, and on the basis
of this will seek out positions. After an initial period of open
student-initiated matching, we will more actively help in linking up
those who are still unattached. You are of course free to take on as
few or as many new people as you want.
In order to implement this new system, we need the following
information for each potential GROUP (i.e., some faculty members may
have several distinct research groups, and the student should be
associated with a particular one). Mentors can be research associates
as well as regular faculty.
1. Names of faculty member(s) or research associate(s) in charge.
If several are involved, indicate which, if any, is primary.
2. What is the group called?
This does not need to be an official name, just a unique identifier.
3. What is the research?
We need more than a single sentence - a short paragraph is fine. In
the absence of better information we will include your current entry
in the departmental research summary.
4. Funding sources of the group
If you can include the actual grant/contract titles, that is better, but
just names of the granting agencies will do.
5. Structure of the group
Just a few words -- e.g., "Programming is done by small groups (2-3)
working together. The whole group meets once a week to discuss project
details, and the students participate in the weekly BAGLUNCH seminar."
6. How many (paid and unpaid) slots might you have for new students
7. Names of one or two senior students in the group to whom new
students can talk.
This is extremely useful and can save your having to spend time
answering a lot of the stray questions.
We'll compile your answers and distribute them to the students. If we
don't get anything from you by the first Wed. of the quarter (Oct. 1)
the default will be that you are NOT INTERESTED in working with any
incoming students this year.
By the way, the folders of the incoming students are available in Victoria's
office. Feel free to drop by and peruse them at your convenience, at
which time you can give her the answers to the above, if you don't want
to type them.
Thanks for your help. --t
-------
∂18-Sep-86 1726 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA List of Forum companies
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Sep 86 17:26:01 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Sep 86 17:13:39-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: List of Forum companies
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, staff@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12240030134.11.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We just had a few changes: Ericsson and Lotus dropped; Arthur Andersen
joined.
STANFORD COMPUTER FORUM MEMBERS
Arthur Andersen & Company
Atlantic Richfield (ARCO)
AT&T Information Systems
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Bank of America
Bell Communications Research, Inc. (Bellcore)
BNR INC.
Boeing Computer Services Company
Bull Corporation of America
Burroughs Corporation
Chevron Information Technology Company
Control Data Corporation
CSELT
Digital Equipment Corporation
Eastman Kodak Company
EG&G Idaho
ELF Aquitaine
ESL
FMC Corporation
Ford Aerospace
Fujitsu Laboratories
Fuji Xerox
GEC Research Laboratories
General Dynamics
General Electric Company
General Motors
General Research of Electronics, Inc.
GTE
Hewlett-Packard
Hitachi, Ltd.
Honeywell
Hughes Aircraft Company
IBM Scientific Center
IBM Yorktown Heights
Inference Corporation
Intel Corporation
ITT
Japan Science Institute
Lockheed
Martin Marietta Aerospace
MCC
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
NCR Corporation
NEC Corporation
Nippon Telegraph and Telephone
Olivetti
Oracle
Pacific Telesis Group
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Philips Research Laboratories, Sunnyvale
Philips Netherlands
Procter & Gamble
RCA
Rockwell International
Schlumberger Doll
Schlumberger SPAR
Shell Development Company
Siemens AG
Signaal
Singer Kearfott
Software Research Associates
Standard Oil Production
Standard Oil Research and Development
Sony Corporation
Sperry Computer Systems
Tandem Computers
Tektronix, Incorporated
Texaco
Texas Instruments
Toshiba
TRW
Varian Associates
Xerox PARC
-------
∂19-Sep-86 0949 grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU changes
Received: from HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Sep 86 09:49:09 PDT
Received: by harvard.HARVARD.EDU; Fri, 19 Sep 86 12:46:41 EDT
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 86 12:46:41 EDT
Received: by endor.HARVARD.EDU; Fri, 19 Sep 86 12:39:18 EDT
From: grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU (Barbara Grosz)
To: MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Cc: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA, gnelson@DECWRL.DEC.COM
In-Reply-To: Gina Modica's message of Thu 18 Sep 86 15:08:59-PDT
Subject: changes
Gina --
Would you also get me removed from the logmtc mailing list?
thanks
Barbara
∂19-Sep-86 1003 gls@Think.COM Digital Press
Received: from GODOT.THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Sep 86 10:03:29 PDT
Received: from yon by Godot.Think.COM via CHAOS; Fri, 19 Sep 86 13:02:44 edt
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 86 13:03 EDT
From: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>
Subject: Digital Press
To: cl-technical@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA, gls@AQUINAS
Message-Id: <860919130341.2.GLS@YON.THINK.COM>
I met with Mike Meehan and Chase Duffy of Digital Press yesterday.
No shatteringly new topics, but refreshing of old issues:
(1) They are still waiting for a letter from X3J13 requesting
nonexclusive rights to use portions of CLtL as a basis for a standard.
I was under the impression that Bob Mathis was going to write this.
Was I wrong, or are we waiting for the first X3J13 meeting to have
such a letter authorized by the committee? In any case, they are
ready to give permission just as soon as a letter is received.
(2) They would like to put out a second edition of CLtL during the
summer of 1987. (Major constraint: it would be nice to have it out
for AAAI. Minor constraint: it would be nice to have it out before
July 1 because of Digital press fiscal year.)
(a) I think this is an appropriate time to fix a large number of minor
textual and typographical problems. Chase Duffy and I are plotting to
produce a much better index than the last time around, using a
combination of Thinking Machines indexing software and a professional
indexer who is given more than just a weekend to go over it.
(Apparently the most frequent criticism of the book is that the index
is poor. The second most frequent is that the pages fall out of the
perfect binding under heavy use--they're working on that one, too.)
(b) I plan to go over the text systematically looking for a number
of things, and also inserting many more examples. Now that we have
some real Common Lisp code, I would like to extract some examples
from real use. In particular, while I like phlogiston, it would be
nice to have a real-world example of the use of the package and
module primitives. Any suggestions?
(c) I of course am completely unwilling to make substantive changes to
the text without basing it on decisions of the committee. It would be
nice if my list of typographical correction got formal approval at the
first meeting, and if my long list of issues from last December could
be resolved within the next few months (Scott's issues too).
(d) As far as I am concerned such a second edition could contain a
preliminary (i.e., not ANSI-official) description of Common Loops.
This is a double-edged sword. If we are agreed on nearly all of the
content, this is a vehicle for distributing the design fast so that
everyone can implement it. On the other hand, if we are not agreed in
time, then jumping the gun on publication could cause chaos.
(e) Regarding the function-cell/value-cell thing: if there is a
possibility of ever merging them in the future, such a second edition
could provide early warning ("the following language change is under
consideration; here's some advice on writing programs to avoid
problems if the change is made").
(3) They recognize the need and desire to have on-line copies of the
documentation, but currently have no precedent for appropriate
licensing agreements. What is really needed, I think, is for someone
to propose an actual agreement to them now, for real, so that they can
spring their lawyers into action now. (Basically lawyers won't
prepare ahead for a hypothetical case on speculation.)
--Guy
∂20-Sep-86 2247 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu talk tomorrow
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Sep 86 22:47:48 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Sat, 20 Sep 86 22:44:44 PDT
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 86 22:44:44 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: talk tomorrow
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Did I mention that the talk tomorrow is at 2PM?
It is.
---jeff
∂21-Sep-86 1054 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu changes at TheoryNet
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Sep 86 10:54:07 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sun 21 Sep 86 10:51:12-PDT
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 21 Sep 86 10:51:17-PDT
Message-Id: <8609211731.AA03129@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from LOCALHOST.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Sun, 21 Sep 86 12:31:42 CDT
To: TheoryNet-list:;
Subject: changes at TheoryNet
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 86 12:31:29 -0500
From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Victor Miller from IBM Yorktown Heights is going to be the new
moderator for TheoryNet starting Monday Sept 22.
The new addresses are
for contribution - TheoryNet@ibm.com (csnet and internet)
or theorynt@yktvmz (bitnet).
for administrative requests -
TheoryNet-Request@ibm.com (csnet and internet)
or theorynt@yktvmz (bitnet).
(The bitnet addresses are the same for both purposes, but it's not
a problem since all messages are screened first anyway.)
You should receive a message from the new address in the next few days
to verify that everything works correctly.
Mail to theory@rsch.wisc.edu and theory-request@rsch.wisc.edu
(the old addresses) will be forwarded automatically.
I'd like to thank those who helped me to get TheoryNet off the ground
and run it for the last 2 years. I certainly learned a lot more about
networking than I imagined.
I hope to see you all at the FOCS conference in Toronto.
-- Udi Manber
∂21-Sep-86 1421 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA faculty meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Sep 86 14:21:03 PDT
Date: Sun 21 Sep 86 14:19:43-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: faculty meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12240784902.15.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We will have our first regularly-scheduled general faculty meeting
of the quarter on Tuesday, September 30, 1986 at 2:30 pm in the
Conference Room in Building 170 (the basement of 170). [Sorry about
MJH 146 not being available then; there is a Youth Dev. meeting there
that Tuesday, and they bumped us. Bldg 170 is a 2-minute walk; it's
just between the President's office and the front of the Quad.]
Known agenda items currently are:
Review of CSD recent and planned future new faculty
Review of CSD new PhD student policy (Terry, I assume you will be able
to give us a 5 minute summary of the main points)
Consideration of Tom Binford's suggestion about having a "robotics qual"
Review of CSD-CF situation and plans. Review of CSD score/sushi policy.
--Les Earnest
Approval of degree candidates
CSD financial situation
Review of progress on getting ready for the UG major
--Jeff Ullman and Stuart Reges
----
Please let me know if you have additional agenda items. -Nils
-------
∂21-Sep-86 1426 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Sep 86 14:26:15 PDT
Date: Sun 21 Sep 86 14:25:48-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12240786009.15.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a Senior Faculty mtg immediately following the
general meeting on Tuesday, September 30, 1986 in the Building
170 Conference room.
Known agenda items are:
Promotion to Sr. Res. Associate: Oussama Khatib (see previously
distributed resume)
Review of possible promotions: Cheriton, Lantz
Consideration of transfer of Winograd fully into CS
---
Please let me know if you have any additional agenda items. -Nils
-------
∂22-Sep-86 0127 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #52
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 01:27:12 PDT
Date: Sunday, September 21, 1986 7:25PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #52
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 22 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 52
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Graphics,
Announcement - Research Opportunity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 Sep 86 22:09:10 GMT
From: Barry Brachman <!ubc-ean!ubc-cs!brachman@uw-beaver.arpa>
Subject: Graphics for C-Prolog on the SUN
I'm posting to net.sources a package called gprolog that lets
you call graphics routines in the SunCore library from C-Prolog.
GProlog runs on both the SUN 2 and SUN 3 (4.2BSD Releases 2.3/3.0).
The distribution includes:
- diffs to be applied to C-Prolog 1.5
- code that implements the interface between Prolog and SunCore
- a user's manual
- three puny demos
To run gprolog you'll need:
- Larry Wall's (great!) patch program (or a lot of patience)
- the unaltered source to C-Prolog version 1.5
- a SUN 2 or SUN 3 with a console (i.e., bit mapped display),
the SunCore library and preferably suntools (does everybody get
SunCore and suntools?)
-- Barry Brachman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 86 13:56:00 BST
From: David Warren <warren%
Subject: Item for Prolog Digest
dunix.computer-science.manchester.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER
Department of Computer Science
PARALLEL EXECUTION MODELS
FOR LOGIC PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
TWO RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Applications are invited for two Research Associate posts
associated with the above SERC-funded project. The appointees
would join the Computational Logic Group led by Professor
David Warren.
The aim of the project is to design and implement parallel
execution models for logic programming languages to achieve
much high inference speeds than are possible on sequential
machines. We are looking for models which are transparent
to the programmer, which generalise sequential implementation
techniques, and which will support real applications. The
aim is to demonstrate significant speedups through parallelism
in a language that is a true extension of Prolog. The work
will involve producing a portable implementation for commercial
multiprocessors, and investigation of novel architectures for
implementing the models.
A Sequent Balance 8000 multiprocessor, with six processors,
will be used as a target machine, with most of the development
work being done on Sun workstations. The main implementation
languages will be C and Prolog. The project will involve close
collaboration with groups at Argonne National Laboratory,
Imperial College, and the Swedish Institute for Computer Science.
Applicants should have a good honours degree and relevant
postgraduate experience, including experience with one or more
of Prolog, C, Unix, or multiprocessors. The posts are tenable
for up to three years and are available immediately. Appointments
will be made according to age and experience on the RA1A or RA2
salary scales (8,020-12,780 or 11,790-15,700 pounds sterling
respectively).
Letters of application, including a CV, a statement of research
interests, and the names and addresses of two referees, should
be sent to Professor David H.D. Warren, Department of Computer
Science, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, preferably
by 10 November 1986. Informal enquiries can be made by telephone
(061-273-7121 ext 5550) or by electronic mail (JANET: dhdw @
uk.ac.man.cs.ux).
Vacancies are also available within the Computational Logic Group
for academic staff. Enquiries should likewise be addressed to
Professor Warren.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂22-Sep-86 1049 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB CogSci Seminar-September 30,1986
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 10:48:43 PDT
Received: by cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (5.53/1.16)
id AA20307; Mon, 22 Sep 86 10:27:10 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 86 10:27:10 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8609221727.AA20307@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU, cogsci-friends@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: UCB CogSci Seminar-September 30,1986
Cc: admin@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, September 30, 11:00 - 12:30*
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
"Concept of Dispositional Definition and Its Relation to Nonmonotonic Reasoning''
Lotfi Zadeh
Computer Science
It has long been recognized that many concepts--and espe-
cially those relating to natural kinds--do not lend themselves
to definition in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions.
The concept of a dispositional definition is intended to pro-
vide a framework for dealing with such concepts in a systematic
fashion. Dispositional definitions can be dealt with through
the use of probabilistic logic in a way which clarifies some of
the basic issues underlying nonmonotonic reasoning.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE
SESAME Colloquium: Joanne Stein from SESAME will speak on Mon-
day, September 29, from 4:00-6:00 in 2515 Tolman. For more
information please call, 2-4206.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Oct 14:Daniel Kahneman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Oct 28: Anne Triesman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Nov 11: Johanna Nichols, Slavic Languages & Literature, UC
Berkeley
Nov 25: Stuart Russell, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Jan 27: Geoff Hinton, Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: Paul Grice, originally scheduled for this Tuesday was unable to make
this date and so his appearance has been interchanged with that of Lotfi
Zadeh who had been scheduled for next semester.
∂22-Sep-86 1133 HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA paychecks
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 11:32:54 PDT
Date: Mon 22 Sep 86 11:30:26-PDT
From: Katherine Hanrahan <HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: paychecks
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA, staff@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12241016228.16.HANRAHAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This is the first pay period of our new salaries for 9/1/86. Please check
to see that the amount you have received is correct or let me know and we
will make the appropriate corrections. Katie
-------
∂22-Sep-86 1210 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA UNIX for CS classes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 12:10:02 PDT
Date: Mon 22 Sep 86 12:07:52-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: UNIX for CS classes
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 030C, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12241023042.56.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This is a reminder that LOTS now runs a VAX 8650 called Portia to support
classes that require UNIX. If you feel your fall quarter class has special
requirements that make Portia more appropriate than the DEC-20's, you should
fill out an application form to request access to the machine. You can obtain
the form either by dropping by the new LOTS offices in Sweet Hall or by sending
mail to KING@PORTIA.
-------
∂22-Sep-86 1318 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM Seminar on Representation & Computation
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 13:17:51 PDT
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 22 Sep 86 12:58:28-PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 22 SEP 86 12:47:31 PDT
Date: 22 Sep 86 12:12 PDT
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Seminar on Representation & Computation
To: Folks@csli.stanford.edu, Phil-all@csli.stanford.edu,
ComputerResearch↑.pa@Xerox.COM
cc: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Reply-to: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <860922-124731-1039@Xerox>
Course announcement: Philosophy 266
Seminar on Representation, Formality, & the Foundations of Computation
Quarter: Autumn 1986
Time: Tuesdays, 10:00-11:50
First meeting: October 7, 1986
Place: Seminar Room, Ventura Hall (CSLI)
Instructor: Brian Cantwell Smith
Issues of representation and computation permeate modern semantical
inquiry -- in philosophy, AI, and cognitive science. But what are these
notions, really; and how do they relate? Representational theorists of
mind, for example, seem to think that they can rest their analyses of
representation on computation. Is this plausible intellectual
cartography? Do we have a theory of computation that can do justice to
the demands of AI and cognitive science?
This seminar will address itself to such issues in the philosophy of
computation. First, we will explore three conceptually distinct
proposals for the foundation for computation, asking of each whether it
can adequately reconstruct the essence of computational practice.
Second, we will examine the tradition of resting theories of
representation on computation, and sketch an exactly opposite view: one
that rests the notion of computation on representation. Third, we will
look briefly at representation itself, in order to develop intuitions
both about what demands it would place on computation, and about what
kind of conceptual foundation it could provide in its own right.
Finally, we will examine the consequences of these various accounts for
cognitive science.
Permeating the seminar will be an explicit concern with the interaction
between method and subject matter, focusing in particular on the
overwhelmingly popular but largely unexamined assumption that
computation is a "formal" discipline. We will use this assumption as a
foil in terms of which to critique current views of computation, and to
assess methods currently adopted in its study. Half a dozen different
readings of formality will be examined, many of which suggest that the
popularity of the assumption that computation is formal represents more
of an allegiance to method than a commitment to subject matter.
Readings will include works by Fodor, Haugeland, Marr, Newell, Turing,
and the instructor.
∂22-Sep-86 1417 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sunrise Club Breakfast 10/14/86
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 14:17:05 PDT
Date: Mon 22 Sep 86 14:14:07-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sunrise Club Breakfast 10/14/86
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12241046027.28.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Faculty:
You are cordially invited to attend the third School of Engineering
Sunrise Club meeting on Tuesday, October 14, l986, at 7:30 a.m. The
meeting will be held in Tresidder Union's Oak Lounge. Professor John L.
Hennessy, Director of the Computer Systems Laboratory, will speak on
"Research in the Computer Systems Lab: Overview and Examples."
The Sunrise Club is designed to provide a common meeting ground for
interested students and faculty and their conterparts in venture capital
firms and small or start-up high technology companies. There are currently
28 members.
The benefits to us are an increased pool of fellowship funds (the
$2500 annual gift made by the corporate members goes for fellowships),
and an opportunity to exchange information with an important local group
of engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs.
Since we must have a fairly accurate head count in order to plan the
breakfast, please respond to Ann Diaz-Barriga, Diaz@Score, or Dwain Fullerton,
Fullerton@Sierra.
Sincerely,
Nils Nilsson
-------
∂22-Sep-86 1515 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Comprehensive exam syllabus
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 15:14:13 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 22 Sep 86 15:10:36-PDT
Date: Mon 22 Sep 86 15:04:50-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Comprehensive exam syllabus
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The following is the current state of discussion about the new
comprehensive syllabus. It is not feasible to have it revised by the
Comp committee before school starts, since the chair (Knuth) won't even
be back until next week. I propose that the faculty vote on a
PROVISIONAL syllabus at the opening meeting next Tuesday, based on the
following. The comp committee may then choose to submit a revised
version within a month, in order to be out in time for use in the Winter
exam. The version here is NOT a final proposal, but open to comments by
the faculty before something is approved.
In order to give the students an appropriate idea of the contents so
they can plan their Fall courses, I propose that the comp committee be
requested not to ADD material before the Winter exam, although they may
choose to delete some. With this in mind, I have left it on the long
side (much of the dicussion in the Spring centered around questions of
whether this list was too long), although I have dropped some items
(listed at the end of the message) on the basis of prior discussions.
I. SYSTEMS
Alfred V. Aho, Sethi, R., and Jeffrey D. Ullman, Compilers --
Principles, Techniques, and Tools, Addison-Wesley, 1986. All
except sections 9.11-9.12, 10.9-10.13.
M. Ben-Ari, Principles of Concurrent Programming, Prentice-Hall
International, 1982.
Kogge, P., The Architecture of Pipelined Computers, McGraw-Hill,
1981. Chapter 1 only.
M. Morris Mano, Computer System Architecture, Second Edition,
Prentice-Hall, 1982. Basic logic design, data representation, and
computer organization. Material taught in CS 108 and CS 112.
--- Chapter numbers need filling in --
Bell, C.G., Mudge, J.C., and McNamara, J.E., Computer Engineering
-- A DEC View of Hardware Systems Design, Digital Press, 1978. Part
III only.
James L. Peterson and Abraham Silberschatz, Operating System
Concepts, Addison-Wesley, Second Edition, 1985.
Terrence W. Pratt, Programming Languages: Design and
Implementation, Second edition, Prentice-Hall, 1984.
II. THEORY
Alfred V. Aho, John E. Hopcroft, and Jeffrey D. Ullman, Data
Structures and Algorithms, Addison-Wesley, 1983.
Michael R. Garey and David S. Johnson, Computers and
Intractability, Freeman, 1979, Chapters 1--3, 7.
John E. Hopcroft and Jeffrey D. Ullman, Introduction to
Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley, 1979,
Chapters 1--3, 4.1--4.6, 5--7, 8.1--8.5.
Donald E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Volume 1,
Second Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1973, Section 1.2 (except for subsections
1.2.9, 1.2.10, 1.2.11.2, and 1.2.11.3.)
Zohar Manna, Introduction to Mathematical Theory of
Computation, McGraw-Hill, 1973, Chapters 1--3.
Nils Nilsson, Principles of Artificial Intelligence, Kaufman,
1980, Chapters 4--6.
Robert Sedgewick, Algorithms, Addison-Wesley, 1983.
III. APPLICATIONS AND TECHNIQUES
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Elaine Rich, Artificial Intelligence, McGraw-Hill, 1983.
DATABASES
Jeffrey Ullman, Principles of Data Base Systems, Computer
Science Press, 1982 ---Chapters? ---
GRAPHICS
William Newman and Robert Sproull, Principles of Interactive Computer Graphics,
Chapters 1--5, and 15--18.
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
Kendall E. Atkinson, An Introduction to Numerical Analysis,
Wiley, 1978, Chapters 1--3, 5, 7, 8 (except Sections 2.8, 2.10,
5.4).
---------------------
Students may also want to read the following as a prerequisite to
topics in several of the areas:
Herbert B. Enderton, A Mathematical Introduction to Logic,
Academic Press, 1972, Chapters 1--2.
The comprehensive exam is meant generally to cover the material
from the following courses:
Systems = 112, 140, 143A, 212, 242, 240 A,B, 243
Applications = 237A, 225, 248, 245
Theory = 223, 254, 261, 257A
-------------------------------------------------------------
END of the proposed syllabus
-------------------------------------------------------------
Items included on earlier versions that have been left out here
(based on my informal weighing of the various responses to them):
Harold Abelson and Gerald Sussman, Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs, MIT, 1985.
John McCarthy and Carolyn Talcott, LISP: Programming and
Proving, (available from McCarthy's secretary) 1980, Chapters
1--3.
A.S. Tanenbaum, Computer Networks, Prentice-Hall, 1981.
Netorks as a an applications topic: (following is from Lantz)
Re networks: Certainly warrants billing equivalent to graphics and
databases, as I've said before. If pressed on the volume of the book,
could easily drop Chapters 2, 6, and 11 (which is just a bibliography
anyway). (Note: assuming networks IS covered, then CS244 should be
added to the list of courses for applications.)
-------
∂22-Sep-86 1839 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Sep 86 18:39:10 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Mon, 22 Sep 86 18:23:33-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA06021; Mon,
22 Sep 86 18:28:08 PDT
Date: Mon 22 Sep 86 18:28:02-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
To: planlunch←reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 22-Sep-86 18:28:02.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
ALSO: NOTE DAY CHANGE!!! (Tuesday -- this week only)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPROVING BACKTRACK SEARCH ALGORITHMS
FOR CONSTRAINT-SATISFACTION PROBLEMS
Rina Dechter (DECHTER@CS.UCLA.EDU)
Cognitive System Laboratory, Computer Science Department, U.C.L.A.
and
Artificial Intelligence Center, Hughes Aircraft Company
11:00 AM, TUESDAY, September 23
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
SUMMARY:The subject of improving search efficiency has been on the
agenda of researchers in the area of Constraint-Satisfaction- Problems
(CSPs) for quite some time. A recent increase of interest in this
subject, concentrating on backtrack search, can be attributed to its
use as the control strategy in PROLOG, and in
Truth-Maintenance-Systems (TMS). The terms ``intelligent
backtracking'', ``selective backtracking'', and ``dependency- directed
backtracking'' describe various efforts for producing improved
dialects of backtrack search in these systems. In this talk I will
review the common features of these attempts and will present two
schemes for enhancing backtrack search in solving CSPs.
-------
∂24-Sep-86 0355 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #53
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 86 03:55:51 PDT
Date: Tuesday, September 23, 1986 6:11PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #53
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 24 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 53
Today's Topics:
Implementation - "For All" & Cut,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Sep 86 12:58:57 GMT
From: Douglas Baldwin <baldwin@rochester.arpa>
Subject: "For All" in Prolog
Thanks to everyone who answered my question a few
weeks ago about implementing "for all" in Prolog.
The general consensus was that
forall X in S, Body
can be re-expressed as
"there is no X in S such that Body doesn't hold"
which can be written in Prolog as
not( In←S(X), not Body(X,...) )
(This is a mix of syntaxes from several Prologs, my original
description of the problem, etc., but the idea is clear I
hope.) This is clearly what I need.
Special thanks to Lee Naish, David Morley, Heiner Marxen
and Steve Jones for their discussions of this solution.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 86 15:20:06 MET DST
From: Norbert%Germany.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Experiments with Cut
At the Third International Conference on Logic Programming, Chris
Moss compared several Prolog implementations with regard to their
interpretations of cuts in control structures. The results were
quite impressive: eleven different interpretations for 24
implementations!
But I suppose, he would have found even more differences, if he
had compared the effect of combining more than two control
structures. I experimented a bit with our C-Prolog 1.5
interpreter and got some results, that increased my doubts about
Prolog being a logic language quite a lot.
Try the following:
---------------------- cut here for prolog source ---------------
all←tests :-
nl, test1(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test2(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test3(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test4(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test5(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test6(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test7(A), write(A), fail;
nl, test8(A), write(A), fail;
true.
test1(A) :- Goal = (A = 1, !), Goal.
test1(A) :- A = 2.
% Cut does not act through a metacall, it does not cut the choice
% point built by test1. Solutions for A are 1 and 2.
% Now add an alternative:
test2(A) :- Goal = (A = 1, !), (Goal; A = 2).
test2(A) :- A = 3.
% You get less for more - the only solution is 1. The same holds,
% if the call to cut is constructed in the disjunction:
test3(A) :- Goal = (A = 1, !), Goal; A = 2.
test3(A) :- A = 3.
% The C-Prolog manual states that a metacall X is "exactly the
% same as call(X)":
test4(A) :- Goal = (A = 1, !), call(Goal); A = 2.
test4(A) :- A = 3.
% Solutions are 1, 2, and 3.
% Let's try some more: we use the body of test1, but construct
% it at runtime:
test5(A) :- Metacall = (Body = (Goal = (A = 1, !), Goal), Body),
(Metacall; A = 2).
test5(A) :- A = 3.
% A sharpened cut prevents any solutions other than 1.
% You don't even need the disjunction, some brackets suffice:
test6(A) :- (Goal = (A = 1, !), Goal), true.
test6(A) :- A = 2.
% Once again, the only solution is 1.
% That's not what I would expect of a programming language often
% termed "logic".
% If you follow Moss' proposal, that cut should not act through
% metacalls, another problem arises, that he did not mention: you
% first have to define, what *is* a metacall! Or: how can an
% interpreter detect that the term it now starts to interpret is
% a metacall, and that the effect of all cuts occurring in it
% should be restricted to choice points built after starting to
% interprete this call?
% What, e.g., should be the solutions for the following
% predicates?
test7(A) :- Call = (A = 1, Cut; A = 2), Cut = !, (Call; A = 3).
test7(A) :- A = 4.
test8(A) :- Call = (A = 1, Cut = !, Cut; A = 2), (Call; A = 3).
test8(A) :- A = 4.
% While Cut in test7 is already instantiated when Call is called,
% it isn't yet in test8.
------------------- end of prolog source ------------------------
I'd like to hear
- about the results you obtain when running the tests on your
interpreter or compiler and
- your opinion on cuts in control structures.
The KA-Prolog group at Universitaet Karlsruhe / GMD Karlsruhe,
that I am a member of, has decided to restrict the use of cut to
that as a (pseudo) literal in the (arbitrarily bracketed)
conjunction that forms the body of a clause. Any attempt to use a
cut in a metacall or another language-defined control structure
will be rejected by the compiler or cause a program abort at
runtime.
As we do supply a quite comprehensive set of control structures -
including Moss' backtrack predicate -, we do not think this to be
too hard a restriction.
-- Norbert Lindenberg
Universitaet Karlsruhe
norbert@germany.csnet
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂24-Sep-86 0821 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Call for Papers
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 86 08:21:10 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 24 Sep 86 08:13:31 PDT
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 86 08:13:31 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Call for Papers
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
CALL FOR PAPERS
SECOND ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
22 - 25 June 1987
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
THE SYMPOSIUM will cover a wide range of theoretical and practi-
cal issues in Computer Science that relate to logic in a broad
sense, including algebraic and topological approaches.
Suggested (but not exclusive) topics of interest include:
abstract data types, computer theorem proving, verification, con-
currency, type theory and constructi ve mathematics, data base
theory, foundations of logic programming, program logics and se-
mantics, knowledge and belief, software specifications, logic-
based programming languages, logic in complexity theory.
Organizing Committee
K. Barwise E. Engeler A. Meyer
W. Bledsoe J. Goguen R. Parikh
A. Chandra (chair) D. Kozen G. Plotkin
E. Dijkstra Z. Manna D. Scott
Program Committee
S. Brookes D. Gries (chair) J.-P. Jouannaud A. Nerode
L. Cardelli J. Goguen R. Ladner G. Plotkin
R. Constable Y. Gurevich V. Lifschitz A. Pnueli
M. Fitting D. Harel G. Longo P. Scott
PAPER SUBMISSION. Authors should send 16 copies of a detailed
abstract (not a full paper) by 9 DECEMBER 1986 to the program
chairman:
David Gries -- LICS (607) 255-9207
Department of Computer Science gries@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Abstracts must 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. Abstracts must be no more than 2500 words.
Late abstracts or abstracts 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 be accepted.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by 30 JANUARY
1987. Accepted papers, typed on special forms for inclusion in
the symposium proceedings, will be due 30 MARCH 1987.
The symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society, Techni-
cal Committee on Mathematical Foundations of Computing and Cor-
nell University, in cooperation wi th ACM SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS.
GENERAL CHAIRMAN LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS
Ashok K. Chandra Dexter C. Kozen
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Dept. of Computer Science
P.O. Box 218 Cornell University
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 Ithaca, New York 14853
(914) 945-1752 (607) 255-9209
ashok@ibm.com kozen@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
∂24-Sep-86 1214 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA:grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 86 12:14:15 PDT
Received: from harvard.HARVARD.EDU by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Wed, 24 Sep 86 12:07:10-PDT
Received: by harvard.HARVARD.EDU; Wed, 24 Sep 86 15:04:45 EDT
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 86 15:04:45 EDT
Received: by endor.HARVARD.EDU; Wed, 24 Sep 86 15:04:42 EDT
From: grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU (Barbara Grosz)
To: LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA
Cc: planlunch←reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Amy Lansky's message of Mon 22 Sep 86 18:28:02-PDT
Subject: REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Rina Dechter
Amy --
Would you take me off the planlunch mailing list? It's a little too far
for me to come. thanks
Barbara
∂24-Sep-86 1402 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New address for Explorer hardware problem reporting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 86 14:01:51 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Wed 24 Sep 86 13:58:08-PDT
From: Acuff@Sumex-AIM.Stanford.EDU
To: ksl-explorer@Sumex-Aim
Cc: explorer-repair@Sumex-Aim
Subject: New address for Explorer hardware problem reporting
Date: 24-Sep-86 13:47:25
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2736967644@KSL-EXP-1>
In the past people have reported Explorer hardware problems directly
to me. Michael Marria is now helping out with Explorer fixing, so I've
created a new mailbox called EXPLORER-REPAIR@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA that KSL
Explorer users should send messages about broken or failing hardware.
Michael and I will both read such messages, which should result in
quicker response to Explorer hardware problems. Please continue to
contact me if you have software problems or questions.
-- Rich
∂24-Sep-86 1615 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Object-Oriented Programming Workshop
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Sep 86 16:15:38 PDT
Date: Wed 24 Sep 86 16:14:32-PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Object-Oriented Programming Workshop
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12241592236.51.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I got a recent issue of SIGPLAN Notices which is the special issue on th
Object-Oriented Programming Workshop held at IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
June 9-13. This issue covers the following topics:
Object-Oriented systems, including extensions to concurrency, knowledge
representation, graphical programming and actors (7 papares)
Concepts, including type-based versus instance-based
inheritance, integration with block-structure, and layered system
description (8 papers)
Theoretical issues, including integration with functional and
logic programming, and type theory (3 papers)
Next week, the 1986 ACM Symposium on the Object-Oriented Programming,
Systems, Languages, and Applications will be held in Portland
Marriott, Portland, Sept 29 ~ Oct. 2. I'll attend the confence. If
you are interested in the conference, please drop by my office after
the conference. I'll be back on Friday.
- Gitchang -
-------
∂25-Sep-86 0302 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:VICTOR%YKTVMZ.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Program of POPL '87
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 86 03:02:46 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 25 Sep 86 02:56:40-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 24 Sep 86 15:47:46-PDT
Received: from (VICTOR)YKTVMZ.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 09/24/86 at
17:37:07 CDT
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 86 16:25:08 cdt
From: odonnell@gargoyle.UChicago (Mike O'Donnell)
Subject: Program of POPL '87
Resent-date: 24 Sep 1986 17:42:12-EDT (Wednesday)
Resent-From: VICTOR%YKTVMZ.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Wednesday, January 21 8:00 - 9:00 possible tutorial
Session 1
9:00 - 10:30 Chair: Gilles Kahn
9:00 "Specification and Verification of Concurrent Programs
by V-Automata" Zohar Manna, Stanford University and
Weizmann Institute of Science; Amir Pnueli, Weizmann
Institute of Science
9:30 "Axioms for Concurrent Objects" Maurice Herlihy, and
Jeannette M. Wing, Carnegie-Mellon University
10:00 "Completeness and Incompleteness of Trace-Based Network
Proof Systems" Jennifer Widom, David Gries, and Fred B.
Schneider, Cornell University
Session 2
1:00 - 12:30 Chair: Marc Auslander
11:00 "Semantic Parallelization: A Practical Exercise in Abstract
Interpretation" Pierre Jouvelot, University of Paris
11:30 "CP--The Language: Definition and Operational Semantics"
Vijay A. Saraswat, Carnegie-Mellon University
12:00 "Automatic Decomposition of Scientific Programs for Parallel
Execution" J. Randall Allen, David Callahan, and Ken Kennedy,
Rice University
Session 3
2:30 - 4:30 Chair: Fernando Pereira
2:30 "Macro-by-Example: Deriving Syntactic Transformations from
their Specifications" Eugene Kohlbecker, Indiana University;
Mitchell Wand, Northeastern University
3:00 "Binding Performance at Language Design Time" Jiazhen Cai and
Robert Paige, Rutgers University
3:30 "Environments as First Class Objects" David Gelernter, Yale
University; Suresh Jagamnathan, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology; Thomas London, AT&T Bell Laboratories
4:00 "Constraint Logic Programming" Joxan Jaffar and Jean-Louis
Lassez, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Thursday, January 22 8:00 - 9:00 possible tutorial
Session 4
9:00 - 10:30 Chair: Alan Mycroft
9:00 "Strictness Analysis and Denotational Abstract Interpretation"
Flemming Nielson, Institute of Electronic Systems, Denmark
9:30 "Compiling Strictness into Streams" Cordelia V. Hall and
David S. Wise, Indiana University
10:00 "On Strictness and its Analysis" Tsung-Min Kuo and Prateek
Mishra, SUNY at Stony Brook
Session 5
11:00 - 12:30 Chair: Michael J. O'Donnell
11:00 "A Logic for Partially Specified Data Structures"
M. Drew Moshier and William C. Rounds, University of Michigan
11:30 "An Improvement to Bottom-up Tree Pattern Matching"
David R. Chase, Rice University
12:00 "LUSTRE: A Declarative Language for Real-Time Programming"
P. Caspi, D. Pilaud, N. Halbwachs, and J. A. Plaice,
University of Grenoble
Session 6
2:30 - 4:30 Chair: Neil Jones
2:30 "Appraising Fairness in Distributed Languages" Krzysztof Apt,
Universite Paris, Nissim Francez, Shmuel Katz, Technion -
Israel Institute of Technology
3:00 "Concurrent Transition System Semantics of Process Networks"
Eugene W. Stark, SUNY at Stony Brook
3:30 "Semantics for Concurrency without Powerdomains" Frank J.
Oles, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
4:00 "Full Abstraction of a Real-Time Denotational Semantics
for an OCCAM-like Language" R. Gerth, C. Huizing, W.P. de
Roever, Eindhoven University of Technology
Friday, January 23 8:00 - 9:00 possible tutorial
Session 7
9:00 - 10:30 Chair: Edmund Clarke
9:00 "Computable Values can be Classical" Val Breazu-Tannen, Albert
R. Meyer, M.I.T.
9:30 "Skinny and Fleshy Failures of Relative Completeness"
Tim Fernando and Daniel Leivant, Carnegie Mellon
University
10:00 "Empty Types in Polymorphic Lambda Calculus" Albert R. Meyer,
MIT Lab for Computer Science; John C. Mitchell, AT&T Bell
Labs, and Richard Statman, Carnegie-Mellon University
Session 8
11:00 - 12:30 Chair: Harald Ganzinger
11:00 "Scheduling Arithmetic and Load Operations in Parallel with No
Spilling" David Bernstein, Technion-Israel Institute of
Technology; Jeffrey M. Jaffe, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
and Michael Rodeh, IBM Israel Science Center
11:30 "Computation of Aliases and Support Sets" Anne Neirynck and
Prakash Panangaden, Cornell University; Alan J.
Demers, Xerox Parc, Palo Alto
12:00 "A Realistic Compiler Generator Based on High-level Semantics"
Peter Lee and Uwe F. Pleban, University of Michigan
Session 9
2:30 - 4:00 Chair: Thomas Reps
2:30 "Extending the Record Facility in Conventional Programming
Languages for Distributed and Parallel Programming" David R.
Cheriton and Michael E. Wolf, Stanford University
3:00 "Views: A Way for Pattern Matching to Cohabit with Data
Abstraction" Philip Wadler, Oxford University
3:30 "A Calculus for Assignments in Higher-Order Languages"
Matthias Felleisen and Daniel P. Friedman, Indiana
University
∂25-Sep-86 0611 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLB of the year
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 86 06:11:33 PDT
Date: Thu 25 Sep 86 06:07:21-PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: First AFLB of the year
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12241743844.8.PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
This is my last message as AFLB coordinator. Alex Schaffer will
take over starting this quarter, although the transition won't
be instantaneous.
The first AFLB of the year, on Thursday, October 2, will be an
informal, learn-names-and-faces, welcome-back-Don-Knuth,
catch-up-on-the-latest-results-and-rumors gathering.
See you there.
--Oren
***** Time and place: October 2, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. Electronic
mail: schaffer@sushi.stanford.edu phone: (415) 723-4532.
Contributions are wanted and welcome. Very few time slots for this
academic year have been filled. The file
[SUSHI]<schaffer.aflb>aflb.bboard contains more information about
future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
Alejandro Schaffer
-------
∂25-Sep-86 1016 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu tomorrow's meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 86 10:16:26 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 25 Sep 86 10:09:36 PDT
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 86 10:09:36 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: tomorrow's meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Moshe has offered to talk about the result that says a simple-chain
recursion is monadic iff the underlying language is regular
(due to Beeri & ???)
The meeting is 11AM today, if anybody is around.
--jeff
∂25-Sep-86 1105 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #54
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 86 11:05:46 PDT
Date: Wednesday, September 24, 1986 6:12PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #54
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 25 Sep 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 54
Today's Topics:
Query - DBMS Examples,
Implementation - Cut & Metacall,
LP Library - GProlog Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 86 14:51 EDT
From: Tim Finin <Tim@cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: Prolog DBMS
I got the following request from a colleague who is
teaching our database course. I have a very small
example which shows how to do a few DB-type things
in Prolog, but I suspect there are much better things
around. Does anyone have a suggestion?
Thank you.
-- Tim.
From: Susan Davidson <Susan@upenn> on Thu 28 Aug 1986 at 11:47
Subj: Prolog and Databasese
Tim,
I am trying to find interesting software for the database course,
and was wondering what we had in the way of a "prolog database"
type system. Do we have anything like this (you might consider
it a Prolog knowledge base system)? Or is it enough for novices
to just write little Prolog programs and write the assertions to
stable storage?
-- SBD
------------------------------
Date: Wed 24 Sep 86 10:12:37-PDT
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Cut and metacall
I think Norbert Lindenberg is reading too much into the results
he got from various call/metacall/disjunction/cut tests in
C-Prolog. Some of the differences he got are just bugs in the
way cut is handled in some complicated situations. These bugs
could be solved in a systematic way by modifying the
implementation of cut in C-Prolog, but nobody has got around to
doing it.
The basic question about metacall is whether it is like a macro
call (textual replacement) or like a call to an anonymous procedure.
I prefer the latter. Then is clear that cuts in the term the
metacalled variable is bound to should have no effect outside the
metacall. Different behavior in C-Prolog is just buggy, not a proof
of some deep conceptual differences.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Wed 24 Sep 86 18:04:52-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: GProlog source
[cwr]
There is a copy of Barry Brachman's graphics for the
Sun that was announced in V4 No.52 under
SCORE:PS:<Prolog>GProlog.C
If anyone cannot FT the file, send a note to Prolog-Request.
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂25-Sep-86 1351 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa No PLANLUNCH next week.
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Sep 86 13:48:28 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Thu, 25 Sep 86 12:43:43-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA08202; Thu,
25 Sep 86 12:44:18 PDT
Date: Thu 25 Sep 86 12:44:14-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: No PLANLUNCH next week.
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 25-Sep-86 12:44:14.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
There will be no PLANLUNCH next week.
Volunteers for giving PLANLUNCH are now being solicited. We are in
particular need of October speakers, so those of you who are willing,
please let me know (and a preferred date if possible). (However,
there will be no seminar on Oct.13 (yom kippur)).
Also, I have recently decoupled the planlunch mailing list from
the SRI aic-staff list, so those of you who would like their name
removed from either the usual distribution list or the reminder list
or both should let me know.
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂25-Sep-86 1724 JJW Mt St Coax fixed
To: MJH-LispM@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Mt St Coax, the 3600 in MJH 360, has been fixed, after being
down for several weeks. The main problem was a broken power
supply in the processor.
∂26-Sep-86 0957 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Video
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 09:57:10 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 09:50:00-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Video
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Some of you have heard about the 7-minute CSLI video tape that is
being made for Stanford's Development Office. The tape will give an
overview of CSLI's goals and research activities, emphasizing its
uniqueness as a multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional center.
It will be used as part of the training program for development
officers and may be shown by them to potential donors.
Roger Williams of Stanford's Instructional TV Network has been putting
the tape together. On Monday he will be at Ventura to shoot some
footage of informal meetings -- people meeting on the deck or in the
lounge, for example. These will be used as background while a
narrator is talking, so only the visual part of the scene will be
used. He would like to be able to film any meetings that happen to be
going on when he's around or to ask people to form what will appear to
be a meeting if no meetings are taking place.
I hope you'll be willing to take part if he asks you. The film
should be very helpful in our fundraising efforts, and, who knows,
it may be your first step towards Hollywood!
Thanks.
Betsy
-------
∂26-Sep-86 1346 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Expenditure Statements
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 13:46:36 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 13:45:40-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Expenditure Statements
To: AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12242089423.27.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Many of you are very tardy in returning monthly expenditure statements which
have been checked and sent to you for signature. Since we need to refer
to the statements for problem solving or to answer questions, it is important
that they be signed and returned promptly, along with any questions you may
have. I have just pulled a file of statements to check on a couple of items
only to find that the last expenditure statement in the file is April 1986.
This happens to me time and time again, and it is extremely frustrating to
have put the question or problem aside while I try to run down the statements.
Please do sign and return the original statements within a day or two of
receipt. You also receive a Xerox copy of the statements which you may retain
for going over at your convenience. We can always make a correction at a later
date if you find something which you think is not correct.
PLEASE!!!
Betty
-------
∂26-Sep-86 1427 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA XPD, a new seminar
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 14:27:36 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 26 Sep 86 14:24:35-PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 14:24:01-PDT
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: XPD, a new seminar
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, su-etc@SU-SCORE.ARPA, aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
paco@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12242096405.32.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It's about expander graphs, some of the underlying math, and a lot about
applications of expander graphs in computer science, and some related concepts.
XPD will meet Wednesdays, at 2:15pm, in MJH352. The first, constituting
session will be next Wednesday, October 1. I'll distribute some material
at this meeting. If you are interested, come
and/or send me a message. I'll set up a mailing list xpd@navajo.
-ernst
-------
∂26-Sep-86 1640 CAROL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bye!
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 16:40:05 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 16:34:54-PDT
From: Carol Kiparsky <CAROL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Bye!
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I'll be taking off for the East Coast over the weekend, returning
October 12. If anyone needs help with dandelions while I'm gone,
please contact Yi-Chin Lee (LEEY@CSLI), Doug Jones (JONES@CSLI),
or, if absolutely necessary, Brad Horak (BRAD@CSLI). Doug, our new
director of student consultants, is an old dlion hand, and Yi-Chin
also knows a great deal about them.
If you are a newcomer who can't wait to get your hands on one of
these beasts, Yi-Chin will be happy to give you an introductory
tutorial. Just send him a message. Or contact me in two weeks.
-Carol
-------
∂26-Sep-86 2239 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Expenditure Statements
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 22:37:53 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 22:15:56-PDT
From: Gene H. Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Expenditure Statements
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA, AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12242089423.27.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Phone: 415/723-3124
Message-ID: <12242182313.11.GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
What's really frustrating for us, Betty, is that it takes so long for
those statements to reach us. Isn't it possible to have an on-line
system where we can find out our financial situation instantaneously?
You must be overwhelmed with trivial questions. Let's see if there is
some way to automate the system.
GENE
-------
∂26-Sep-86 2311 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sunday Brunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Sep 86 23:11:48 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 23:04:39-PDT
From: Gene H. Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sunday Brunch
To: AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Phone: 415/723-3124
Message-ID: <12242191183.11.GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I would be very pleased if you came to the Sunday Brunch for our new
students. It'll be at 11 am at my house which is at 576 Constanzo on
the Campus. It's near Santa Ynez and Mayfield, down the hill from the
President's house.
This is one of the few opportunities the new students have a chance to
meet the faculty and I'm sure they'll be pleased to see you ( as will
I).
GENE
PS If you need further directions, call me at 323-0105.
PPS In case of rain, we'll have our brunch at the department.
-------
∂27-Sep-86 1708 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Committees
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Sep 86 17:08:10 PDT
Date: Sat 27 Sep 86 17:06:49-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Committees
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12242388186.16.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is the latest list of the CSD committees and who is on them. The
student bureaucrats should begin thinking about student members of
these committees as appropriate and let me know. Some adjustments have
been made since the last time this list was promulgated. Please let me
know if you see any further adjustments that might be needed.
I want everyone to know how very much their efforts on these committees
is appreciated by all of us in the department and certainly by the
university. Suggestions for improving our efficiency in ways that
would reduce committee workload are eagerly solicited. I also want
us to do everything we can to see that the work that is necessary is
evenly and fairly distributed among us. Thanks again. -Nils
PhD Admissions: Decides which students admitted to CSD PhD program.
Genesereth (Chair), Golub, Knuth, Mayr, Pratt, Ullman, Pollack (SRI),
Gabriel (Lucid), Roberts (DEC), Tenenbaum (Schlumberger)
Comprehensive Exam: Conceives, administers and grades the Comp Exams.
Beginning in '85/'86 we had one committee do both exams during the
year. That seemed to work well, and I suggest we do the same this
next year.
Knuth (Chair), Pratt, Manna, Papadimitriou, Shoham, Baskett (DEC),
Gabriel (Lucid)
Programming Project Committee: Supervises the administration of the PhD
programming projects in collaboration with individual faculty members
who are responsible for each of the individual projects.
Membership still to be decided (volunteers welcome).
Colloquium: Organizes and introduces speakers for CS500.
An easy task since so many potential speakers visit the campus anyway.
Autumn: Floyd
Winter: Cheriton
Spring: Gupta
Curriculum: Decides about CSD courses.
Mayr (Chair), Lantz, Reges, Cheriton, Guibas
Facilities: Recommends plans and policies for CSD computer facilities.
Earnest (Chair), Dienstbier, Rindfleisch, Buchanan, Cheriton,
Guibas, Lantz
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. Winograd (Chair),
Cheriton, Lantz, Papadimitriou, Pereira (SRI)
MS Program: Decides which students admitted to MS program. Recommends plans
and policies for MS program. Advises MS students.
Oliger (Chair), Gupta, Manna, McCarthy, Wiederhold, Reges, Shoham, McCluskey
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, Rosenbloom
CSD Undergraduate Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Arranges for advising students.
Ullman (Chair), Linton, Reges, Golub, Wolfstein
Math/Comp. Sci. Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students.
Clancey (Chair), Reges, Herriot, Floyd
Computer Systems Engrg. Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students.
Hennessy (Chair), Reges, McCluskey, Ungar
Symbolic Systems Major: Recommends plans and policies for the major.
Advises students.
Rosenbloom (Chair), Winograd, Reges, Nilsson, Clancey
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, Winograd
First Year PhD Student Advisor:
Nilsson
-------
∂28-Sep-86 1536 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tuesday lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Sep 86 15:36:45 PDT
Date: Sun 28 Sep 86 15:35:24-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tuesday lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12242633686.12.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We'll resume our regular CSD faculty lunches on Tuesday, Sept. 30 at
12:15 in MJH 146. I'm looking forward to us all getting together again.
I thought it would be interesting to begin by considering the question
"What I would like to see accomplished in the department during '86/'87."
Bring appetites and aspirations! -Nils
-------
∂29-Sep-86 1606 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 86 16:06:05 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 29 Sep 86 15:48:58 PDT
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 86 15:48:58 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
I'd like to meet Thursday at 11AM in our usual room, 301 MJH.
The subject will be the state of the NAIL! front end.
We ought to plan for regular meetings this quarter.
Would those planning to attend regularly send me mail
with a schedule of available times.
---jeff
∂29-Sep-86 1632 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kudos
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 86 16:32:00 PDT
Date: Mon 29 Sep 86 16:30:07-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Kudos
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, eustis@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12242905791.41.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It's my pleasure to brag about two of our faculty members. Gene Golub
has just learned that he will be awarded an honorary doctorate (around
January 1987) from the Scientific, Technological and Medical
University of Grenoble.
George Dantzig received, at the University of Kent, Canterbury on
September 11, 1986, the "Silver Medal" of the Operational Research
Society of Great Britain. The Silver Medal is that society's
highest honor.
Congratulations to Gene and to George. We are all very proud of you!
(Anne, can you see that a copy of this msg gets sent to the Campus
Report?)
-Nils
-------
∂29-Sep-86 1909 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Computer Cost Centers, Policies, and Free Computers
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Sep 86 19:09:15 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 29 Sep 86 19:07:55-PDT
Date: 29 Sep 86 1908 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Computer Cost Centers, Policies, and Free Computers
To: AC@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Here is some information on computer facilities planning, offers of free
computers, and two proposed departmental policies on computer use. Comments
will be invited at the Faculty Meeting on September 30 and the policy
statements will be offered for departmental approval.
COMPUTER COST CENTERS. CSD-CF is taking steps to reduce the operating
costs of computer cost centers. These steps will be reflected in lower
overall charges for cost-center computers.
(1) More internal hardware maintenance will be used instead of contract
maintenance, with typical savings of about one-half the cost.
(2) Some services that have been "free" will be charged for, such as data
storage on Labrea and local Ethernet services.
Some administrative changes are planned to better allocate costs among users.
(3) Connect time charges will be reduced at the expense of compute time and
disk storage charges.
(4) Operating costs and computer usage will be tracked more regularly so that
massive retroactive billings such as the one that just occurred will be
avoided.
New cost center rates reflecting these changes will be announced before they
take effect, most likely by the beginning of 1987.
"FREE" COMPUTERS. At least three computers are up for grabs.
1. The DEC KA10 CPU that is part of SAIL is no longer needed and could be
made available to any group that wants it. It comes with BBN paging box
suitable for running Tenex but has no main memory. Its market value
appears to be negligible except possibly as a trade-in.
2. A local person offers to donate an H-P 9825 workstation with four 8"
floppy drives and thermal printer to any group at Stanford that wants it.
It was reportedly purchased new in 1979 for $23k.
3. We have a tentative offer of a new Toshiba G8O50 computer, which is
a four-processor system running a version of Unix System V, nominally
rated at 18 MIPS. It is being considered as a possible Unix server for
the department.
Anyone who wishes to know more about any of these machines may contact
Les Earnest.
COMPUTER USE POLICY. The department needs to have a fairly clear policy
on who may use its computers, primarily for legal and tax reasons.
The proposed policy given below was reviewed in an earlier form by the
Facilities Committee and revised in accordance with remarks received there.
It has since been reviewed by the Provost's Office and further revised to
conform with university policies.
PROPOSED POLICY. Computers operated by components of the Department of
Computer Science may be used only by Stanford employees, visiting scholars
and students in direct support of teaching, research and administrative
needs of the University. The following are the only exceptions and must
be specifically approved in advance and at least annually thereafter by
the Department Chairman:
(1) others may be granted access to computers if it is required in support
of a contract with Stanford or for research collaboration with a
Stanford employee or visiting scholar;
(2) access may be granted to agents of nonprofit scientific societies
whose activities complement and enhance those of the Department of
Computer Science;
(3) vendors that maintain valuable software on departmental machines
may be granted free computer accounts to carry out this work only;
(4) in cases where it will benefit the department to have direct
communication with certain individuals, they may be granted free
computer accounts for the purpose of sending or receiving electronic
mail only;
(5) employees, students, and visiting scholars who are writing scholarly
books may be granted the use of computer facilities for this purpose
on a case-by-case basis and they shall pay the costs of such use.
In keeping with University policy, the resources and facilities of the
Department may not be used for non-University purposes except in a purely
incidental way.
STUDENT USE OF SUSHI. It has been a recent departmental policy to provide
accounts on SUSHI to any CSD students who request them. Nearly all
students have opened such accounts, which has substantially reduced the
load on SAIL, SCORE and the LOTS machines but has caused SUSHI to be
overloaded much of the time.
A number of students are working on sponsored research. Given that SUSHI
is paid for out of departmental unrestricted funds, the department is
effectively subsidizing sponsored research. This has two bad side-
effects: (1) it makes the load on SUSHI greater than it needs to be,
yielding poor response times and (2) it lowers utilization of the cost
center computers, which causes their charge rates to be higher in the
long term.
It is proposed that SUSHI accounts normally be provided only for
unsupported students. Those working on sponsored projects will be
expected to use project computers or cost-center machines for their work.
Exceptions would be granted on a case-by-case basis.
Les Earnest
∂30-Sep-86 0852 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 08:52:03 PDT
Date: Tue 30 Sep 86 08:39:57-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243082346.13.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a general faculty meeting today (September 30) at 2:30 in
the conference room in Bldg. 170.
Agenda Items:
Approval of Degree Candidates
Staff Reports including review of CSD financial situation
Review of CSD recent and planned future new faculty
Review of CSD new PhD student policy
Review of CSD-CF situation and plans. Review of CSD score/sushi policy.
Review of progress on getting ready for the UG major
Update on committees
Resolution of thanks to Harry Llull
Here is a map to Bldg. 170.
----- ---------------
| 10 |
| Pres |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
| *170 | +
| | +
| | +
----- ----------------- + ----------
+++++++++++++++++
160 460
Poly Sci CSD
>>>>>Follow the +'s to the *
-------
∂30-Sep-86 0855 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 08:55:17 PDT
Date: Tue 30 Sep 86 08:42:23-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243082788.13.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting today (September 30) following the
general faculty meeting in the conference room in Bldg. 170.
Agenda Items:
Promotion of Oussama Khatib to sr. research associate
Review of possible promotions: Cheriton, Lantz, Oliger, Winograd
Consideration of transfer of Winograd fully into CS
-------
∂30-Sep-86 0916 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 09:16:51 PDT
Date: Tue 30 Sep 86 09:09:57-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243087807.13.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
One more pointer on the location of the conference room in Bldg. 170 ----
it's in the lower level. See you there!
-Anne
-------
∂30-Sep-86 0919 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Tuesday lunch]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 09:19:26 PDT
Date: Tue 30 Sep 86 09:13:58-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Tuesday lunch]
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243088537.13.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Today's the day for the first CSD Tuesday Lunch in the series. Come one -
come all!
-Anne
-----
---------------
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 28-Sep-86 15:35:24
Date: Sun 28 Sep 86 15:35:24-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tuesday lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12242633686.12.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We'll resume our regular CSD faculty lunches on Tuesday, Sept. 30 at
12:15 in MJH 146. I'm looking forward to us all getting together again.
I thought it would be interesting to begin by considering the question
"What I would like to see accomplished in the department during '86/'87."
Bring appetites and aspirations! -Nils
-------
-------
∂30-Sep-86 0945 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Undergraduate mailing list
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 09:44:58 PDT
Date: Tue 30 Sep 86 09:41:53-PDT
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Undergraduate mailing list
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Secretaries@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Jacks Hall, Stanford; +1 (415) 725-5555
Message-ID: <12243093620.33.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We now have a mailing list for CS undergraduates that is maintained
through PEDIT. To send a message to the undergrads, send mail to
either:
Undergrads@Score
or Undergraduates@Score
After midnight tonight, the Students@Score list will go to the Undergrads,
as well as to the PHD, MSAI, and MSCS students.
-------
∂30-Sep-86 0947 CLT Seminar on program transformations and parallel Lisp
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-events@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
AAP@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Speaker: James M. Boyle, Argonne National Laboratory
Time: Monday, October 6, 4pm
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks (Stanford Computer Science Dept)
Abstract:
Deriving Parallel Programs
from Pure LISP Specifications
by Program Transformation
Dr. James M. Boyle
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL 60439-4844
boyle@anl-mcs.arpa
How can one implement a "dusty deck" pure Lisp program on global-
memory parallel computers? Fortunately, pure Lisp programs have a declara-
tive interpretation, which protects their decks from becoming too dusty!
This declarative interpretation means that a pure Lisp program is not
over-specified in the direction of sequential execution. Thus there is
hope to detect parallelism automatically in pure Lisp programs.
In this talk I shall describe a stepwise refinement of pure Lisp pro-
grams that leads to a parallel implementation. From this point of view,
the pure Lisp program is an abstract specification, which program transfor-
mations can refine in several steps to a parallel program. I shall
describe some of the transformations--correctness preserving rewrite rules
--used to carry out the implementation.
An important property of a parallel program is whether it can
deadlock. I shall discuss a number of the design decisions involved in the
refinement and their role in preserving the correctness of the transformed
program, especially with regard to deadlock.
Implementing a transformational refinement often leads to interesting
insights about programming. I shall discuss some of these insights,
including one about the compilation of recursive programs, and some that
suggest ways to systematically relax the "purity" requirement on the Lisp
program being implemented.
We have used this approach to implement a moderately large pure Lisp
program (1300 lines, 42 functions) on several parallel machines, including
the Denelcor HEP (r.i.p.), the Encore Multimax, the Sequent Balance 8000,
and the Alliant FX/8. I shall discuss some measurements of the performance
of this program, which has achieved a speedup of 12.5 for 16 processors on
realistic data, and some of the optimizations used to obtain this perfor-
mance.
Oh, yes, and by the way, the transformations produce a parallel pro-
gram in FORTRAN!
∂30-Sep-86 0952 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Seminar on program transformations and parallel Lisp
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 09:51:41 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 30 Sep 86 09:49:56-PDT
Date: 30 Sep 86 0947 PDT
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Seminar on program transformations and parallel Lisp
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-events@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
AAP@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Speaker: James M. Boyle, Argonne National Laboratory
Time: Monday, October 6, 4pm
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks (Stanford Computer Science Dept)
Abstract:
Deriving Parallel Programs
from Pure LISP Specifications
by Program Transformation
Dr. James M. Boyle
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL 60439-4844
boyle@anl-mcs.arpa
How can one implement a "dusty deck" pure Lisp program on global-
memory parallel computers? Fortunately, pure Lisp programs have a declara-
tive interpretation, which protects their decks from becoming too dusty!
This declarative interpretation means that a pure Lisp program is not
over-specified in the direction of sequential execution. Thus there is
hope to detect parallelism automatically in pure Lisp programs.
In this talk I shall describe a stepwise refinement of pure Lisp pro-
grams that leads to a parallel implementation. From this point of view,
the pure Lisp program is an abstract specification, which program transfor-
mations can refine in several steps to a parallel program. I shall
describe some of the transformations--correctness preserving rewrite rules
--used to carry out the implementation.
An important property of a parallel program is whether it can
deadlock. I shall discuss a number of the design decisions involved in the
refinement and their role in preserving the correctness of the transformed
program, especially with regard to deadlock.
Implementing a transformational refinement often leads to interesting
insights about programming. I shall discuss some of these insights,
including one about the compilation of recursive programs, and some that
suggest ways to systematically relax the "purity" requirement on the Lisp
program being implemented.
We have used this approach to implement a moderately large pure Lisp
program (1300 lines, 42 functions) on several parallel machines, including
the Denelcor HEP (r.i.p.), the Encore Multimax, the Sequent Balance 8000,
and the Alliant FX/8. I shall discuss some measurements of the performance
of this program, which has achieved a speedup of 12.5 for 16 processors on
realistic data, and some of the optimizations used to obtain this perfor-
mance.
Oh, yes, and by the way, the transformations produce a parallel pro-
gram in FORTRAN!
∂30-Sep-86 1132 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:THEORYNET@IBM.COM Cornell Day
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Sep 86 11:32:33 PDT
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 30 Sep 86 11:22:28-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 30 Sep 86 11:06:47-PDT
Date: Fri 26 Sep 86 13:08:30-EDT
From: S Landau <MATH.S-LANDAU%KLA.WESLYN@Wesleyan.Bitnet>
Subject: Cornell Day
Resent-date: 30 Sep 1986 09:38:08-EDT (Tuesday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
**************************************************************
PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT
**************************************************************
CORNELL DAY AT WESLEYAN
starring
BOB CONSTABLE
JOHN GILBERT
JURIS HARTMANIS
DEXTER KOZEN
FRED SCHNEIDER
SAM TOUEG
Friday afternoon/all day Saturday May 1-2, 1987
Hosted by Alan Cobham, Dan Dougherty, Sorin Istrail
and Susan Landau
For further information, contact Susan Landau
203-347-9411 x2484
or LANDAU%WESLYN.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
****************************************************************
Second in a series of
computer science research gatherings at Wesleyan
****************************************************************
-------
∂01-Oct-86 0903 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 09:03:34 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 08:57:16-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12243347640.17.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The first plenary session of AFLB will take place on Thursday
2 October in MJH352 at 12:30PM. This will be an informal meeting
whose main purpose is to make the perfect bipartite matching between
names and faces common knowledge in constant time.
Next week at the same time we have the first regular seminar; an
abstract follows.
The Deterministic Coin Flipping Problem - A Survey of Results
Dr. Cynthia Dwork
IBM Almaden Research Center
9 October, 12:30PM
In the context of a distributed system a global coin is a
``sufficiently unbiased'' source of randomness visible to
``sufficiently many'' processors. In 1983 Rabin observed that
Byzantine agreement can be obtained in expected time O(T(n)),
independent of the number of faulty processors, where T(n) is the
number of rounds of communication required to achieve a global coin
among n processors of which up to a linear fraction may be faulty.
Rabin's result offered the possibility, soon realized, of beating the
lower bound of t+1 rounds required by any deterministic algorithm to
reach agreement in the presence of t faults. At the same time a
similar idea enabled Ben-Or to obtain a randomized asynchronous
agreement algorithm, beating the impossibility result for
deterministic algorithms in that model. This talk surveys work of the
past 3 or 4 years on the problem of achieving a global coin. Several
open questions will be raised.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: schaffer@sushi.stanford.edu phone: (415) 723-4532.)
Contributions are wanted and welcome. Very few time slots for this
academic year have been filled. The file
[SUSHI]<schaffer.aflb>aflb.bboard contains more information about
future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
Alejandro Schaffer
-------
∂01-Oct-86 0955 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 09:55:34 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 09:00:27-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243348220.31.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We ran out of time yesterday and I told Nils I would send the
Forum and Fellowship reports on line.
FORUM:
We had a record breaking 1985/86 -- the Forum brought in $1,024,598.
GSB is number 1 with $1,300,000; Solid State is 3 with $665,000.
Futures Fund has a total of $373,369.
We now have 76 members: Arthur Andersen, CSK Research Institute,
Rolm-Milspec have joined, and we have a 99% commitment from Sun
Microsystems. Lotus and Ericsson dropped.
The 19th Annual Meeting is scheduled for February 3/4/5. Terry Winograd,
Program Chairman, will be contacting the faculty in the near
future regarding the program. We are contacting the students regarding
their resumes for the Forum Resume Book, and I would appreciate your
encouraging your students to participate.
FELLOWSHIPS:
We have 29 new students and 14 1/3 fellowships for them.
REUNION:
The CSD/CSL Reunion is scheduled for March 26/27/28.
Carolyn Tajnai
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1026 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Request for new student information
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 10:26:41 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Oct 86 09:41:56-PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 09:40:58-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Request for new student information
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
This is a repeat. To those of you who have already responded, Thank you.
Others please respond immediately so we can get the information to the
students. --t
--------
The assignment of new students to assistantships this year is being
handled differently, as part of our revision of the PhD program. Part of
the new requirements recently approved by the faculty included the
concept of a research mentor for all entering PhD students. The idea is
to have a more cohesive system for getting all new students involved in
some kind of research, regardless of how they are financially supported.
We want them to be associated with a research group that includes
experienced students as well as faculty and/or full-time researchers.
The connection of the student with the group may be in the form of a RA,
where a student is doing a substantial amount of research work with that
group. It may also be that the student is supported by the group, but
devoting primary effort to studying for the Comprehensive Exam. In
still other cases, there will be no money involved (e.g., the student
has a fellowship, or is being supported by departmental funds), but the
group will provide facilities and connections.
It is not assumed that the student's eventual research work will be with
the initial group or faculty member; this is considered a one-year
initial period for finding out what research here is like. On the other
hand, we expect that many students will initially select a group in
their interest area and end up doing research within it.
Soon after the beginning of the quarter, the new students will be given
a packet describing the potential mentors and groups, and on the basis
of this will seek out positions. After an initial period of open
student-initiated matching, we will more actively help in linking up
those who are still unattached. You are of course free to take on as
few or as many new people as you want.
In order to implement this new system, we need the following
information for each potential GROUP (i.e., some faculty members may
have several distinct research groups, and the student should be
associated with a particular one). Mentors can be research associates
as well as regular faculty.
1. Names of faculty member(s) or research associate(s) in charge.
If several are involved, indicate which, if any, is primary.
2. What is the group called?
This does not need to be an official name, just a unique identifier.
3. What is the research?
We need more than a single sentence - a short paragraph is fine. In
the absence of better information we will include your current entry
in the departmental research summary.
4. Funding sources of the group
If you can include the actual grant/contract titles, that is better, but
just names of the granting agencies will do.
5. Structure of the group
Just a few words -- e.g., "Programming is done by small groups (2-3)
working together. The whole group meets once a week to discuss project
details, and the students participate in the weekly BAGLUNCH seminar."
6. How many (paid and unpaid) slots might you have for new students
7. Names of one or two senior students in the group to whom new
students can talk.
This is extremely useful and can save your having to spend time
answering a lot of the stray questions.
We'll compile your answers and distribute them to the students. If we
don't get anything from you by the first Wed. of the quarter (Oct. 1)
the default will be that you are NOT INTERESTED in working with any
incoming students this year.
By the way, the folders of the incoming students are available in Victoria's
office. Feel free to drop by and peruse them at your convenience, at
which time you can give her the answers to the above, if you don't want
to type them.
Thanks for your help. --t
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1654 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting/paper received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 16:51:04 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 1 Oct 86 16:44:52 PDT
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 86 16:44:52 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting/paper received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
There may be some confusion about the meeting time.
We are going to meet 11AM Thursday (tomorrow), although I am trying
to arrange another "normal" meeting time.
The meeting is in 301 MJH, and we're going to talk about the front end.
Paper received:
"Processing Recusrion in Database Systems"
Y. E. Ioaninidis, UCB/ERL M86/69, Berkeley.
This is Yannis' thesis.
---jeff
∂01-Oct-86 1809 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA I'm going away for a week.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 18:09:22 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 18:05:12-PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: I'm going away for a week.
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12243447389.52.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I'm going to be in Ohio all of next week so if you want anything
done before I go you'd better speek now or wait.
Details in my finger.plan
Rice.
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1818 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Calendar, October 2, No. 1
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 18:18:03 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 17:14:06-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Calendar, October 2, No. 1
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
October 2, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 1
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, October 9, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Meditations on a Hobby Horse or the
Conference Room Roots of Artistic Form," by E. H. Gombrich
Discussion led by Geoff Nunberg (Nunberg.pa@xerox)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Situations and Semantic Paradox
Trailer Classroom John Etchemendy and Jon Barwise (barwise@csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Thursday activities will be similar to last year's activities.
TINLunches will continue. Each week a member of CSLI will lead a
lunchtime discussion on a paper which will be available ahead of time
at the front desk of Ventura Hall. You may bring a bag lunch, or, if
you arrive early, lunch may be bought at Ventura Hall. Thursday
seminars will be given by the research groups at 2:15 every Thursday.
However, no regular colloquia are planned for autumn and winter
quarters. Special colloquia will be announced from time to time.
The first CSLI Monthly of the new academic year comes out on October
16.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading is E. H. Gombrich's essay
Meditations on a Hobby Horse or the Roots of Artistic Form
Discussion led by Geoff Nunberg
October 9, 1986
This is a classic paper in art criticism in which E. H. Gombric
formulates certain basic questions about the nature of representation,
in terms that are surprisingly relevant to a number of strands in
current CSLI research. He takes as his occasion a child's hobby
horse--a broomstick with a crudely carved head--and asks after its
relation to horses and horsehood. In his words: "How should we address
it? Should we describe it as an `image of a horse'?...A portrayal of
a horse? Surely not. A substitute for a horse? That it is." He goes
on to suggest that the "substitute" relation, which depends more on
functional than on formal similarities, that underlies representation
in general.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Situations and Semantic Paradox
John Etchemendy and Jon Barwise
October 9, 1986
This seminar will be about the Liar paradox and its implications for
the foundations of semantics. It is based on our recently completed
book, "The Liar: an essay on truth and circularity."
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1905 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Reception Reminder
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 19:05:23 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 19:02:54-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Reception Reminder
To: new-phd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, new-mscs@SU-SCORE.ARPA, new-msai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, students@SU-SCORE.ARPA, staff@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12243457892.10.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Just a reminder--tomorrow (Thursday) is the CSD reception to welcome
all of our new students. It will be held at the CSD-Psychology patio
(behind Jacks) from 4-5:30 pm.
Hope to see you all there!
Victoria
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1928 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 19:28:29 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Wed, 1 Oct 86 19:24:17-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA04569; Wed,
1 Oct 86 11:46:44 PDT
Date: Wed 1 Oct 86 11:46:40-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 1-Oct-86 11:46:40.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROBABILISTIC PREDICTION THROUGH AUTOMATIC CLASS FORMATION
Peter Cheeseman (CHEESEMAN@AMES-PLUTO)
NASA Ames Research Center
11:00 AM, MONDAY, October 6
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
A probabilistic expert system is a set of probabilistic connections
(e.g. conditional or joint probabilities) between the known variables.
These connections can be used to make (conditional) probabilistic
predictions for variables of interest given any combination of known
variable values. Such systems suffer a major computational problem---
once the probabilstic connections form a complex inter-connected
network, the cost of performing the necessary probability calculations
becomes excessive. One approach to reducing the computational
complexity is to introduce new "variables" (hidden causes or dummy
nodes) that decouple the interactions between the variables. Judea
Pearl has described an algorithm for introducing sufficient dummy
nodes to create a tree structure, provided the probabilistic
connections satisfy certain (strong) restrictions. This talk will
describe a procedure for finding only the significant "hidden causes",
that not only lead to a computationally simple procedure, but subsume
all the significant interactions between the variables.
-------
∂01-Oct-86 1945 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS 300 Department Lecture Series
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Oct 86 19:45:53 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Oct 86 19:44:30-PDT
Date: 01 Oct 86 1945 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CS 300 Department Lecture Series
To: ac@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Leaders of research projects who would like to interest new students in
their work are invited to give a talk in the CS 300 lecture series, which
occurs on Thursdays from 2:45 to 4:00 pm in Terman 156. Please send me
your topic and a list of any Thursdays for which you have prior
commitments.
∂02-Oct-86 0829 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU seminar in the philosophy of linguistics
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Oct 86 08:28:55 PDT
Date: Thu 2 Oct 86 08:22:29-PDT
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: seminar in the philosophy of linguistics
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
As announced in an earlier message in this space, I will be leading a
seminar in the philosophy of linguistics this quarter. The listed
time for it is 10-11:50, but it turns out that this creates schedule
conflicts for a number of people. So I will try to find an alternate
time at the first meeting. If you cannot make that meeting, but would
like to come to the seminar, please let me know what times would be
possible for you (including evenings).
I have a syllabus, which you can get from me in hard copy or on-line. I have
also put together a packet of the readings, and will have copies of it made
up once I have a clearer idea of how many people to expect.
Tom Wasow
-------
∂02-Oct-86 0959 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:avg@navajo.stanford.edu Re: CSD Reception Reminder
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Oct 86 09:59:42 PDT
Received: from navajo.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Oct 86 09:52:48-PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 2 Oct 86 09:52:37 PDT
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 86 09:52:37 PDT
From: Allen Van Gelder <avg@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: CSD Reception Reminder
To: CHEADLE@su-score.arpa, new-msai@su-score.arpa, new-mscs@su-score.arpa,
new-phd@su-score.arpa
Cc: faculty@su-score.arpa, staff@su-score.arpa, students@su-score.arpa
And remember that volleyball will follow. Newcomers will benefit from
reading one of the files:
on sushi, <vangelder>volleyball.doc
on rocky, ~avg/volleyball.doc
to get an idea how we play.
∂03-Oct-86 0906 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Late Newsletter Entry
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 09:06:04 PDT
Date: Fri 3 Oct 86 08:16:59-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Late Newsletter Entry
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: dlevy.pa@xerox.com
Tel: (415) 723-3561
Return-Path: <dlevy.pa@Xerox.COM>
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 2 Oct 86 17:42:25-PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 02 OCT 86 17:43:51 PDT
Date: 2 Oct 86 17:43 PDT
From: dlevy.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Late newsletter entry
To: emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: dlevy.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <861002-174351-1656@Xerox>
Emma:
Could you send this out through the usual channels as a late newsletter
entry?
Thanks,
David
Reading and Discussion Group on Figural Representation
Organizers: David Levy, Geoff Nunberg
First meeting: Thursday, October 9 at 10 AM, Ventura Hall
We are forming a reading and discussion group to explore the nature of
figural (roughly speaking, visual) representation. Systems of figural
representation include writing systems, systems of musical notation,
screen "icons," bar graphs, architectural renderings, maps, and so
forth. This topic lies at the intersection of various concerns relevant
to a number of us at CSLI, at Xerox PARC, and at SRI -- theoretical
concerns about the nature of language and representation and their
manifestation in the building of systems and the design of visual
notations for formal languages. There is currently no well-motivated
framework for discussing such material, no map on which to locate
important terms such as "document," "text," "icon," and "format." But
there is clearly a coherent subject matter here waiting to be explored.
Topics we want to look at in early meetings include:
1. Properties of the figural.
2. Figural representation and representation in general.
3. The typology of figural systems.
4. Writing as a figural representation system; distinctive properties
of written language.
5. The technological basis for figural representation (from writing to
print to the computer).
Initially, we plan to organize the discussion around readings drawn from
the literatures of a number of disciplines, among them linguistics,
psychology, literary theory, art criticism, AI, anthropology and
history. We expect to meet once a week (or once every two weeks) at
Ventura Hall (CSLI), starting Thursday morning, October 9, at 10AM.
Please note that we consider this to be a working group, not a general
public forum or a TINLunch.
At our first meeting, we will be discussing a short paper, "Visible
Language," which outlines some of the areas we will be concerned with.
Copies are available at the Ventura Hall desk.
-------
∂03-Oct-86 0930 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Research info for new students
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 09:30:26 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Oct 86 09:25:56-PDT
Date: Fri 3 Oct 86 09:25:34-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Research info for new students
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The information will be printed and distributed to the students at the
end of today. If you haven't responded, today is the day to do it. --t
-------
∂03-Oct-86 0954 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Torben Thrane
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 09:53:57 PDT
Date: Fri 3 Oct 86 09:47:41-PDT
From: Leslie Batema <LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Torben Thrane
To: visitors-patrol@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
(415) 723-9007
Torben Thrane, a linguist from the University of Copenhagen, has
arrived at CSLI and will be here through October, 1986.
-------
∂03-Oct-86 1151 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:avg@navajo.stanford.edu pentagon puzzle
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 11:51:37 PDT
Received: from navajo.stanford.edu by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 3 Oct 86 11:48:45-PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 3 Oct 86 11:49:17 PDT
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 86 11:49:17 PDT
From: Allen Van Gelder <avg@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: pentagon puzzle
To: aflb.su@sushi.stanford.edu
I think the pentagon puzzle we discussed in AFLB was generalized
a little unsoundly, and below I give what I believe to be the
correct way to generalize it. This message, which I sent to
net.math on USENET, also contains the problem description.
> ari@sylvester.columbia.edu.UUCP (Ari Gross) writes (paraphrased):
>A pentagon has an integer value assigned to each of its vertices,
>labelled A,B,C,D,E. The sum of the integers assigned to A-E must be
>greater than zero. We have an operator that can be applied to
>any 3 adjacent vertices, say D,E, and A, to modify their values,
>provided the middle value is negative. The operator is applied as
>follows : If the 3 adjacent vertices have the values x, y, and z
>and y<0, then the operator reassigns to the respective vertices the
>values x+y, -y, and z+y.
>For example, 10, -10, and 5 are reassigned as 0, +10, -5.
>(Note that the sum does not change.)
>Assuming that this operator must be applied (with no
>particular order of application assumed if there are multiple possibilities)
>whenever possible, is the computation guaranteed to eventually halt on all
>allowable inputs ?
A lunchtime group of Stanford CS faculty and grads kicked this puzzle around
for an hour. I suggested looking for a function of the vertex values
that the operation drives toward zero, something like the
sum of the squares, except that the sum of squares does not work.
But after a few minutes, Ramsey Haddad thought of the following function,
A↑2+...+E↑2 + (A+B)↑2 + (B+C)↑2 + (C+D)↑2 + (D+E)↑2 + (E+A)↑2
which DOES work.
If the operation is applied to C (which must be negative), the change
in the above function is 2C(A+B+C+D+E), which must be negative.
A nice feature of this is that it generalizes to larger polygons.
Don Knuth suggested looking at longer consecutive sums,
and later I worked out the following.
If n is odd, say 25, the function to look at is
A↑2+ B↑2 + ... + Y↑2 +
(A+B)↑2 + (B+C)↑2 + ... + (Y+A)↑2 +
(A+B+C)↑2 + (B+C+D)↑2 ... + (Y+A+B)↑2 +
... +
(A+...+L)↑2 + (B+...+M)↑2 + ... + (Y+A+...+K)↑2
i.e., all sums of 1 through (n-1)/2 consecutive values are
squared and summed. The operation applied to M produces a change
of 2C(A+...+Y).
If n is even, say 26, a slight variation is needed, as follows:
2 (A↑2+ B↑2 + ... + Z↑2) +
(A+B)↑2 + (B+C)↑2 + ... + (Z+A)↑2 +
(A+B+C)↑2 + (B+C+D)↑2 ... + (Z+A+B)↑2 +
... +
(A+...+X)↑2 + (B+...+Y)↑2 + ... + (Z+A+...+W)↑2
i.e., all sums of 2 through (n-2) consecutive values are
squared and summed, and twice the sum of individual squares is added.
The operation applied to M produces a change of 4M(A+...+Z).
Some students had already looked at the problem and developed
a termination proof along different lines. Also note that if the
sum of values is allowed to be 0, then 0 1 -1 1 -1 does not terminate.
My open question is, suppose the sum of the weights is negative?
∂03-Oct-86 1506 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM Foundations of Computation POSTPONED
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 15:06:51 PDT
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 3 Oct 86 14:58:27-PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 OCT 86 14:56:53 PDT
Date: 3 Oct 86 14:54 PDT
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Foundations of Computation POSTPONED
To: Folks@csli.stanford.edu, Phil-all@csli.stanford.edu,
ComputerResearch↑.pa@Xerox.COM, csd@score.stanford.edu
cc: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Reply-to: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <861003-145653-2568@Xerox>
Due to a number of apparently irreconcilable scheduling conflicts,
including the direct overlap with Tom Wasow's parallel course on
philosophy of linguistics, we have had to postpone the previously
announced course on Representation, Formality, & the Foundations of
Computation (Philosophy 266) until winter quarter (time and place to be
announced).
I very much apologise for the late notice of this change, and hope that
it won't throw too much of a wrench into anyone's plans. And I hope to
see you in January.
Brian Smith
∂03-Oct-86 1638 HITSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SSN: why is this needed in LOOKUP/PEDIT database?
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Oct 86 15:54:28 PDT
Date: Fri 3 Oct 86 15:51:26-PDT
From: Bruce Hitson <HITSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SSN: why is this needed in LOOKUP/PEDIT database?
To: pedit@Score.Stanford.EDU, facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: hitson@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, csl.bureaucrat@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
bureaucrat@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12243947326.32.HITSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just noticed that during the summer, someone decided to enter my
social security number into the LOOKUP/PEDIT database that is
available on Score and Sushi (PEDIT says that my record was "last
updated on 7/15/1986 by Robert Barcklay"). I am concerned for the
following reasons:
- it is not clear who has access to this information or why,
but it is clear that potentially many people who do not
need access to this info may actually have access to it,
- I cannot add, delete, or change this information using PEDIT,
- I was not asked about or informed of this change,
- the information is available on at least Score and Sushi (and
possibly elsewhere that I am not aware of?)
In light of this, I have the following specific questions:
1 Why must this information be online on any CSD computer system at
all? That is, is it *essential* to the operation of some
departmental activity? What is that activity?
2. Assuming there is a good reason for it being on *some* CSD computer,
why is it available on multiple systems rather than a single
(the "main administrative") system?
3. Who has access to this information? I am concerned that through
simple human errors (e.g., incorrect file protections, listings
of administrative reports to departmental lineprinters), or
through "system hacker breakins" (of which there have been numerous
recent examples) that this information may be made widely available.
I can understand and sympathize with the need to have this information
conveniently available *somewhere* for the efficient operation of
departmental and university activities. However, I also think it is
important to:
- insure confidentiality,
- propagate such information *only* to systems where it is
*absolutely essential* rather than merely convenient,
- enter the minimum amount of information.
Finally, as a leading center of computer science, the Stanford CS
department has both an opportunity and an obligation to help develop
policies for "reasonable" use of sensitive information in computer
systems. I hope that the issues raised in this note will stimulate
productive discussion along these lines.
--- Bruce Hitson
P.S. I am only moderately concerned by the addition of my SSN to the
LOOKUP/PEDIT database, but I would be *very* concerned if instead of
my SSN, a credit card number or other personal information was entered.
P.P.S. Whatever the answers to the questions I have raised, I would
be much happier if my *student number* was used instead of my SSN as
a unique identifier in computer systems and any other activities of
the department. As far as I can tell, only some high-level
administrative entity in the university needs to know my SSN for
purposes of tax reporting, and that everyone else can simply use my
Stanford student number - or is this not true?
-------
∂05-Oct-86 1459 @Score.Stanford.EDU:R.REULING@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU Classes using LOTS
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Oct 86 14:58:53 PDT
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 5 Oct 86 14:57:20-PDT
Date: Sun 5 Oct 86 14:57:58-PDT
From: John Reuling <R.Reuling@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Classes using LOTS
To: Instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12244461882.107.R.REULING@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
If your class will be using any of the LOTS machines this
quarter and you've not yet registered with LOTS, please send
me a message, and I'll bring you a LOTS Class Registration
form.
Your students won't be given additional console or disk
allocation until your course is regeistered.
-J
-------
∂05-Oct-86 1633 GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Sad News
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Oct 86 16:33:52 PDT
Date: Sun 5 Oct 86 16:26:46-PDT
From: Gene H. Golub <GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sad News
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Phone: 415/723-3124
Message-ID: <12244478045.9.GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Colleagues,
I'm sorry to tell you that our dear colleague Jim Wilkinson died
today. He was in the garden and had a massive heart attack; he had
just celebrated his 67th birthday. You may send condolence letters to
his widow Heather at 40 Atbara Road, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 9PD,
England.
GENE
-------
-------
∂05-Oct-86 1920 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa REMINDER -- Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Oct 86 19:20:01 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Sun, 5 Oct 86 19:17:38-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA07403; Sun,
5 Oct 86 19:22:05 PDT
Date: Sun 5 Oct 86 19:22:02-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER -- Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Cheeseman
To: planlunch←reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 5-Oct-86 19:22:02.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROBABILISTIC PREDICTION THROUGH AUTOMATIC CLASS FORMATION
Peter Cheeseman (CHEESEMAN@AMES-PLUTO)
NASA Ames Research Center
11:00 AM, MONDAY, October 6
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
A probabilistic expert system is a set of probabilistic connections
(e.g. conditional or joint probabilities) between the known variables.
These connections can be used to make (conditional) probabilistic
predictions for variables of interest given any combination of known
variable values. Such systems suffer a major computational problem---
once the probabilstic connections form a complex inter-connected
network, the cost of performing the necessary probability calculations
becomes excessive. One approach to reducing the computational
complexity is to introduce new "variables" (hidden causes or dummy
nodes) that decouple the interactions between the variables. Judea
Pearl has described an algorithm for introducing sufficient dummy
nodes to create a tree structure, provided the probabilistic
connections satisfy certain (strong) restrictions. This talk will
describe a procedure for finding only the significant "hidden causes",
that not only lead to a computationally simple procedure, but subsume
all the significant interactions between the variables.
-------
∂06-Oct-86 0849 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 08:49:47 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Oct 86 08:47:17-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12244656544.14.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch tomorrow (Tuesday, Oct. 7) in MJH 146. Topic: Some Statistics Used
By The School Of Engineering In Comparing SOE Departments.
-------
∂06-Oct-86 1104 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Consulting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 11:04:08 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Oct 86 10:56:53-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Student Consulting
To: students@Score.Stanford.EDU, faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12244680138.10.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I want to remind all returning students and to inform all new students
of the Department's policy concerning student consulting. (It is based
on Stanford's policy of permitting faculty members to consult one day
per week---defined as 13 days per academic quarter.) This policy was
proposed by a combined faculty-student committee and was approved by the
faculty:
A student may perform up to 104 hours of consulting per registered quarter
with the approval of the student's advisor and the principal investigator
of the project supporting the student. Students on fellowships which allow
consulting and students who are not yet supported by a research project need
only the approval of the advisor.
-Nils
-------
∂06-Oct-86 1131 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU "Foundations" Search
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 11:31:28 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Oct 86 11:09:02-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: "Foundations" Search
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12244682348.10.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
At last week's faculty meeting, we agreed to expand the charter of the
"Theory Search Committee" to include the charge of looking for outstanding
computer scientists in the broad area of "Foundations of Computer Science."
The committee consists of Leo Guibas (chair), Vaughan Pratt, Jeff Ullman,
Ernst Mayr, Christos Papadimitriou, Donald Knuth, and John McCarthy.
In order to expedite the matter of filling the billet vacated by Andy
Yao (presumably by someone interested in that subset of "foundations"
roughly desribed by "analysis of algorithms/computational complexity"),
I think it would be appropriate for that task to be handled by
a subcommittee of the entire committee. The AA/CC subcommittee will
consist of these people who served on the "theory committee" last
year: Leo Guibas (chair), Vaughan Pratt, Jeff Ullman, Ernst Mayr
plus Donald Knuth.
The present situation with regard to billets is that the subcommittee
has a billet, and the whole committee has another billet.
To ensure harmony and consensus, etc., I would like to see the
subcommittee's recommendation endorsed by the whole committee before
referring to the whole faculty.
-Nils
-------
∂06-Oct-86 1226 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New Explorer Bands
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 12:26:10 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Oct 86 12:19:08-PDT
From: Acuff@Sumex-Aim
To: KSL-Explorer@Sumex-Aim
Subject: New Explorer Bands
Date: 6-Oct-86 11:39:36
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2737996776@KSL-EXP-1>
Folks,
It's that time again, time to bring up new software on all the
Explorers. This is a set of patches from TI, bringing us to System 2.78
from System 2.11. These have been tested and integrated into the KSL
environment over the past week or so. These are almost entirely bug
fixes, so there should be no major change in functionality from out
point of view. I'm going to start putting the new software on private
machines immediately, and on the pool machines starting Wednesday, if
all goes well. Please contact me if you anticipate a problem with this
schedule.
There are a couple of things to note about the new world:
1. Since people have not been turning down the brightness of their
screens, I've put an Idle program into the bands to darken the
screens after a while when the console is idle, thus preventing
premature screen burning. I tried hard to make sure that this
facility does not interfer with anything the machine is doing. If
there is a problem, please let me know. It is possible to extend
the timeout period, or turn idling off altogether--please contact me
if you wish to do so.
2. The mail program has been taught how to read Tops-20 and Unix mail
inboxes. However, I *strongly* suggest that nobody uses the
Explorer mailer. There are many pitfalls ranging from losing
messages to losing your whole mailbox. Some of you have noted that
I've been using it. This is an experiment, and I've got plenty of
arrows sticking out of my back (good thing my chair's red).
3. SETF has been extended. This shouldn't make any difference except
that loading programs compiled with the current system might cause
the warning "compiled with a different version of macro SETF" to be
printed. This can be safely ignored, and will no longer appear if
programs are recompiled.
4. DISK-SAVE is no completely in Lisp. The most important implication
of this is that it's now possible to save a world on top of the one
being run.
5. The microcode is bigger, requiring bigger MCR bands. This means
that we will need to repartition disks as we bring up the new
system. There will be a negligible decrease in paging area as a
result, but this does mean it will take some time to bring up the
new system.
Serious developers might want to look at X1:BUGS;2-78-BUGS.TEXT for a
list of outstanding reported bugs. Any with fixes in that file are
fixed in the KSL-Patches system.
Please contact me if you have questions or concerns.
-- Rich
∂06-Oct-86 1614 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Cognitive Science Seminar
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 16:14:14 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.53/1.17)
id AA19543; Mon, 6 Oct 86 15:38:02 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 86 15:38:02 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8610062238.AA19543@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Cognitive Science Seminar
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, October 14, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``Cross-Talk and Backward Processing in Mental Operations''
Daniel Kahneman
Psychology Department
There are many indications that we only have imperfect
control of the operations of our mind. It is common to compute
far more than is necessary for the task at hand. An operation
of cleaning-up and inhibition of inappropriate responses is
often required, and this operation is often only partially suc-
cessful. For example, we cannot stop ourselves from reading
words that we attend to; when asked to assess the similarity of
two objects in a specified attribute we apparently compute many
similarity relations in addition to the requisite one. The
prevalence of such cross-talk has significant implications for
a psychologically realistic notion of meaning for the interpre-
tation of incoherence in judgments.
A standard view of cognitive function is that the objects
and events of expeience are assimilated, more or less success-
fully, to existing schemas and expectations. Some perceptual
and cognitive phenomena seem to fit another model, in which
objects and events elicit their own context and define their
own alternatives. Surprise, for example, is better viewed as a
failure to make sense of an event post hoc than as a violation
of expectations. Some rules by which events evoke counterfac-
tual alternatives to themselves will be described.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE
Professor Michael Motley, Professor and Chair, Dept. of Rhe-
toric, UC Davis, will talk on "Slips of the Tongue as Clues to
the Efficiency of Natural Speech Production" on Oct.14 from
8:00 pm in 117 Dwinelle.
W. Daniel Hillis will speak on parallel computations and
machine connectionism on Wed, Oct 8 at 4:00 pm in Sibley Audi-
torium, Bechtel Hall.
Cognitive Psychology Colloquium: tutorial on Connectionism run
by Steve Palmer and Cognitive Psychology graduate students,
Fri. Oct 10, from 4-6 pm 3105, Tolman.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Oct 28:Anne Triesman, Psychology, UC Berkeley
Nov 11:Johanna Nichols, Slavic Languages & Literature, UC Berkeley
Nov 25:Stuart Russell, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Jan 27:Geoff Hinton, Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
$9 October 6, 1986
∂06-Oct-86 2119 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM ICCSSE Call papers
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Oct 86 21:19:45 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 6 Oct 86 21:14:49-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Oct 86 21:14:15-PDT
Date: 6 Oct 1986 16:43:48-EDT (Monday)
From: Michael Rodeh <rodeh@israearn.bitnet>
Subject: ICCSSE Call papers
Resent-date: 6 Oct 1986 16:48:47-EDT (Monday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Second Israel Conference on Computer Systems
and Software Engineering
The Tel-Aviv Hilton, May 6-7, 1987
Call for papers
Computer system engineering requires an integrated approach to the
analysis, design, and development of all aspects of the system: hardware,
software, communications, economics, management, and development
environments.
The purpose of the Second Israeli Conference on Computer Systems and
Software Engineering is to discuss the engineering problems involved in
the development of computerized systems. As in the first conference,
effort will be made to present both academic and industrial
contributions. Special emphasis will be placed on the lessons learned
from the application of advanced methods in industrial projects,
and on the use of analytical methods in performance analysis of
computerized systems.
Subjects of Interest
* Computer systems engineering and communications
- Evaluation of system and computer architectures
- Computer communications
- Systems analysis
- Systems analysis
- Development and testing methods
- Rapid prototyping
* Software engineering
- The software process
- Evaluation of software system architectures
- Formal methods in software development
- Development and testing methods
* Development environments
- Evaluation of development environments
- Tools for systems engineering
- Tools for software engineering
* Artificial intelligence
- Artificial intelligence application in computer systems
- The use of artificial intelligence in the development process
* Management of the development process and personnel
- Project management
- Quality assurance
- Training of industrial personnel
- Academic education programs
Information to authors
Authors interested in presenting a paper are requested to submit four
(4) copies of an extended abstract (5-10 pages) in English or Hebrew*
by December 15, 1986.
Authors will be notified of the acceptance of their papers by
February 15, 1987. The final version of accepted papers will be due
by April 1, 1987.
* The official language of the conference will be Hebrew, nevertheless,
papers may be presented in English.
Organizing Committee Program Committee
-------------------- -----------------
M. Rodeh - Chairman J.Z. Lavi - Chairman F. Rosenberg
A. Cohen A. Barak I. Sagie
M. Gotlieb M. Ben-Bassat A. Segall
J.Z. Lavi R. Gonosar A. Tidhar
Y. Kodish S. Koenig A. Tzidon
O. Mantzur N. Yavne
A. Pnueli A. Yehudai
P. Rogoway
Secretariat: C/O ORTRA Ltd., P.O.B. 50432, Tel Aviv, 61500, Israel
------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Israeli Conference on Computer Systems
and software engineering
Tel Aviv Hilton, May 6-7, 1987
Notice of intention to submit a paper
Send to: ORTRA, Ltd., P.O. Box 50432, Tel Aviv 61500, Israel
Family name: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← First name: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
address: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← city: ←←←←←←←←←← tel: ←←←←←←←←←←←
state: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← zip code: ←←←←←← country:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
place of work: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← position: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
work address: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←← I intend to submit a paper on the following subject:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←← I do not intend to submit a paper, but please send me the conference
program as I would like to participate.
date: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← signature: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
∂07-Oct-86 1507 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Linguistics Talk, by Professor M. Motley
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 15:05:54 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.53/1.17)
id AA24504; Tue, 7 Oct 86 14:45:13 PDT
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 86 14:45:13 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8610072145.AA24504@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Linguistics Talk, by Professor M. Motley
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Professor Michael Motley, Professor and Chair, Department of
Rhetoric, UC Davis will give a talk on 14 October 1986, in
117 Dwinelle at 8:00 P.M. on:
"Slips of the Tongue as Clues to the Efficiency of Natural
Speech Production".
Abstract:
For almost a century, slips of the tongue have been studied
as a 'window on the mind.' Psychoanalysts, linguists, and
cognitive psychologists have disagreed, however, about what
we see when we peek into that window. By incorporating data
from both naturalistic slip collections and laboratory-
induced verbal slips into a 'spreading activiation' model of
lexical organization, we can arrive at a compromise perspec-
tive on verbal slips, per se, and also gain additional
insights to natural speech-production processing.
Sponsored by the Department of Linguistics. Leave a message
for John Ohala (ohala@cogsci) if you're interested in join-
ing the group that takes Prof. Motley to dinner before the
talk.
∂07-Oct-86 1541 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 15:41:27 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 7 Oct 86 14:46:57 PDT
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 86 14:46:57 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
The most sensible thing to do seems to be: have afternoon meetings
this Q. I'm going to get a room for 3:15 Thursdays; the default
will be 301, unless you hear from me.
I'd like to continue discussion of the strategy-search
algorithm then.
---jeff
∂07-Oct-86 1601 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Symbolics-Repair mailbox
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 16:01:21 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Oct 86 15:58:13-PDT
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Symbolics-Repair mailbox
To: ksl-symbolics@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: symbolics-repair@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12244997136.62.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Folks, from now on, when a Symbolics machine has a problem that
looks like hardware, please send mail to SYMBOLICS-REPAIR@Sumex-AIM
instead of directly to me. This way, if I'm out (like I will be
next week), Michael Marria, or someone else, will be able to respond.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Oct-86 1607 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA My Upcoming Absence
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 16:07:42 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Oct 86 16:04:17-PDT
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: My Upcoming Absence
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12244998240.62.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I will be away from this Friday, Oct 10, (as opposed to any other
Friday, like last Friday) through the following Friday, Oct 17. In
the mean time, Michael Marria will be covering hardware problems
(send mail to EXPLORER-REPAIR or SYMBOLICS-REPAIR). Please try to
hold on to software problems until I return, but if it's important,
James Rice will probably be able to help you, though he may require
you to come to tea in return. I will try to read my mail, so don't
hesitate to send me a message.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Oct-86 1607 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA My Upcoming Absence
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 16:07:42 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Oct 86 16:04:17-PDT
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: My Upcoming Absence
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12244998240.62.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I will be away from this Friday, Oct 10, (as opposed to any other
Friday, like last Friday) through the following Friday, Oct 17. In
the mean time, Michael Marria will be covering hardware problems
(send mail to EXPLORER-REPAIR or SYMBOLICS-REPAIR). Please try to
hold on to software problems until I return, but if it's important,
James Rice will probably be able to help you, though he may require
you to come to tea in return. I will try to read my mail, so don't
hesitate to send me a message.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Oct-86 1637 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA A new tool
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 16:37:14 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Oct 86 16:27:31-PDT
From: John R Delaney <DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: A new tool
To: ksl-explorer@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: delaney@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12245002470.51.DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have installed a tool on the system which I got off of the
INFO-TI-EXPLORER mailing list. The tool allows one to specify in a
login-init file that certain ZMACS minor modes are initial defaults
only under certain major modes. Without this tool, one can only
specify that certain minor modes are initial defaults under all
major modes. This tool would be relevant if you wanted to have the
ZMACS minor mode "Upper Case Global Functions" automatically apply
when editing LISP files but not text files. The name of the tools is
"major-mode-specific-minor-modes" and is loaded as usual.
In order to take advantage of the tool, you will also have to add to
your login-init file an expression specifying the initial minor modes.
The following is an example which cause "Atom Word Mode" to be automatic
for all major modes but "Uppercase Global Functions" and "Electric
Font Lock" modes to be automatic only for "ZetaLISP" and "Common LISP"
major modes:
(SETQ ZWEI::*INITIAL-MINOR-MODES*
'(ZWEI::ATOM-WORD-MODE
((ZWEI::ZETALISP-MODE ZWEI::COMMON-LISP-MODE)
ZWEI::UPPERCASE-GLOBAL-FUNCTIONS-MODE
ZWEI::ELECTRIC-FONT-LOCK-MODE )))
Note: Profile (the usual tool for establishing these defaults) has not
been modified to give you a menu to set such complex defaults. One can
only do so through such LISP code. Profile will display the results, but
I cannot promise it will not choke if you try to change the defaults when
they are major mode specific.
John
-------
∂07-Oct-86 1946 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU SSN in PEDIT database
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Oct 86 19:46:24 PDT
Date: Tue 7 Oct 86 19:37:12-PDT
From: John Reuling <Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SSN in PEDIT database
To: Hitson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU, pedit@Score.Stanford.EDU,
csl.bureaucrat@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, bureaucrat@Sushi.Stanford.EDU,
reges@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: 246 Jacks Hall, Stanford; +1 (415) 725-5555
Message-ID: <12245037002.13.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Let me start by explaining what information is kept in which
databases. Then I'll discuss why it's there, and what we might want
to change.
Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are now stored in the PEDIT database
for all students who have RAships, TAships, CAships, or hourly
positions through the department which require Sharon Bergman to
report an SSN to the University on an appointment form. In the past
they were stored in a separate file on Score in one of the Financial
directories.
The SSN information is NOT stored in the LOOKUP database. LOOKUP
contains a subset of the information in PEDIT. PEDIT is built on top
of the 1022 dbms. A nightly batch job generates a file of records for
LOOKUP from the PEDIT database.
The SSN information and all other PEDIT information is stored on both
Score and Sushi.
Through PEDIT, SSN information is NOT available to most users. A
particular user can see his/her own SSN, but he/she can't see the SSN
of others. Certain staff members and the maintainers of the PEDIT
database may see the SSNs for other users.
SSNs were moved to PEDIT over the summer as part of our reorganization
of Sharon Bergman's SUPPORT database and Victoria Cheadle's TEACHING
REQUIREMENT and PHD databases. PEDIT seemed like a logical place to
store this information: PEDIT is our master database of
person-specific information. We made the information visible so that
students could verify that their SSNs were listed correctly. We have
not yet announced this change though. Eventually, we planned to allow
people to enter/edit their SSNs, cutting down on a bit of work for
Sharon.
PEDIT also stores two other ID numbers for each person: our own PERSON
ID (or PID) and a UNIVERSITY ID, which is a 7-digit student number for
most. Eventually the University will issue 7-digit IDs for all staff
and faculty as well as students, and we'll be able to get rid of PIDs
and perhaps SSNs. That won't be for a couple of years though. You
can see these two numbers by going into PEDIT and typing SHOW ID.
Almost all CSD databases on Score/Sushi use the PID to identify
people.
I will certainly consider eliminating SSNs from Sushi if you feel
strongly that we should. It would be trivial for me to prevent this
info from being updated from Score. It's impossible to promise 100%
confidentiality, however; anything stored on-line is automatically
available to all of the privileged users, and it's not terribly
difficult to retrieve protected files from the backup tapes in the
basement of MJH. I do believe that we've made it fairly difficult for
random users to access this information though. Of course, we could
keep SSNs off-line, but I'm not convinced that this buys much security
either. It would be fairly easy to get most of this info out of
Sharon's office if one were determined enough.
I really am interested to hear what you (all) think about this, and
will try to accommodate everyone as much as possible.
-John
-------
∂08-Oct-86 0843 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(s)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 08:42:58 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Oct 86 08:36:05-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB(s)
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12245178793.10.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The next regular meeting of AFLB will be on Thursday 9 October in
MJH352; Dr. Cynthia Dwork will speak. On 16 October Professor
Eli Shamir will speak. In order to encourage a more informal discussion,
the speaker should be able to use the side blackboard to explain
details and answer questions. Therefore, *please* sit where you can see
both the front screen and the side blackboard.
Abstracts for the next two talks follow.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Deterministic Coin Flipping Problem - A Survey of Results
Dr. Cynthia Dwork
IBM Almaden Research Center
9 October, 12:30PM
In the context of a distributed system a global coin is a
``sufficiently unbiased'' source of randomness visible to
``sufficiently many'' processors. In 1983 Rabin observed that
Byzantine agreement can be obtained in expected time O(T(n)),
independent of the number of faulty processors, where T(n) is the
number of rounds of communication required to achieve a global coin
among n processors of which up to a linear fraction may be faulty.
Rabin's result offered the possibility, soon realized, of beating the
lower bound of t+1 rounds required by any deterministic algorithm to
reach agreement in the presence of t faults. At the same time a
similar idea enabled Ben-Or to obtain a randomized asynchronous
agreement algorithm, beating the impossibility result for
deterministic algorithms in that model. This talk surveys work of the
past 3 or 4 years on the problem of achieving a global coin. Several
open questions will be raised.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parallel Routing in Networks -- Back to Virtual Paths?
Professor Eli Shamir
Hebrew University, Jeruslem
and
DEC SRC, Palo Alto
16 October 1986
There are networks of size ranging from a few hundreds to a few millions
nodes which achieve a ratio diameter/fanout much smaller (so better) than
hypercubes. This implies a massive number of edge-disjoint paths,
allowing parrallel communication requests to be routed by virtual paths
instead of randomized packet switching (which is used only on tracers finding
and marking these paths).
Algorithms and implementation issues will be discussed.
-------
∂08-Oct-86 1120 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 11:20:10 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 8 Oct 86 11:07:19 PDT
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 86 11:07:19 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
the meeting tomorrow is in 301 MJH, but we'll start at 3:30PM
instead of 3:15.
--jeff
∂08-Oct-86 1540 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
Received: from PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 15:40:11 PDT
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 8 Oct 86 15:38:59 pdt
Date: 8 Oct 1986 1538-PDT (Wednesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu>
To: facil@sail
Cc: hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu
Subject: Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
Some time ago CSD-CF ordered enough extra Sun workstation memory to
upgrade all workstations in the department (and/or world) to 4meg.
What is the current status of this? Has all the hardware arrived?
Has any of it been installed? Any timetables, known or guesstimated
would be interesting.
The reason I ask is that with each passing day, more people are asking
me (and presumably others) about problems that are "not-enough-memory
related". It would be nice if I could tell them that this problem will
be less severe as of mm/dd/yy. Thanks for any info.
On a related topic, some time ago a student suggested (and I'd passed
this suggestion along to facil) that each workstation should have a tag
on it such as:
Please report hardware problems with this workstation
via electronic mail to foo@bar or call x-xxxx.
If it is agreed that this is a reasonable thing to do, then it should
probably be done at the same time that memory upgrades are taking
place. I would be willing to assist in creating a label (and perhaps
attaching them as well) if someone could provide values for "foo@bar"
and "x-xxxx" in the proposed (or alternate) text.
--- Bruce
∂08-Oct-86 1602 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Videotaping at TINLunch
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 16:02:39 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Oct 86 15:51:27-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Videotaping at TINLunch
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Roger Williams and his crew will be videotaping parts of TINLunch
tomorrow for the CSLI Video. We're hoping it will be a lively
session! Roger also needs a few more spot shots of activities
in and around Ventura.
The taping has gone very well so far. Thanks so much to all
of you who have already helped out and those of you who may
help tomorrow. This is going to be a very useful tool for
CSLI's fundraising efforts.
Betsy
_
-------
∂08-Oct-86 1612 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 New Software--how to use with old
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 16:12:00 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Wed 8 Oct 86 16:10:17-PDT
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-Aim>
To: ksl-explorer@Sumex-Aim
Subject: New Software--how to use with old
Date: 8-Oct-86 16:11:24
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2738185883@KSL-EXP-1>
Folks,
The new software requires microcode version 313, which should be in
MCR1 on all machines. The old stuff ran with microcode 257, which
should be in MCR2 on all the machines. I think I've set up all the
machines now so that they will boot ok with m-c-m-c-Rubout or
m-c-m-c-Abort, but if you want to run some old software from LOD2,
you'll need to specify microcode 257 when it asks you which microcode
partition to use.
-- Rich
∂08-Oct-86 1854 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 9, No. 2
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 18:54:20 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Oct 86 17:43:32-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, October 9, No. 2
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
October 9, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 2
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, October 9, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Meditations on a Hobby Horse or the
Conference Room Roots of Artistic Form," by E. H. Gombrich
Discussion led by Geoff Nunberg
(Nunberg.pa@xerox.com)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Situations and Semantic Paradox
Trailer Classroom John Etchemendy and Jon Barwise
(barwise@csli.stanford.edu)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, October 16, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: To be announced
Conference Room Discussion led by John Perry (John@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in next week's calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Categorial Unification Grammar
Room G-19 Lauri Karttunen and Hans Uszkoreit
(Lauri@sri-warbucks.arpa)
Abstract in this calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Categorial Unification Grammar
Lauri Karttunen and Hans Uszkoreit
October 16, 1986
The introduction of unification formalism and new types of rules has
brought about a revival of categorial grammar (CG) as a theory of
natural language syntax. We will survey some of the recent work in
this framework and discuss the relationship of lexical vs. rule-based
theories of syntax.
Non-transformational syntactic theories traditionally come in two
varieties. Context-free phrase structure grammar (PSG) consists of a
very simple lexicon and a separate body of syntactic rules that
express the constraints under which phrases can be composed to form
larger phrases. Classical CG encodes the combinatorial principles
directly in the lexicon and, consequently, needs no separate component
of syntactic rules.
Because a unification-based grammar formalism makes it easy to
encode syntactic information in the lexicon, theories such as LFG and
HPSG, which use feature sets to augment phrase structure rules, can
easily encode syntactic information in the lexicon. Thus syntactic
rules can become simpler and fewer rules are needed. In this respect,
HPSG, for example, is much closer to classical CG than classical PSG.
Pure categorial grammars can also be expressed in the same
unification-based formalism that is now being used for LFG and HPSG.
This includes more complex versions of CG employing the concepts of
functional composition and type raising as they are currently
exploited in the grammars of Steedman, Dowty, and others. The merger
of strategies from categorial grammar and unification grammars
actually resolves some of the known shortcomings of traditional CG
systems and leads to a syntactically more sophisticated grammar model.
--------------
READING AND DISCUSSION GROUP ON FIGURAL REPRESENTATION
Organizers: David Levy, Geoff Nunberg
First meeting: Thursday, October 9 at 10 AM, Ventura Hall
We are forming a reading and discussion group to explore the nature of
figural (roughly speaking, visual) representation. Systems of figural
representation include writing systems, systems of musical notation,
screen "icons," bar graphs, architectural renderings, maps, and so
forth. This topic lies at the intersection of various concerns
relevant to a number of us at CSLI, at Xerox PARC, and at SRI---
theoretical concerns about the nature of language and representation
and their manifestation in the building of systems and the design of
visual notations for formal languages. There is currently no
well-motivated framework for discussing such material, no map on which
to locate important terms such as "document," "text," "icon," and
"format." But there is clearly a coherent subject matter here waiting
to be explored.
Topics we want to look at in early meetings include:
1. Properties of the figural.
2. Figural representation and representation in general.
3. The typology of figural systems.
4. Writing as a figural representation system; distinctive
properties of written language.
5. The technological basis for figural representation (from
writing to print to the computer).
Initially, we plan to organize the discussion around readings drawn
from the literatures of a number of disciplines, among them
linguistics, psychology, literary theory, art criticism, AI,
anthropology and history. We expect to meet once a week (or once
every two weeks) at Ventura Hall (CSLI), starting Thursday morning,
October 9, at 10AM. Please note that we consider this to be a working
group, not a general public forum or a TINLunch.
At our first meeting, we will be discussing a short paper, "Visible
Language," which outlines some of the areas we will be concerned with.
Copies are available at the Ventura Hall desk.
-------
∂08-Oct-86 2135 cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
Received: from PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Oct 86 21:35:26 PDT
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 8 Oct 86 21:34:24 pdt
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 86 21:34:24 pdt
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Sun memory upgrades (status?) + workstation labelling...
To: facil@Sail, hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu
The labeling sounds good to me. I can supply the values for my workstations.
∂09-Oct-86 0616 jjohnson@mitre.ARPA ANSI X3J13 committee
Received: from MITRE.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 06:15:52 PDT
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 86 09:14:26 edt
From: jjohnson@mitre.ARPA (Jerry Johnson)
Full-Name: Jerry Johnson
Message-Id: <8610091314.AA20136@mitre.ARPA>
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Washington, D.C.
To: common-lisp-request@su-ai.ARPA, mathis@b.isi.edu, rpg@sail.stanford.edu,
x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: ANSI X3J13 committee
Cc: jjohnson@mitre.ARPA
Greetings to all recipients of this message. I would appreciate your including
me on any correspondence concerning the standardization of Common Lisp within
ANSI and any other countries contributions to this ISO effort since I
am MITRE's representative on the X3J13 committee.
Sincerely,
Jerry Johnson
MITRE Corporation
AI Center
Mail Stop W418
1820 Dolley Madison Blvd
McLean, VA 22102
703-883-7173
∂09-Oct-86 0748 TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU sun memory
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 07:48:20 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Oct 86 07:47:03-PDT
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: sun memory
To: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12245432010.9.TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The only memory that I have in stock (two boards) is for multibus suns only.
We do have VME bus memory on order from SUN which has not come in as of yet.
tom
-------
∂09-Oct-86 0913 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu time of meeting
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 09:13:18 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 9 Oct 86 08:51:38 PDT
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 86 08:51:38 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: time of meeting
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
We still don't have the meeting time right.
Today, let's meet in 301 MJH as soon after 3PM as people can make it.
We'll talk about possibly moving the meeting to Tuesday aft.,
between 2:30 and 4PM. Let me know if anybody wants to attend meetings
regularly but can't make that time.
---jeff
∂09-Oct-86 1054 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar announcement
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 10:52:54 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 9 Oct 86 10:49:49-PDT
Date: Thu 9 Oct 86 10:38:18-PDT
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: seminar announcement
To: paco@Navajo.Stanford.EDU, aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12245463185.31.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
PACO SEMINAR
TITLE: How Robust is the n-Cube??
SPEAKER: Hans-Ulrich Simon
Universitaet des Saarlandes
Saarbruecken
West Germany
WHEN: Friday, Oct. 10, at 1:15pm
WHERE: MJH252
ABSTRACT:
The n-cube network is called "faulty" if it contains any faulty
processor or any faulty link. For any number k we are interested
in the minimum number f(n,k) of faults, necessary for an adversary to
make any (n-k)-dimensional subcube faulty. Or vice versa:
The existence of a (n-k)-dimensional nonfaulty subcube can be
guaranteed, unless there are at least f(n-k) faults in the n-cube.
We derive several lower and upper bounds for f(n,k) such that the
resulting gaps are "small". The upper bounds are obtained by
analysing the behaviour of an adversary, who makes "worst-case"
distributions of a given number of faulty processors. For k-2 the
distrubtion is obtained constructively, whereas in the general
case only the existence is shown using probabilistic arguments.
The above bounds change if the notions are relativized with respect
to some given parallel fault-checking procedure p. In this case
only those subcubes must be made faulty by the adversary, which are
possible outputs of p. In the case k=2 the notion of "directed
chromatic index" is defined to analyse this situation. Relations
between the directed chromatic index and the chromatic number are
derived, which are of interest in their own right.
(Joint research with Bernd Becker.)
-------
∂09-Oct-86 1136 RPG Greetings
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I am sending this message to reassure you that the X3J13
mailing list exists. The net address is:
x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
and the request address is
x3j13-request@sail.stanford.edu
-rpg-
∂09-Oct-86 1300 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu local list
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 13:00:46 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 9 Oct 86 12:49:37 PDT
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 86 12:49:37 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: local list
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
The messages about setting upa meeting time have gotten to some
peoplee not at or near Stanford.
I therefore set up a nail-local@navajo list, and put the local
people who usually attend meetings on it.
I'll send a message saying "you are on nail-local", and if you
don't receive it, but want to get meeting notices, send me a message.
---jeff
∂09-Oct-86 1327 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS retreat
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 13:27:35 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Oct 86 16:55:21-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CIS retreat
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12245269682.39.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The excom of the Center for Integrated Systems (of which I am a
member) is having a retreat this Friday, Oct. 10. After hearing the
various members of the excom describe their CIS-related activities,
we will focus on the topic of how CIS and the CS Dept. can benefit
each other more. I'd be interested in any ideas from the faculty
on this topic. Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂09-Oct-86 1347 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 S8 down
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 13:47:50 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Thu 9 Oct 86 13:45:04-PDT
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-Aim>
To: KSL-Symbolics@Sumex-Aim
Subject: S8 down
Date: 9-Oct-86 13:14:17
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2738261657@KSL-EXP-1>
S8 is going to need a reformatted disk, as I can't repair it. I
don't think I'll be able to do this today, so I will do it when I get
back in a week or so. If this is likely to cause a problem for you,
please let me know soon, and I'll try to do it tonight.
-- Rich
∂09-Oct-86 1344 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.arpa.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice.arpa No PLANLUNCH for 2 weeks
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 13:44:44 PDT
Received: from sri-venice.arpa.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with
TCP; Thu, 9 Oct 86 13:37:55-PDT
Received: by sri-venice.arpa.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA13714; Thu,
9 Oct 86 13:42:05 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Oct 86 13:41:50-PDT
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: No PLANLUNCH for 2 weeks
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 9-Oct-86 13:41:50.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
There will be no PLANLUNCH for the next two weeks. Also, those of
you who would like to give a talk, please contact me as soon as
possible.
Thanks, Amy Lansky (LANSKY@SRI-AI, (415)859-4376).
-------
∂09-Oct-86 1710 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS retreat
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 17:10:13 PDT
Date: Wed 8 Oct 86 17:39:25-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CIS retreat
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12245277704.13.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I hate to admit EAF was right six years ago when he told me that
CIS was nothing but a vehicle for Jim Meindl to carry out his
own research ideas. (Ed--I hope i'm not paraphrasing too badly;
I know you said this much more diplomatically.)
I think CIS could be a fine way for CS faculty to get better interaction
with some of the CIS companies, but realistically, it has to be
based on our own research directions--if it doesn't fit the "integrated
systems" view, fine--it may still be of significant interest to
some of these companies.
For example, perhaps the companies could be invited to send some
more mainstream CS types to work with people in this department.
Perhaps CIS should focus more on CS-related directions such as
AI, NA, and theory, even without an explicit connection to
semiconductor electronics.
Oh yes, and it would be nice if some of the CIS sponsor
contributions found their way to support the research of our
beginning faculty, regardless of their area of interest.
From what I can tell, this would be a subversion of the CIS
purpose not entirely unwelcome to many of the sponsors.
---jeff
-------
∂09-Oct-86 2005 HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Mind and Language
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Oct 86 20:05:22 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Oct 86 19:58:06-PDT
From: Gary Holden <HOLDEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Mind and Language
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
In case people didn't know, as I didn't until today, the first two
issues of "Mind and Language" are now available in the current
periodicals section of Green Library.
Gary.
-------
∂10-Oct-86 0942 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Next Exec Council
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 09:35:00 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Oct 86 09:29:21-PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Next Exec Council
To: officers: ;
cc: aaaI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12245712779.31.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We've made reservations for the Winter Executive Council meeting for
Friday, February 6 (arriving on Thursday, February 5) at the Westin
Tabor Hotel in Denver.
I'll be sending you the agenda later, but I will need to know your
intent to attend the meeting. AAAI will pay for your room and board
on its hotel master account. After the meeting, send me the remaining
expenses for reimbursement.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Cheers,
Claudia
-------
∂10-Oct-86 1325 GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Logic Seminar
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 13:25:27 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Oct 86 13:22:04-PDT
From: Robert Goldblatt <GOLDBLATT@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Logic Seminar
To: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA
The Math Department's logic seminar will have an organisational
meeting on October 14 at 4.15 in 381-T. This quarter's topic will be
the model-theory of p-adic fields.
Seminar Organiser: Philip Scowcroft
382-J
723-1851
-------
∂10-Oct-86 1420 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS300 Department Lecture Series
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 14:20:18 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 14:16:40-PDT
Date: 10 Oct 86 1321 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CS300 Department Lecture Series
To: ac@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Here is a tentative listing of speakers and topics for the CSD Lecture
Series. These lectures are held on Thursdays from 2:45 to 4:00 in
Terman 156, though the room may yet change. If any speaker listed below
has a problem with his proposed date please let me know.
Note that there are three open dates, which will be filled in the order of
requests received. If you wish to speak and are not yet scheduled, please
tell me your topic and any date constraints.
Les Earnest
DATE SPEAKERS TOPICS
10/2 Stuart Reges Introduction to Stanford CSD
10/9 Vaughan Pratt Concurrency Modelling
10/16 John McCarthy, Vladimir Formal Reasoning -- non-monotonic logic
Lifschitz, Carolyn Talcott and Qlisp
10/23 Zohar Manna, Richard Waldinger, Logics of Programming
Eric Muller
10/30 Ernst Mayr Parallel Algorithms
11/6 Nils Nilsson Intelligent, Communicating Systems
11/13
11/20
12/4
∂10-Oct-86 1432 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Courses satisfying programming project requirement
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 14:32:37 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Oct 86 14:29:48-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Courses satisfying programming project requirement
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12245767474.14.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Among the various ways listed in the new Ph.D. program requirements to
satisfy the programming project was the following:
``By successfully completing a project associated with a course, where
the course instructor has had the project approved by the Ph.D.
committee as adequate for the requirement. To be adequate, it must
satisfy the normal standards for the project, as outlined in the memo
of June 14, 1984, including sufficient complexity, quality, and
originality. Parts of group projects are acceptable under the
guidelines outlined in paragraph 4 of that document.'' (That memo is
available in my office.)
If you feel your course meets this criteria, please let me know. Also
let me know if the course will meet it only this particular year, or
that in general the content of the course will satisfy the
requirements.
-------
∂10-Oct-86 1547 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Meeting conflict
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 15:47:04 PDT
Received: from DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 6231; Fri 10-Oct-86 18:44:00 EDT
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 86 18:44 EDT
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Meeting conflict
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <861010184419.6.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
Folks,
I will be able to attend the next meeting on December 10 and 11 but not Dec.
12 because I have two scheduling conflicts on the 12th (it's my birthday and I
have to be present at another conflicting meeting on Friday the 12th).
--Carl
∂10-Oct-86 1607 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU oops!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 16:07:07 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Oct 86 15:50:41-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: oops!
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12245782198.14.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
In re-reading my previous message about the courses that
would satisfy the programming project, I noticed that I
said ``this criteria'' instead of ``these criteria''.
I plead Friday afternoon brain death....sorry 'bout that.
Victoria
-------
∂10-Oct-86 2052 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM Call For Papers
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 20:52:26 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 20:49:41-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 20:24:59-PDT
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 86 08:35:04 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Call For Papers
Resent-date: 10 Oct 1986 01:25:03-EDT (Friday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL for PAPERS
Structure in Complexity Theory
Second Annual Conference
16-19 June 1987
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
The Structure in Complexity Theory Conference focuses on
structural properties of complexity classes and complexity-bounded
reducibilities. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to,
the following issues in complexity theory:
Structure of complexity classes Properties of complete sets
Resource-bounded reducibilities Theory of relativizations
Applications of recursion theory Random and interactive proof systems
Kolmogorov complexity Cryptographic complexity
Applications of finite model theory Independence results
Original research papers and technical expository talks are sought.
Authors can anticipate 40 minutes for presenting research papers and 60
minutes for expository talks. Send 10 copies of an extended abstract
or full draft paper by November 28, 1986 to:
Stephen R. Mahaney
Room 2C-454
AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Ave.
Murray Hill, NJ 07974, U.S.A.
Conference Proceedings will be published by Springer-Verlag as an issue
in the Lecture Notes in Computer Science series. Authors will be
notified of acceptance or rejection by January 30, 1987. Final papers
typed on special forms are due March 20, 1987. The Program Committee
consists of: Shafi Goldwasser, Juris Hartmanis, Neil Immerman, Deborah
Joseph, Steve Mahaney, Uwe Schoning, Alan Selman, Mike Sipser, Larry
Stockmeyer, and Peter van Emde Boas. Some members of the program
committee will present research talks or technical expository talks
providing perspective on their current research programs.
The conference is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society Technical
Committee for Mathematical Foundations of Computing and Cornell
University, in cooperation with ACM SIGACT. It will be held at Cornell
University in conjunction with the Logic in Computer Science
Conference.
Conference Chairman Program Chairman Local Arrangements
Alan L. Selman Stephen R. Mahaney Dexter C. Kozen
College of Computer Science Room 2C-454 Computer Science Dept.
Northeastern University AT&T Bell Laboratories Cornell University
360 Huntington Ave. 600 Mountain Ave. Upson Hall
Boston, MA 02115 Murray Hill, NJ 07974 Ithaca, NY 14853
------- End Forwarded Mail
∂10-Oct-86 2106 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Oct 86 21:06:01 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 21:03:43-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 20:49:49-PDT
Resent-date: 10 Oct 1986 01:31:49-EDT (Friday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
From bose%oregon-state.csnet@relay.cs.net Tue Oct 7 00:29:16 1986
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 86 16:35:25 PDT
From: Bella Bose <bose%oregon-state.csnet@relay.cs.net>
Posted-Date: Thu, 2 Oct 86 16:35:25 PDT
Subject: FTCS17 Call for papers.
CALL FOR PAPERS
FTCS17
THE SEVENTEENTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM
ON FAULT-TOLERANT COMPUTING
sponsored by IEEE Computer Society's Technical
Committee on Fault-Tolerant Computing
Portland, Oregon, June 17-19, 1987
The Fault-Tolerant Computing Symposium has, since 1971, become the
most important forum for discussion of the state-of-the-art in
fault-tolerant computing. It addresses all aspects of specifying,
designing, modeling, implementing, testing, diagnosing and evaluating
dependable and fault-tolerant computing systems and their components.
A special theme of the conference will be the practical application of
fault-tolerance to the design of safety critical systems, real-time
systems, switching systems and transaction systems.
Papers relating to the following areas are invited:
a) design methods and basic algorithms for distributed
fault-tolerant systems,
b) specification, design, testing, verification of reliable software,
c) specification, design, testing, verification, and diagnosis of
reliable hardware
d) fault-tolerant hardware system architectures,
e) reliability, availability, safety modeling and measurements,
f) fault-tolerant computing systems for safe process control,
digital switching, manufacturing automation, and on-line
transaction processing.
Authors should submit 6 copies of papers before the submission
deadline November 21, 1986 to the program co-chairmen: Flaviu
Cristian, IBM Research K55/801, 650 Harry Rd., San Jose, Ca
95120-6099, USA, and Jack Goldberg, SRI International, 333
Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, Ca 94025. Papers in areas a, b, and f
should be sent to F. Cristian, and papers in areas c, d, and e to
J. Goldberg.
Papers should be no longer than 5000 words, should include a clear
description of the problem being discussed, comparisons with extant
work, and a section on major original contributions. The front page
should include a contact author's complete mailing address, telephone
number and net address (if available), and should clearly indicate the
paper's word count and the area to which the paper is submitted.
Submissions arriving late or departing from these guidelines risk
rejection without consideration of their merits.
The general chairman for this symposium is John Wensley, August
Systems, USA. The program co-chairmen are: Flaviu Cristian, IBM, USA,
and Jack Goldberg, SRI International, USA. Publicity chaiman is Bella
Bose, USA.
The program committee consists of: Jacob Abraham, USA, Vinod Agarwal,
Canada, Sheldon Akers, USA, Philip Bernstein, USA, Bill Carter, USA,
Jim Gray, USA, Hirokazu Ihara, Japan, Ravi Iyer, USA, Kozo Kinoshita,
Japan, John Knight, USA, Herman Kopetz, Austria, Leslie Lamport, USA,
Jean-Claude Laprie, France, Gerard Le Lann, France, Nancy Leveson,
USA, Barbara Liskov, USA, Bev Littlewood, UK, Ed McCluskey, USA,
Michael Melliar-Smith, USA, David Parnas, Canada, David Rennels, USA,
Richard Shlichting, USA, Fred Schneider, USA, Dan Siewiorek, USA, Dale
Skeen, USA, Basil Smith, USA, Yoshi Tohma, Japan, Wing Toy, USA,
Kishor Trivedi, USA, Ted Williams, USA. Ex Officio member: Tom
Anderson, UK, TC chairman.
----------------------------------------------------
∂11-Oct-86 0538 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM FOCS Symposium
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Oct 86 05:38:01 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 11 Oct 86 05:35:40-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Oct 86 22:50:04-PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 86 15:32:33 CDT
From: ihnp4!wucs!wuccrc!bmw@rsch.wisc.edu (Bernard Waxman)
Subject: FOCS Symposium
Resent-date: 10 Oct 1986 01:17:25-EDT (Friday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
I am looking for some one to share a room with at the FOCS Symposium
in Toronto October 26 - 28. If you are interested please send mail
to bmw@wudma.UUCP. Or phone me at (314) 726-4163.
Bernard M. Waxman
∂12-Oct-86 1144 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Computer Use Policy
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Oct 86 11:44:32 PDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 12 Oct 86 11:41:49-PDT
Date: 12 Oct 86 1142 PDT
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Computer Use Policy
To: ac@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
The department adopted a computer use policy at the last faculty meeting
that was an amended version of the proposal that was presented. After
discussions with various interested parties, it appears appropriate to use
it as it stands for now rather than undertaking additional amendments.
Here is a copy of the policy that was adopted.
Les Earnest
POLICY. Computers operated by components of the Department of Computer
Science may be used only by Stanford employees, visiting scholars and
students in direct support of teaching, research and administrative needs
of the University. The following are the only exceptions and must be
specifically approved in advance and at least annually thereafter by the
Department Chairman:
(1) others may be granted access to computers if it is required in support
of a contract with Stanford or for research collaboration with a
Stanford employee or visiting scholar;
(2) access may be granted to agents of nonprofit scientific societies
whose activities complement and enhance those of the Department of
Computer Science;
(3) vendors that maintain valuable software on departmental machines
may be granted free computer accounts to carry out this work only;
(4) in cases where it will benefit the department to have direct
communication with certain individuals, they may be granted free
computer accounts for the purpose of sending or receiving electronic
mail only.
In keeping with University policy, the resources and facilities of the
Department may not be used for non-University purposes except in a purely
incidental way.
∂12-Oct-86 1531 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CIS
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Oct 86 15:27:08 PDT
Date: Sun 12 Oct 86 15:24:52-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CIS
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12246301785.14.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The CIS executive committee held a mini-retreat last Friday (as I
mentioned previously).
Here are my impressions:
1) The CIS is no longer the "empire" of any single individual or
interest group (if it ever was, but I know there are perceptions that
it was). The excom intends to run CIS as an interdisciplinary
research organization that leaves plenty of opportunities for research
and for funding of a wide spectrum of activities including computer
science.
2) The excom realizes that for the CIS to survive and play a role that
is not already being played by other labs and individual research
projects, it must concentrate its resources on a few
interdepartmental/interdisciplinary exemplary projects. The excom will
encourage suggestions for such projects and will recommend funding
sponsorship of the best ones.
3) The excom is prepared to use CIS resources as "seed money" to help
new faculty members get started on these exemplary projects and to
support new initiatives by older faculty members. In making suggestions,
we should not be influenced at all by what we might have thought about
"the old CIS."
4) Whereas in the past some of us might have felt that CIS "needed"
us mainly when talking to their sponsors to prove that CIS was
interdisciplinary (but never encouraged us to help run the place or
benefit from its funds), I'm convinced that that is not now the case.
The rules have changed.
The executive committee currently consists of Jim Gibbons (chair), Jim
Plummer, John Hennessy, Bob Dutton, Jim Harris, Krishna Saraswat,
Bob Gray, John Linvill, Paul Losleben, Rick Reis, and Nils Nilsson
I mentioned to the excom some areas where I think CS has a role to play.
In addition to the obvious interests of CSL people, there are (at least)
opportunities in:
1) robotics---especially automating the fabrication process.
2) new architectures---the sort of thing I think Anoop Gupta will
be interested in. I wouldn't be surprised if had the "new CIS" existed
at the time the QLISP and the "AI architectures" projects were getting
started that it wouldn't have been of considerable help in providing
seed funding and expertise from other interested colleagues in the
systems area.
3) AI---again automated fabrication and "high-level" design
aids ("qualitative physics" may even be important here).
Also, "intelligent agents" projects may be important for
dealing automatically with the consequences of design changes.
I encourage us to think carefully about how CIS and the CSD/CSL can
help each other to our mutual benefit. The situation does seem
encouraging. -Nils
-------
∂12-Oct-86 1552 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Funds
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Oct 86 15:52:35 PDT
Date: Sun 12 Oct 86 15:50:35-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Funds
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12246306466.14.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Department "has come into some funds" that are not exactly
inconsequential. They are from an anonymous donor who wishes this gift
to be used in support of students, projects, trips, visitors, research
that will bolster work in foundations of computer science. There is
no particular definition of "foundations" except I take the donor to
be interested in emphasizing formal methods. Suggestions for
how to use these funds are being accepted on an ongoing basis. -Nils
-------
∂13-Oct-86 0915 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Undergrad program/course admin has moved!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Oct 86 09:14:55 PDT
Date: Mon 13 Oct 86 09:01:19-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Undergrad program/course admin has moved!
To: csd@Score.Stanford.EDU, bboard@Lear.Stanford.EDU, tas@Score.Stanford.EDU,
instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, sec@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 030C, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12246494107.28.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The University has made space available to CSD in the old Bowling Alley of
Tressider Student Union to house the administration of the new undergraduate
program and CS courses. That space isn't quite livable yet, but we have moved
into it nonetheless. The offices that have moved include:
o Gina, Gerda, and me
o student instructors and industrial lecturers
o TA offices and course bins (handout/handin bins)
o Macintosh development lab
TAs and student instructors should stop by to schedule their office hours.
Either Gina or Gerda can help you to do this. If you have any questions, feel
free to send mail or stop by. The next few days are likely to be bumpy as we
try to get everything set up in Tressider, so we ask for your patience. When we
get settled over here, we will hold some kind of open house for those of you who
would like to see the new space.
-------
∂13-Oct-86 1051 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Oct 86 10:51:31 PDT
Date: Mon 13 Oct 86 10:48:18-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12246513583.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch tomorrow in MJH 146 at 12:15. Topic: of your choosing. (Nils will be
away.) Enjoy the sandwiches and each other!
-------
∂14-Oct-86 1000 GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU Award
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 10:00:26 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 09:44:08-PDT
From: Gene H. Golub <GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Award
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Phone: 415/723-3124
Message-ID: <12246764045.26.GOLUB@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm pleased to inform you that as President of SIAM , I have just
informed Andy Yao that he is the recipient of the Polya Prize in
combinatorics. Andy has graciously accepted and will be giving a
presentation at the national SIAM meeting in Denver in October, 1987.
It's unfortunate that Andy is no longer at Stanford but I'm sure he
would be happy to hear from you. His e-mail address is
yao%princeton.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa.
GENE
PS The beautiful medal Andy will be given was designed by Jill Knuth.
-------
∂14-Oct-86 1004 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Good News!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 10:04:48 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 10:00:01-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Good News!
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, students@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12246766936.44.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm happy to be able to announce that the University Advisory Board
approved the appointment of Jean-Claude Latombe as an Associate
Professor of Computer Science. I expect Board of Trustees approval
today. In a phone conversation with Jean-Claude, he has let me know
that he will accept our offer and will come to Stanford for
Spring Quarter 1987. Jean-Claude will play a significant leadership
role in robotics as well as pursue his own research and teaching in
that field. -Nils
-------
∂14-Oct-86 1131 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu capture rule system ideas
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 11:31:02 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 14 Oct 86 11:00:19 PDT
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 86 11:00:19 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: capture rule system ideas
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
CAPTURE RULE SEARCH STRATEGY
I want to set down the observations that several of us made
over the past two NAIL! meetings.
First, we agree that the original idea of trying to capture
whole collections of strong components using limited sets of capture
rules, then trying it again with a larger set of CR's is a loss.
The reason is that we have to try all orderings of the subgoals
in each rule we encounter.
Our latest idea is to divide the capture rules into categories:
EDB (i.e., the predicate in the SCC is a database predicate)
Built-in (predicates like "<")
Nonrecursive IDB predicates
Linear recursive IDB predicates
Nonlinear recursive IDB predicates
When faced with an adorned goal, say p↑bf, we examine its SCC and
decide which category it belongs in.
We then apply the CR's of that category in the order listed,
until we succeed in capturing the SCC or all fail.
Each capture rule has to decide on its own way of selecting
the orders for the subgoals in the rules of that SCC.
What we hope is that this problem is not n! on an n-subgoal rule,
but n↑2 if done properly.
First, given an order for the subgoals, there is an implied b/f decision
for each subgoal, i.e., a variable is bound if it was bound in
the initial goal or some previous subgoal provides a binding; else it is free.
In order for a given capture rule to be happy with a SCC and rule-ordering,
we need two things:
1. Each of the adorned subgoals can be captured.
2. The Rule/Goal Graph that results from the given choice of subgoal order
is one on which the CR will work. For example, if the CR is "naive bottom-up,"
then there are no constraints on the RGG, at least not if we're
talking about datalog (no function symbols).
If the CR is Henschen-Naqvi, then it is (I think) sufficient that
none of the subgoals have an all-free adornment.
KEY ASSUMPTION: If we can capture a goal with a given adornment,
then we can capture it with any "more bound" adornment.
Suppose for the moment that our CR is one for which any RGG is OK.
Then we can pick our ordering of subgoals in a greedy way.
First, we have a heuristic, say "largest number of bound arguments first,"
that suggests an ordering.
We let our heuristic pick the first subgoal, say s.
If NAIL! already knows that s with the given adornment cannot be
captured, then we ask for the next heuristic choice, and so on,
until it finds one that is not known to be uncapturable.
We then apply the whole capture rule algorithm to this adorned subgoal, s,
and one of two things happen:
1. s can be captured. Go on to the next subgoal in the heuristic order.
2. s cannot be captured. Take the next choice the heuristic gives you,
in place of s.
Exception: If s is an adorned goal in the same SCC as we are working on,
do not try to capture s. Rather, assume it can be captured.
As we construct the RGG for the SCC, we'll eventually have to
consider the rules with s on the left, and that will lead to more
reordering problems for subgoals, but we are assuming that if we
are successful in constructing *any* RGG for the SCC, that will
be an acceptable one for the capture rule.
Our key assumption implies that IF WE CAN CAPTURE AN ADORNED SUBGOAL,
WE MAY AS WELL DO SO AT THE PRESENT POINT IN THE SUBGOAL ORDERING.
The reason is that deferring a subgoal can only give more free
arguments to the *other* subgoals, never less, so postponing
a capturable subgoal never helps capture any of the other subgoals.
That is not to say the order we obtain leads to the most efficient
implementation of the SCC; but at this point, we're happy just to
find a feasible order in a finite time when one exists.
************************
Example: Suppose we start with goal p↑bf, and one of the
rules for p is p(X,Y) :- r(X,U) & s(U,V) & p(V,Y).
Assume r and s are in lower SCC's than p.
Our greedy algorithm might say attack r↑bf first.
Let's say it succeeds, i.e., we can capture r↑bf.
Next, greedy says attack s↑bf, but we can't capture it.
We thus look for the next-most-preferred remaining subgoal,
which is p(V,Y). We must thus attack p↑ff.
This is a special case, because p is in the current SCC.
We expand p↑ff, building more of the RGG as we do.
If we come back to p↑bf or p↑ff as we do, we assume that goal
will succeed, thus avoiding infinite iterations of this search process.
Assume that no failure is encountered on expanding p↑ff.
Then we attack the remaining subgoal, which is now s↑bb, because
the recursive call to p↑ff bound V.
If s↑bb succeeds, we have constructed the RGG (well we have to
consider other adorned rules for p↑bf first), and the entire
processing of the SCC of p with adornment p↑bf has succeeded.
If s↑bb fails, then we know there is no possible RGG for this SCC
and p↑bf, so that goal fails.
*************************
What if not every RGG is acceptable? Then the greedy strategy
can paint us into a corner, where an RGG exists, but you can't
get to it because you prematurely fixed part of the order for
one of the adorned rules in the SCC.
There is an important special case where this cannot happen if
we do a simple modification of the above.
Suppose we can characterize forbidden RGG's by a set of adorned
goals that may not appear in them.
For example, the bottom-up capture rule for datalog is
characterized by the empty set.
For another: I think that Henschen-Naqvi, magic sets, and the
other strategies for linear logic can be characterized by
"no all-free adornments on recursive goals."
For a third, consider Naish's algorithm for detecting whether
Prolog with function symbols converges. We have to find a set of
positions (arguments) for each recursive predicate such that each time around
the recursion(s), at least one position has been given a subpart
of its former value, and the values of the remaining positions
has not changed. The sets of positions that have this property
can be determined from the logic (or at least a sufficient test exists).
The forbidden adorned goals are the recursive predicates with
b/f patterns that fail to make any of these subsets all bound.
***************************
Example: Naish's example is
merge(X,[],X).
merge([],X,X).
merge([A|X],[B|Y],[A|Z]) :- A<=B & merge(X,[B|Y],Z).
merge([A|X],[B|Y],[B|Z]) :- A>B & merge([A|X],Y,Z).
The sets of positions that work are {1,2} and {3}, as well as their
supersets. Thus, the forbidden adornments on merge are
fff,fbf, and bff.
*******************************
The "trick" then, is to create a local *forbidden list* of adorned
subgoals for each capture rule. When attempting to create a RGG,
we avoid creating adorned subgoals that are either known (globally)
to be uncapturable or that are on the forbidden list for the current
capture rule. Presence on either list is enough to disallow a choice
of the next subgoal in a rule.
The following is a sketchy outline of the system.
We use AR both as an abbreviation for "adorned rule" and as the name of one;
similarly AG for goals.
The routines are:
1. capture(AG): decide if AG is capturable. [really, it should report
the method used for AG and all the generated subgoals.]
2. rgg(AG): construct a RGG for AG. Uses a local queue of AG's
whose AR's have not yet been considered. Also remembers
whether an AG has ever been on this queue.
3. processAR(AR): selects an order for the subgoals of AR if one exists,
succeeding or failing accordingly.
4. selectNextSubgoal(AR): really takes the history of AR, that is,
AR with information about what subgoals have already been
selected, and the consequent binding of variables appearing
in AR. returns the selected AG, or fails.
In more detail:
capture(AG):
decide on class of AG;
FOR each capture rule in that class DO BEGIN
set forbidden AG list appropriately for this capture rule;
rgg(AG);
IF rgg succeeded THEN succeed;
END;
fail;
END capture;
rgg(AG):
enqueue the AR's for AG;
let the SCC for the goal AG be the "current SCC;
WHILE AR's remain enqueued DO BEGIN
processAR(next AR);
IF processAR failed THEN fail;
END;
succeed;
END rgg;
processAR(AR):
WHILE subgoals of AR remain DO BEGIN
AG := selectNextSubgoal(AR);
IF selectNextSubgoal(AR) failed THEN fail;
IF AG is in the current SCC AND its AR's have never
been enqueued THEN enqueue these AR's;
ELSE /* AG is in a lower SCC */ BEGIN
capture(AG);
IF capture failed THEN BEGIN
record AG as "uncapturable";
"unselect" AG in the history of AR;
END;
END;
END;
END processAR;
selectNextSubgoal(AR):
use some heuristic to select the most preferred adorned subgoal
AG that has not yet been selected from AR, that has bound
variables only where justified by the bindings of AR plus
the bindings implied by previously selected subgoals,
and that is not on either the global "uncapturable" list
or the local "forbidden" list;
IF such a subgoal SG exists THEN
succeed and return SG;
ELSE
fail;
END selectNextSubgoal;
*****************************
Open questions:
1. What capture rules can have their conditions for applicability
expressed by forbidden AG's in the RGG?
2. Are there other situations under which we can decide on an
acceptable order for subgoals or determine that none exists in
time that is polynomial in the number of subgoals in the given rule?
∂14-Oct-86 1152 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU [Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>: PhD teaching requirement]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 11:52:54 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Oct 86 11:48:57-PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 11:44:59-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: [Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>: PhD teaching requirement]
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA
If you object to the following policy change, please let me know. If
there are no objections it will become policy as of next week. If there
are, we will take a more formal vote (possibly by EMAIL). --t
---------------
Return-Path: <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 14 Oct 86 11:40:58-PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 11:43:25-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: PhD teaching requirement
To: winograd@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: cheadle@Score.Stanford.EDU, bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 030C, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12246785760.29.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I have been meaning to make this suggestion for some time, but haven't gotten
around to it. The teaching requirement for PhD students mentions courses that
are "200 to 300." The reason it wasn't "less than 300" is that we didn't
want PhD students to TA a class like 106A unless they were going to teach it.
But this now cuts them out of the new undergrad courses like 143A (Compilers)
and 140 (Intro to Systems Programming). I think it would be appropriate to
restrict them to courses between 108 and 300. Andy Tucker is a TA this quarter
for 140 and Yossi Friedman is a TA for 143A. Both would like to count this
towards the teaching requirement. I have sounded out a few faculty on this
(Jeff, Keith, Nils) and they agree that the numbers should be 108 to 300.
Do you think we should try to take a quick vote of the faculty electronically
and make the amendment so these students can count what they are doing this
quarter? We need to decide fairly quickly, because otherwise the University
will start taking out income tax.
-------
-------
∂14-Oct-86 1657 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rich Cower's absence
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 16:57:38 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 16:46:04-PDT
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Rich Cower's absence
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
It now appears as though Rich Cower may be out for a couple of months
more. Brad and the rest of the computer staff have been working
extraordinarily hard, but their short-handedness has made it
impossible for them to fix problems as fast as they would like. We
are working on getting them some reinforcements. In the meantime,
please be patient. Problems and queries can be addressed to Brad, but
please be understanding.
Tom
-------
∂14-Oct-86 1716 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Colloquium Announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Oct 86 17:15:58 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Oct 86 17:06:49-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Colloquium Announcement
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Linguistics Department Colloquium
Paul M. Postal
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
"Semantic and Syntactic Gaps Involving French Indirect Objects"
Date: 28 October 1986
Time: 15:15
Place: 420-050 (Jordan Hall)
Refreshments will be served after the talk in the Greenberg Room.
Abstract
Sentence set (1) illustrates apparently baffling
constrasts concerning whether or not an INDIRECT OBJECT with
the French verb acheter `to buy' can be interpreted
benefactively or not.
(1) a.Marcel achetera cela a Louise.
`Marcel will buy that from/for Louise'
b. Marcel vous achetera a Louise.
`Marcel will buy you from/for Louise'
c. Marcel vous achetera a elle.
`Marcel will buy you from/*for Louise'
d. Vous lui serez achete.
`You will be bought from/for him/her'
e. Je vais acheter cela a elle, pas a vous.
`I am going to buy that from/*for her, not for you'
f. Je vais acheter plus de trucs a elle qu'a vous.
`I am going to buy more things from/for her than from/for you'
g. Marcel s'est achete un bateau.
`Marcel bought a bought ?from/for himself'
h. Marcel s'est achete un bateau a lui-meme.
`Marcel bought a boat ?from/*for himself'
i. Marcel et Claude se sont achete des bateaux l'un a l'autre.
`Marcel and Claude bought boats from/for each other'
j. Marcel va vous acheter a lui-meme.
`Marcel is going to buy you ?from/*for himself'
k. Vous serez achete par Marcel a lui-meme.
`You will be bought by Marcel ?from/*for himself'
With other verbs taking indirect objects, e.g. procurer `to
procure', the examples corresponding to the banned benefactive
meanings in (1) are just ungrammatical, e.g.:
(2)c.*Marcel vous procurera a elle.
`Marcel will procure you for her'
d. *Cela a ete procure par Marcel a lui-meme.
`That was procured by Marcel for himself'
h. Marcel s'est procure un bateau (*a lui-meme).
`Marcel procured a boat for himself'
j. *Marcel va vous procurer a lui-meme.
`Marcel is going to procure you for himself'
This talk sketches the principles underlying this curious array
of data, considering some of what they might reveal about
natural language sentence structure. At issue inter alia are
the existence of primitive grammatical relations and their
organization in a syntactic structure more abstract than
surface structure.
$9
$9
-------
∂15-Oct-86 0904 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(S)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Oct 86 09:04:48 PDT
Date: Wed 15 Oct 86 09:01:44-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB(S)
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12247018470.15.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the next two talks follow.
Parallel Routing in Networks -- Back to Virtual Paths?
Professor Eli Shamir
Hebrew University, Jeruslem
and
DEC SRC, Palo Alto
16 October 1986
MJH352, 12:30PM
There are networks of size ranging from a few hundreds to a few millions
nodes which achieve a ratio diameter/fanout much smaller (so better) than
hypercubes. This implies a massive number of edge-disjoint paths,
allowing parrallel communication requests to be routed by virtual paths
instead of randomized packet switching (which is used only on tracers finding
and marking these paths).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Beta Operations: Efficient implementation of a primitive
parallel operation
Ramsey Haddad (joint work with Evan Cohn)
Stanford University
23 October 1986
MJH352, 12:30PM
ABSTRACT
The Beta Operation was introduced as a parallel programming primitive
by Hillis as a means to reduce the complexity of programming his
hypercube-based Connection Machine. The Beta Operation performs a
combination of sorting and data reduction. (One possible application
would be: sorting numbers in the presence of MANY duplicates.) We
explore efficient ways to perform this operator on the hypercube and
mesh-of-trees.
Let the input size of the problem be N and output size M (note
that 1 <= M <= N). We show how to efficiently perform the
operation in time that is a function of BOTH N and M.
If the parallel time complexity of performing the operation is
expressed solely as a function of the number of inputs, the time
bounds are trivially seen to match those of sorting --- O(log↑2 N) for
the N-node hypercube and O(sqrt N) for the (sqrt N) X (sqrt N)
mesh-of-trees. If it is also clear that if M=1 for this operation, it
can be performed in O(log N) time on either parallel architecture.
What we show is that the Beta Operation can be performed on an N-node
hypercube in O(log N + log↑2 M)$ time. For a (sqrt N) X (sqrt N)
mesh-of-trees, we require O(log N + sqrt M)$ time. Thus, we reduce
the time needed when using the parallel primitive in cases where a lot
of data reduction leaves few outputs (that is, with small M --- for
example, if M is polylog in N).
-------
∂15-Oct-86 1635 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Guest Speaker
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Oct 86 16:33:58 PDT
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 15 Oct 86 16:22:02-PDT
Date: Wed 15 Oct 86 16:23:59-PDT
From: Mae Jones <JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Guest Speaker
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 15-Oct-86 16:23:59.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Robert de Beaugrande, University of Florida, will give a talk on
"Semantic & Pragmatic Issues in Control: The Evaluation of Complex
Systems," on Monday, Oct. 20 at 3:00 p.m., SRI International,
Conference Room EJ228.
-------
∂15-Oct-86 1752 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Informational Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Oct 86 17:51:56 PDT
Date: Wed 15 Oct 86 17:10:27-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Informational Meeting
To: tas@Score.Stanford.EDU, instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 030C, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12247107437.44.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We will be holding an informational meeting for all those people who will be
making use of our Tresidder space this Friday during lunch. The meeting will
start promptly at 12:15 and should end at 12:30. I have asked the TV people
to give an orientation from 12:30 to 12:45 for new TAs, but I haven't gotten
a confirmation from them yet. This meeting applies to all TAs, student
instructors, and industrial lecturers who have no office space in MJH.
The meeting will be held by the new TA offices (where the LOTS offices used to
be in LOTS II). I hope you can make it at 12:15 Friday.
-------
∂15-Oct-86 1753 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 16, No. 3
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Oct 86 17:53:37 PDT
Date: Wed 15 Oct 86 16:59:46-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, October 16, No. 3
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
October 16, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 3
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, October 16, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Possible Worlds and Situations"
Conference Room by Robert Stalnaker
Discussion led by John Perry (John@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Categorial Unification Grammar
Room G-19 Lauri Karttunen and Hans Uszkoreit
(Lauri@sri-warbucks.arpa)
Abstract in last week's calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, October 23, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent
Conference Room Cognition" by John Perry
Discussion led by David Israel
(Israel@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in next week's calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall HPSG Theory and HPSG Research
Room G-19 Ivan Sag (Sag@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "Possible Worlds and Situations" by Robert Stalnaker
Discussion led by John Perry
October 16, 1986
Stalnaker (and also Barbara Partee, in a paper I shall mention at
TINLunch), maintains that possible worlds semantics is an extremely
flexible and metaphysically benign (if not completely neutral)
framework. I will argue that this is not so, that possible worlds
semantics, in the form in which Stalnaker (and Partee) embraces it, is
metaphysically loaded in one of two quite different ways, either of
which incorporate assumptions that linguists and AI-researchers
shouldn't thoughtlessly adopt, and which philosophers should
thoughtfully avoid. --John Perry
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
HPSG Theory and HPSG Research
Ivan Sag
October 23, 1986
This seminar presents an overview of the central ideas under
development by members of the CSLI HPSG project. Head-Driven Phrase
Structure Grammar is an information-based theory of the relation
between syntactic and semantic structure. The syntactic concepts of
HPSG evolved from Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (GPSG) in the
course of the last few years through extensive interaction with
members of the CSLI FOG project. HPSG integrates key ideas of GPSG
with concepts drawn from Kay's Functional Unification Grammar and
Categorial Grammar and incorporates certain analytic techniques of
Lexical-Functional Grammar. The semantic concepts of HPSG are a hybrid
of Situation Semantics and the theory of thematic roles. Current HPSG
theory embodies a number of important design properties: monotonicity,
declarativeness and reversibility, yet current HPSG analyses require
extensions of such standard frameworks as PATR-II. Current research
ideas will be surveyed, as well as ongoing work on the hierarchical
structure of the HPSG lexicon.
-------
∂16-Oct-86 0437 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #55
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 04:37:37 PDT
Date: Wednesday, October 15, 1986 8:52PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #55
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 16 Oct 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 55
Today's Topics:
Query - Chemistry Systems & Neural Nets,
& Forward Chaining, OPS5 Design,
& Opinions on Books,
Implementations - Fixed Points,
LP Library - New Book on Multiprocessors
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 86 10:46:15 -0200
From: Jacob Levy <jaakov%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Chemistry Systems
Has anyone programmed or used a logic programming based
system for use in Chemistry? I am especially interested
in organic synthesis planning systems. Do you know of
such systems written in other languages? Any help,
references and info will be greatly appreciated,
Thank you,
-- Jacob Levy)
------------------------------
Date: 2 Oct 1986 10:04-EDT
From: VERACSD@A.ISI.EDU
Subject: Neural Nets
Has any substantive work been done with neural-networks
using Prolog? If so, I would appreciate pointers.
Thank you.
-- Kobryn
------------------------------
Date: 3 Oct 86 11:19:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: literature on forward-chaining
Are there any articles in the literature about good ways to implement
forward-chaining with multiple rule-sets in Prolog? Eg, at some point
in the program be able to say: keep applying any matching rules from
rule-sets A, B, or E, until no more apply. (I'm looking more for
references than for techniques per se).
Thanks for any citations.
-- John Cugini
------------------------------
Date: 6 Oct 86 12:52:42 GMT
From: Peter Srulovicz
Subject: OPS5 design
I am trying to build a forward chaining system functionally equivalent
to OPS5. I need some advice on how to build such a system efficiently
in Prolog.
Any help would be appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Oct 86 07:12:56 GMT
From: Todd Ogasawara <humu!uhmanoa!todd@bass.nosc.mil>
Subject: Opinions on Prolog books requested
I'd like some opinions on the following books.
1. Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence
by Ivan Bratko
2. Prolog
by Giannesini, Kanoui, Pasero, and van Caneghem
(a intro to Prolog II book)
3. A Prolog Primer
by Jean B. Rogers
I'll probably dig into my pockets and buy all of the books,
but would still like a preview set of opinions
Thank you.
-- Todd
------------------------------
Date: Fri 10 Oct 86 18:31:49
From: Wlodek Drabent <enea!liuida!wdr@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Subject: Fixed Points (V4 #47 of Prolog Digest)
Dear Jamie,
As one of the authors of "fixed points" I am answering your question
mailed in Prolog Digest V4 #47.
The proof that my programs (V4 #46) have the desired property was
actually given together with the programs (but not explained). The
approach is called "declarative debugging" [1].
If you ask a most general question to a logic program (say ?-p(X) )
then the answers you obtain (say X=Ans1, ..., X=Ansn,
...) describe the relation defined by the program. This means
that p(Arg) is true iff it is an instance of p(Ansi) for
some I (provided the computation was finite what guarantees
that the whole tree was searched).
My first program gives one answer to a most general question
?-fix(X,Y) and the computation is finite. The answer is the program
itself. Hence fix(Arg1,Arg2) is true iff Arg1 and Arg2 are an instance
of the program itself.
The second program also gives itself as an answer to a most
general question (and this is the only answer and the computation
is finite). If the extra-logical procedures var and \== had
been defined as
var(X).
X \== Y.
then fix would have been true for every instance of the answer (ie.
itself). Let us analyze the influence of using actual DEC-20
procedures var and \== . (It may be helpful to rename variables in the
first clause and in the question).
There are two variables in the answer. fix is false for every
instance of the answer in which a (nonvariable) term is substituted
for any of these variables (because they are checked by the procedure
var ). fix is also false if they are substituted by the same variable
(this is checked by \== ). So fix is true only for (a variant of) the
program itself. ("Variant" means renaming variables).
-- Wlodek
[1] R.Kowalski "Logic Programming" in "Information Processing 83"
(Proceedings IFIP 1983), Elsevier
Note: by "p(Arg) is true" I mean that ?-p(Arg) succeeds
instantiated to (a variant of) itself.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Oct 86 19:58:39 GMT
From: Michael Wise
Subject: New Book on Multiprocessors
A book is soon to appear, by Michael J. Wise, entitled "Prolog
Multiprocessors". It is being published by Prentice-Hall (Australia).
In a nutshell, the book examines the execution of Prolog on a
multiprocessor.
Starting from a survey of some current multiprocessor
architectures, and a review of what is arguably the most influential
counter-proposal - the "data-flow" model, a model is proposed for
executing Prolog on a multiprocessor. Along with the model goes a
language based on Prolog. The model and the language are called
EPILOG. EPILOG employs both AND and OR parallelism. Results are then
reported for the simulated execution of some Prolog programs rewritten
in the EPILOG language. The book concludes with an extensive survey
of other multiprocessor implementations of Prolog.
The book will be available in Australia from mid November, and in
US/UK/Europe roughly eight weeks later. A list of the Chapter
headings follows. A more detailed list can be obtained from your
local P-H representative, or by e-mailing to me directly.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword by J. Alan Robinson
Preface
1. Parallel Computation and the Data-Flow Alternative
2. Informal Introduction to Prolog
3. Data-Flow Problems and a Prolog Solution
4. EPILOG Language and Model
5. Architectures for EPILOG
6. Experimenting with EPILOG Architectures - Results and Some
Conclusions
7. Related Work
Appendix 1 Data-Flow Research - the First Generation
Appendix 2 EBNF Specification for EPILOG
Appendix 3 EPILOG Test Programs
Appendix 4 Table of Results
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂16-Oct-86 0917 PETERS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Microsoft Word on the MacIntosh
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 09:17:35 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Oct 86 09:06:05-PDT
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Microsoft Word on the MacIntosh
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
To whoever has my Word manual: Will you please return it?
To whoever has a Word manual they can loan me: Will you please
let me borrow it for a few days?
-------
∂16-Oct-86 1427 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU When Supply Doesn't meet Demand
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 14:27:02 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Oct 86 14:13:05-PDT
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: When Supply Doesn't meet Demand
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Due to factors beyond our control, the Lunch supply was beseiged today
and those seeking victuals shortly after noon could not be accommodated.
We apologize for the greed and short sightedness of others. We will take
appropriate measures to meet the continually climbing consumptive patterns
here at CSLI and hope that this type of outrage doesn't recur. Again,
our apologies to those who gracefully(and those who not so gracefully)
settled for yogurt, salads, cookies or fruit. May your dinner tonight
be fulfilling.
Thank you for your continual consumption,
The Center for the Service of Lunch and Interaction.
-------
∂16-Oct-86 1557 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Talk by Abdu Fassi Fehri
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 15:57:15 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Oct 86 15:42:55-PDT
From: Peter Sells <Sells@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Talk by Abdu Fassi Fehri
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The first meeting of the Morphology/Syntax/Discourse Interactions group
this Fall will be on Tuesday October 28th, at 12.30 (abstract and title
below). Subsequent meetings will be on Mondays, at 12.30, on the general
topic of anaphora and in several instances on the particular topic of
reflexives.
--Peter Sells
Relation-changing Affixes and Homonymy
Abdelkader Fassi-Fehri
Oct. 28th, 12.30, Trailer Classroom, CSLI
Of special relevance to a natural theory of affixation are the following
questions:
a) What is the exact nature of the changes that a lexical unit undergoes as
the result of an affixation process (role or argument reduction or
increase, valency reorganization, etc.), and which level of representation
is the most appropriate to state these changes ?
b) Given that languages use different systems of homonymic forms of affixes
to express different valencies (or the same valency organized in different
ways), is there a possible account which will predict which homonymy
affixation would be natural, and which one would be accidental ?
We propose a theory of lexical organisation that answers these questions.
-------
∂16-Oct-86 1734 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 17:34:23 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Oct 86 16:30:27-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
The CSLI Monthly will be sent out some time on Friday and will
be about 33 pages long divided into 8 parts.
Those of you on Turing will not receive the Monthly instead
you can find it in <csli>csli-monthly.10-86.
-------
∂16-Oct-86 1757 @Score.Stanford.EDU:MDIXON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU problems please
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Oct 86 17:57:09 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 16 Oct 86 17:30:20-PDT
Date: Thu 16 Oct 86 17:26:44-PDT
From: Mike Dixon <MDixon@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: problems please
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12247372548.30.MDIXON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
it's time again for the ACM programming competition. this year stanford
is not only holding a local competition to select its team, but also
hosting the regional competition for the pacific region. so... we
need some problems.
problems should
- be clearly defined
- be solvable in a couple of hundred lines of pascal
- not rely on any knowledge beyond standard programming techniques
the problem solutions are judged only on their i/o behavior (i.e. they're
run on particular test data, and the output is judged for correctness), so
problems like "find an O(n) algorithm for ..." are out.
the teams have about an hour to design, write, test, debug, and submit each
problem -- so they shouldn't be *too* complicated. on the other hand, don't
underestimate just how much you can do in that much time...
we'll need four problems for the local competition and another six for the
regional, so any help is greatly appreciated. please send suggestions to
me (MDixon@sushi). thanks!
.mike.
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1431 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 3
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 14:31:22 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 13:48:23-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 3
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 3
RESPONSE
John Perry
Smith's argument is as follows:
1) An important function of natural language is to convey information.
2) Natural language is situated.
Hence, to the extent that situation semantics explains how natural
languages work, its account should apply to the language of situation
theory.
So the language of situation theory, or future developments of it,
should manifest the crucial properties of natural language.
I am a bit vague on how either of the conclusions follow from the
premises. I accept the premises and the first conclusion. The second
conclusion doesn't seem very plausible. Presumably, if statements of
situation theory are to convey information (or misinformation) about
how language works, they must share those properties of natural
language statements that allow them to convey information. But I
would expect there to be many crucial properties of the more natural
parts of natural language that the technical parts need not have. For
example, I don't think it would matter much if there were no agreement
on the pronunciation of the parts of (1) below that are not words of
ordinary English. Perhaps as situation theory's notation evolves, it
will become impossible for anyone but Latex hackers to produce
instances of it. These properties would sharply distinguish the
statements of situation theory from garden variety English statements,
and the latter at least would be a sad development. But I don't think
these differences would point to any significant deficiency of
situation theory as a theory that could be applied to its own
statements.
From the point of view of situation semantics, the most crucial
properties of sentences for communicating information is that they
have efficient meaning, that allows a user to describe a situation
from her situation in the world. For this reason situation semantics
emphasizes the meaning/interpretation distinction. It is crucial to
make the meaning/interpretation distinction with respect to statements
using the vocabulary and notation of situation theory, just as with
other statements. Consider Brian's example:
(1) s1 |= <<Loves, John, Mary; 1>>
This could be used by a great many people to say many different
things: same meaning, different interpretations. Brian might use it
in a class at Xerox PARC, to assert, or bring up for consideration,
that what has happened since 1400 makes it the case that John of
Edlingham loved Mary Queen of Scots, while David Israel might use it
in a class at SRI about a different situation, a different John, and a
different Mary. The meaning is the same in each case, but the
interpretation differs with context. Or it might be used, as it was in
Brian's article as is above, with no John and Mary in mind. There is
meaning, but no interpretation.
Thus the meaning of (1) should be taken to be a relation between
utterances and situations they describe, just as with other English
sentences.
Brian seems to say that the predicate calculus cannot be used to make
assertions, and that sentences in situation theory notation, while
they can be used to make assertions, cannot be used for other speech
acts. But it seems to me that both the predicate calculus and the
language of situation theory can be used to make assertions. Some
examples:
(2) For all x (x=x)
(3) |=<<Involves [x|thing,x;1], [x| =,x,x;1] ;1 >>
Of course, these same sentences could be used for other purposes, but
this goes for other sentences in natural language too, such as "John
loves Mary," which can be used to make assertions, give examples, and
so forth.
The predicate calculus is a formal language while the language of
situation theory is not. The latter is just a part of technical
English, at least at present. (Of course, the predicate calculus, or
an informal notation based on it, gets used this way too.) The
notation of situation theory, then, is not bound by rigid rules but
can be used in novel ways in combination with bits of older parts of
English. I can even ask a question:
(4) |=<<Involves [x|puce,x;1], [x| ugly,x;1] ;1 >> ?
I suspect, however, that by asking this question I will have revealed
not only ignorance about a certain color but also about what exactly
Brian was getting at here.
Brian is most concerned about two differences having to do with what
he calls objectification. This means that "aspects of content" that
in more natural parts of language are contributed by circumstances of
use, or signified by nonnominal constructions, are in situation
theory's notation designated by nominal constructions. I shall ramble
on a bit about these matters.
As to the first point, the more natural parts of language have plenty
of devices for making explicit in language what can be left to the
circumstances to supply -- devices that are used when lack of shared
context or shared understandings threatens. You say, "It's four
o'clock"; I reply, "You mean four o'clock Pacific Coast time -- I'm
calling you from Denver."
There is a long tradition of thinking as Brian seems to, that using
nominal constructions carries a lot of metaphysical weight. That may
be so, but the view that sometimes goes along with this, of trying to
avoid such constructions, seems wrong-headed to me.
Consider a simple language with sentences like "Brian sleeps" and
"Brian stirs" used by some hypothetical folk in the Palo Alto wilds.
There are no nominals standing for times nor even any tenses, we may
suppose. The theorist sees, however, that the truth-values of the
sentences changes in systematic ways with what goes on at various
times. Everyone assents to "Brian sleeps" when used on those
occasions when Brian is sleeping, dissents from it when Brian is
stirring. So he concocts a theory: a use of "Brian is sleeping" at
time t is true iff Brian is sleeping at t. Is there any virtue in the
theorist, having noted the dependence of truth on times, hesitating to
adopt explicit reference to times in his own vocabulary? I must admit
I cannot see it. It is important to see that the theorist is not
thereby saying that the folk in question have the same concept of time
and times he uses in theorizing about their language and behavior.
We won't be clear about this last point, if we confuse the project of
constructing a theory that shows how the informational or other
content of uses of sentences systematically depends on the situation
of use, with the project of producing, in one's own language,
concept-preserving translations of those sentences. It seems to me a
virtue of situation theory that it helps us make this distinction.
Let me abuse another example to try to develop this point. A theorist
who knows about time zones is studying the language of Californians
who do not. His theory is that "It is n o'clock," used by a member of
this group at time t, is true iff at t is is n o'clock Pacific Coast
time. The theorist uses "is n o'clock in" as a two-place predicate of
times and has a supply of names of time zones. He uses this heavy
equipment to state a theory of the use of a language that is innocent
of names of time zones and uses "is n o'clock" as a property of times.
He does not produce of translation of the sentences of the group, but
an account of their conditions of truth. This approach has the
advantage that he can say things like, "The reason they don't need a
concept of a time zone is because they never go on vacations and can't
afford to call long-distance and don't watch national TV, and so the
information about time they pick up in perception is always about
Pacific Coast time, and the actions their knowledge of time controls
are always actions whose appropriateness is determined by Pacific
Coast time--e.g., they go to bed when it is 10 o'clock Pacific Coast
time, which they can find out by looking at their watches, which are
all set to Pacific Coast time."
I am inclined to think that (a) any language, natural or designed,
used by agents to store and convey information that controls their
actions, will rely on aspects of context to contribute to content; (b)
a satisfactory theory of how such languages are used to store and
convey information by the agents that use them will make some of these
aspects explicit, since relationships that merely need to obtain for
things to work, need to be stated to explain how they work. But, as
Brian points out, the theory will itself be used to convey
information, and so will itself rely on aspects of content contributed
by context. There is no reason to expect we can get to a theory that
is itself couched in a language that does not rely on the embedding
situation to supply content.
Basically, although there may be deeper issues involved in the
differences between the statements of situation theory and more garden
variety statements that Brian notes, I don't yet see a problem.
% end of part 3
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1434 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 1:1, part 1
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 14:34:10 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 13:45:21-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 1:1, part 1
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
CSLI MONTHLY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
October 1986 Vol. 2, No. 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A monthly publication of
The Center for the Study of Language and Information
CSLI was founded early in 1983 by researchers from Stanford University,
SRI International, and Xerox PARC to further research and development
of integrated theories of language, information, and computation. CSLI
headquarters and the publication offices are located at the Stanford
site, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305.
------------------
Contents
E Pluribus Unum?
by Tom Wasow 1
The Wedge 2
Is LOST a Natural Language
by Brian Cantwell Smith 2
Response
by John Perry 3
Project Reports 4
Designing a Situated Language
by Susan U. Stucky 4
Quantifiers, Referring Noun Phrases, and Elliptical Verb
Phrases
by Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron 5
Structure of Written Languages
by Geoffrey Nunberg 6
Summer Meetings of GTDS
by Peter Sells 7
CSLI Site Directors 7
New Postdoctoral Fellows 1986/87 7
CSLI Visiting Scholars 7
Announcement and Call for Papers 7
CSLI Publications 8
Apropos 8
------------------
E PLURIBUS UNUM?
Tom Wasow
How many theories of grammar are under development at CSLI? To the
casual reader of our literature, it must appear that there are a great
many. Indeed, the list of types of grammars used in various CSLI
publications reads like a recipe for alphabet soup: LFG, GPSG, HPSG,
FUG, CG, PATR, D-PATR (a.k.a. HUG), etc. What do these have in
common, other than geographical proximity? Is it reasonable to lump
them together, as some have begun to do, under the heading GBAG
(Generalized Bay Area Grammar)?
The existence of multiple labels does not, by itself, entail the
existence of any deep disagreements, especially in the sort of
environment we have at CSLI. Nowhere else is there so much
collaboration between academic linguists and members of industrial
centers of research. This involves both institutionalized and
informal interactions on issues ranging from the philosophical
foundations of grammatical theory to the efficient implementation of
particular formalisms. Ours is a unique and innovative environment
for computational experimentation with theoretical ideas. Therefore
new approaches can be invented, formalized, and explored especially
rapidly here. Consequently, labels tend to proliferate. This does
not mean that our ideas are any more divergent than the loosely
related ideas that might elsewhere be subsumed under a single
inexplicit theoretical framework.
Before we go on to make substantive comparisons, some points of
clarification are necessary. First, the theories in question are
changing, and it is not always easy to determine what the essential
properties of any theory are. Indeed, at least one theory on the list
above (HPSG, for Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar) evolved out of
another (GPSG, for Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar); while
interest in GPSG remains strong, it is no longer being actively
developed in any of CSLI's eighteen research projects. Second, it is
important to recognize that not all of the grammatical research here
is directed toward the same goal. In particular, PATR (in its various
incarnations) is designed to be a general formalism for writing and
implementing a variety of different kinds of grammars. Is is not (and
was never intended to be) a theory of natural language structure.
Thus, it doesn't make sense to try to compare it with systems designed
as linguistic theories.
In fact, it seems reasonable at this point to say that there are at
most three grammatical theories currently being used in research at
CSLI, namely, LFG (for Lexical Functional Grammar), HPSG, and what has
recently been dubbed Categorial Unification Grammar (henceforth, CUG).
The following discussion will be limited to a consideration of the
points of similarity and difference among these three.
Let us turn now to the substantive question of what CSLI's grammatical
theories have in common. The most important thing is a shared
conception of how the information carried by a complex linguistic
expression is related to the information carried by its parts. In all
three theories, the structural description of a sentence (or any other
kind of phrase, for that matter) is built up out of the partial
information contained in its constituent parts by identifying certain
pieces with one another. The formalisms employed in the theories
require certain structures to be identical; this technique is used to
encode a wide variety of types of dependencies between linguistic
elements.
The formal mechanism used by all of CSLI's theories to realize this
general idea is the operation of unification, which is simply the
merger of two mutually consistent structures. How it works can be
sketched by considering the phenomenon of subject-verb agreement in
English (which is analyzed in essentially the same way by all of the
theories in question).
In a sentence like "The fish swim," the noun "fish" is third person,
but contributes no information about its number, whereas the verb
"swim" carries the information that its subject must not be third
person singular. These two pieces of partial information are
compatible, so they can unify, resulting in a well-formed sentence
with a third person plural subject. In "*The whale swim," on the
other hand, the noun "whale" is third person singular, so the noun and
verb carry incompatible information, and unification is impossible.
This sort of analysis differs in crucial respects from approaches
which posit a transformation marking the finite verb's agreement with
the subject. Instead of postulating multiple levels, with rules
manipulating their form, CSLI's theories generate surface structures
directly, making use of unification to account for dependencies
between the parts of a sentence.
This common conceptual and formal core is implemented in PATR in a
manner general enough to permit the encoding of analyses drawn from a
number of different theoretical frameworks. While LFG and HPSG both
employ additional mechanisms that are not straightforwardly
formalizable in PATR, PATR has provided a common medium for the
implementation and comparison across theories of the analyses of a
number of linguistic phenomena. This has been a valuable exercise,
and has been one major focus of the Foundations of Grammar project at
CSLI.
Another common property of CSLI's grammatical theories is their
declarative character. While most approaches to syntax in recent
decades have employed sequential derivations in the analysis of
sentence structures, the theories here have been largely
nonprocedural. The grammars themselves establish relations among the
elements in a sentence. This information can be used in different
kinds of processing (e.g., parsing or generating), but it is
inherently nondirectional. Hence, for example, questions of rule
ordering (intrinsic or extrinsic), which have exercised syntacticians
for years, simply do not arise within these theories.
A slightly less abstract property shared by the grammatical theories
under discussion (though not by GPSG) is the central role of the
lexicon as the repository of most linguistic information. Lexical
entries are conceived of as highly articulated structures, containing
most of the syntactic, semantic, and phonological information about
languages. Language-particular rule systems are assumed to be
relatively impoverished (though a variety of mechanisms are posited to
capture redundancies within the lexicon). This tendency is also
evident in work being done elsewhere, including, notably,
Government-Binding theory. Its culmination is the revival of
categorial grammar as a serious theory of natural language syntax. In
this work, exemplified at CSLI by CUG, even the information about how
words combine into phrases is encoded into the lexicon, rather than in
a separate set of phrase structure rules.
One consequence of these high-level, abstract commonalities among
CSLI's theories of grammar is that many of the specific analyses are
rather similar. The near identity of the treatments of agreement has
already been cited. Similarly, they all analyze the English
active/passive alternation as a lexical relation, associating pairs of
verbs whose syntax, semantics, and morphology are systematically
related. The existential "there" is likewise given a lexical
treatment, its distribution being determined by the co-occurrence
restrictions different verbs impose on their subjects and objects.
Even the analysis of control (that is, the identification of "missing"
subjects in the complements to such verbs as "try," "seem,"
"persuade," "believe," and "promise") exhibits certain uniformities
across CSLI's theories: all of them involve lexically identifying one
of a verb's arguments with its complement's subject; no use is made of
movement, deletion, or empty nodes, as is done in many other syntactic
theories.
In each of these cases, the theories differ in the details of their
analyses, but they agree in their general outlines. Viewed from a
perspective broad enough to include such theories as standard
transformational grammar, Government-Binding theory, Relational
Grammar, and GPSG, these similarities among CSLI's theories seem quite
significant.
There remain, however, a number of points of substantial disagreement.
One obvious one is over the difference in LFG between
c(onstituent)-structure and f(unctional)-structure, for CSLI's other
theories make no such distinction. LFG posits a bifurcation of the
syntactic information about a sentence into information about phrase
structure and information about grammatical function; these are
encoded in rather different ways into c-structure and f-structure.
HPSG and CUG, on the other hand, employ a single type of data
structure to represent all grammatical information. This difference
leads to some substantive linguistic issues. For example, do verbs
ever select arguments of particular grammatical categories (requiring,
say, that complements be adjective phrases), or is such selection
strictly a matter of grammatical function, and perhaps semantics
(requiring, say, that complements be any category that can be used
predicatively)? LFG, by making category a c-structure attribute and
doing subcategorization on f-structures, excludes the former
possibility. The other theories would permit it.
Much of what LFG puts into f-structures is included under the
semantics attribute in the structures posited by HPSG and CUG. For
example, LFG treats the control information alluded to above in terms
of primitive (syntactic) notions of "subject" and "object," whereas
the other theories treat this as part of the meaning of the verb.
This reflects a general commitment on the latter's part to a tight fit
between their syntactic and semantic analyses. LFG, on the other
hand, has a separate (and nontrivial) semantic component providing
intepretations for f-structures.
Another obvious difference among these theories is simply the
difference between categorial and rewriting systems. A common
characteristic of LFG and HPSG is that they employ a system of phrase
structure rules. Such rules express the combinatorial principles of
the language. In categorial grammar, these principles are encoded
into the category labels of lexical items. Thus, in CUG, the
definitions of grammatical categories include the information about
how they combine with each other, whereas LFG and HPSG rely on phrase
structure rules to specify how categories are combined. This
difference has been exploited in the analysis of coordinate
conjunction to permit CUG to treat apparent cases of coordination of
nonconstituents (e.g., "Pat gave a book to Chris and a record to Lee,"
where each conjunct--"a book to Chris" and "a record to Lee"--is a
string of phrases, not a single phrase) in the same manner as
consitituent coordination.
There are of course many other differences, at various levels of
detail. Indeed, it would take a book-length piece to do a really
systematic comparison of the theories. Nevertheless, even this
cursory survey is enough to provide an answer, albeit a somewhat
equivocal one, to the question of whether GBAG exists. At this point,
the answer must be that there is no single grammatical theory at CSLI,
but there are several closely related theories. Indeed, the
differences among these theories are probably no greater than can be
found within research that goes under a single theoretical label.
Thus, the varieties of transformational grammar (or perhaps even of
Government-Binding theory) exhibit no less diversity than is found
among LFG, HPSG, and CUG. Moreover, it is clear that the past three
years of research here have produced considerable convergence among
syntacticians, with the result that we are closer to a unified theory
than we were when the Center was founded.
[Footnote: One issue on which the grammarians at CSLI appear to have
widely divergent views is the one addressed in the present essay.
Reactions to an earlier version ranged from the claim that the
differences among the theories were largely illusory to the claim that
they were substantially greater than I made them out to be. While
some colleagues agreed with my overall assessment, it should be noted
that others took strong exception.]
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1441 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU ACM Scholastic Programming Contest
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 14:39:58 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 14:33:50-PDT
From: John Reuling <Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ACM Scholastic Programming Contest
To: Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: TAs@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks Hall 030c, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12247603214.34.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I would appreciate it if you would announce the upcoming ACM
Scholastic Programming Contest to your class, if you feel it
would be appropriate to do so. This year we are anxious to
get undergraduates to participate. Students in 106B or above
should find the contest interesting.
Thanks for your help!
Below is a message I sent to the SU-EVENTS bboard explaining the
contest.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Scholastic Programming Contest
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1987 ACM Scholastic Programming Contest will be held Wednesday,
February 18th in St Louis Missouri. If you want to go, all you have
to do is win the Regional Contest held either November 15th or
November 23d at Stanford. And all you have to do to enter the
Regional Contest is win the Local Stanford Contest held Saturday,
November 8th (at Stanford).
At the local contest you will compete in teams of two, trying to solve
as many programming problems as possible in a limited period of time
(approximately 4 hours). Programs will be written in Pascal and
judged on correctness of output rather than programming style or
efficiency. (No flames, please!)
This contest is open to all currently registered Stanford students.
The local Stanford contest last year was a lot of fun. This year's
will be bigger AND better. Refreshments will be provided, and prizes
will be awarded. (There will be separate awards categories for grad
students and undergrads).
If you are interested in participating in the local contest on the 8th,
please send mail to Programming-Contest@Score.
If you are interested in helping to organize the local contest and/or
the Regional contest on the 15th, please send mail to Reuling@Score.
Dates to remember
Local: November 8
Regional: November 15 or 23 (to be decided soon!)
National: February 18
-John Reuling
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1448 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 4
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 14:47:29 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 13:49:26-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 4
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 4
------------------
PROJECT REPORTS
DESIGNING A SITUATED LANGUAGE
Susan U. Stucky
Project Participants: Curtis Abbott, Jon Barwise, Adrian Cussins,
Mike Dixon, John Etchemendy, Mark Gawron,
John Lamping, Ken Olson, Brian Smith, Susan Stucky
Designing and building the Situated Inference Engine (SIE), a
computational system that engages in situated inference, is a
collaborative project sponsored by STASS and the Embedded Computation
projects. From the beginning, the input of members from both these
projects has been easily explained: members of STASS are interested
because they are developing a theory of inference that includes cases
which depend on circumstance for their interpretation (e.g.,
TO-THE-RIGHT-OF(X)); the Embedded Computation folks are equally
interested because computational practice suggests that the
interpretation of internal structures is similarly contextually
sensitive. (See also the initial report on the SIE in Project Reports:
Embedded Computation, CSLI Monthly, June 1986.) But because the basic
model of the SIE is conversational--of a person issuing utterances to
the SIE, to which the SIE produces appropriate replies, there is a
third dimension, namely its linguistic aspect which, it seems to me,
makes the project of substantial interest to linguists.
As in inference and computation, I assume the situatedness of
language; however, the point is not just that the language the SIE
uses will be situated (that much is true of current natural language
systems). Rather, the interest lies in the SIE's being designed with
two additional purposes in mind: (i) all three, inference, internal
structures, and language will be situated in compatible ways, and (ii)
there is a commitment to develop a common theoretical framework in
terms of which to understand the full interplay among language,
content, and the internal structures, etc.
But in order to see what this comes to, let's spend a moment looking
at the overall structure of the problem. The inital subject domain of
the SIE is one of schedules and calendars; thus we imagine saying to
some ultimate version of the SIE "I have an appointment in an hour
with Bill Miller" or "Am I free for lunch on Wednesday?" And we
imagine its replying in various appropriate ways: "No, that's
impossible, you're scheduled to meet with the dean then" or "Yes, but
remember that you have an appointment at 12:30." That's a pretty
smart scheduler. And for anyone interested in language, its design
brings up a host of issues. Some of these are familiar from natural
language systems of various stripes; others take on a slightly
different cast, traceable, in the end, to our insistence on situated
inference and our stance on computation.
First, there are elements of language that depend for their
interpretation on circumstance. Pronouns are a well-known case: their
interpretation depends on the structure of the discourse and (if the
linguists are right) on the structure of the utterance itself. Tense
is another instance. Basically, we will need an account of the
structure of the language, and of the structure of the discourse and
of the constraints that hold between the two domains. And then we
will need an account of how all of that is related to the situation
being described. In short, we need nothing more or less than a
full-blooded relational account familiar from situation semantics. An
account of this sort will constitute our theoretical account of the
external facts.
Then there is the matter of the internal facts: how the language is
processed and how the language is related to the inference that gets
done. Among other things, we want to get from an utterance u in the
input language to what, following Brian Smith, we will call an
impression i, some internal state in the machine. One possible
constraint is that u and i have the same interpretation, that is, that
u and i describe the same state of the world. (Of course, u might
correspond to one or more i's, and vice versa, but let's stick to a
simple case here.) A subtle but important point is that u and i can't
(by and large) have the same meaning: if we have adopted a relational
account of meaning, then what u is related to (e.g., states of the
world and i) and what i is related to (e.g., states of the world,
other states of mind, ahem, the machine, and u) are likely not to be
the same. This perspective rules out some familiar approaches to
natural language processing, namely, the ones in which a
representation of the syntax of u (R(s,u)) is first computed (e.g., by
parsing), whereupon a representation of the meaning of u (R(m,u)) is
said to be computed from R(s,u), whereupon it is assumed that R(m,u)
is the same as the R(m,i) (the representation of the meaning of i).
Let's get back to u and i. Note that you can't compute the
interpretation of i itself, at least not if it's some state of affairs
in the world. The best you can do is compute a representation of the
interpretation of i. What you really want is i itself. How then do
you get from u to i? Equally important, how do you get from m to u?
And what role does our theoretical account of the external facts play
in this internalization process? Is it embodied in the
internalization process? To whatever extent it is, is it implicitly
embodied or explicitly embodied? To what extent is the structure of u
affected by the internalization process itself?
Finally, if inference is really going to be situated, then we won't be
needing to flesh out (or even necessarily disambiguate) absolutely
everything upon internalization. For instance, we might expect our
situated robot, upon discovering a note on Barwise's door saying "I'm
at lunch" to infer directly that Barwise was not there then and so not
deliver the cup of tea it was carrying; and do this without using a
sort of logical form that has the import of "Jon Barwise is not in his
office at 12:00 p.m. 15 October l986." In other words, we are going
to expect that the SIE "do inference over" situated representations of
some sort. We expect this because of the overlap in the (temporal)
circumstances of the situation of inference and the situation being
reasoned about. The SIE's being in the stuff it reasons about is
precisely what makes it situated.
So whatever are we to make of this? Any sane linguist might, at this
point, have bailed out of the project, for it is obvious that we can't
address all these issues for any natural language. But there is
another alternative, which is familiar to logicians and to computer
scientists, though not to linguists, and that is to design an
artificial language (what I might have been tempted to call a formal
language but for the fact that Barwise and Smith get very exercised if
you use that term). Rather than selecting a fragment of natural
language (which is a more familiar way a linguist controls the amount
of data to be considered), one simply (!) designs in the desired
properties so that the properties are all structurally marked in the
language. I admit that I was skeptical at the beginning--why would
anyone spend time working on an artificial language when you could
work on the real thing instead? But there are good reasons for the
technique and good reasons why linguists should be involved. (And
here, I think Mark Gawron, the other linguist on the project, would
agree.) This technique turns out to have an added advantage above and
beyond the use of a fragment. Because the language is embedded in a
larger system, we can be clearer about which properties are properties
solely due to the structure of the language itself and which
properties of the language are due to its interaction with the rest of
the system. Moreover, we can experiment with various configurations
of these properties.
In the present case, for instance, I want a language whose structure
is related to the structure of the discourse, and to the structure of
the situation being described, one that is internalizable by some
fairly straightforward mechanism, and whose structure is related in
some obvious way to the inference process. Thus, designing the
language consists not only of specifying its structure, but of giving,
relevant to it, both a complete theoretical account of the external
facts and a complete theoretical account of the internal facts. Even
that is a tall order, and we can suppose the language will not be very
interesting in and of itself. (It is wise to anticipate too that even
the whole system will not be very interesting either.) What is
interesting is the theoretical account itself, particularly the
framework in which the theoretical account is instantiated, which can
be often more complex than the ingredient structures themselves.
Again, the point is to see how the responsibility for various
properties gets allocated across the whole system.
As a first cut on the problem, Mark and I have undertaken the design
of Pidgin, which will be the language of the first situated inference
engine, SIE-0. In this first version I have been concerned to include
some natural-language-like devices that seem to be the glue of
conversation. For instance, I have designed in a rudimentary version
of notions like topic of the discourse, and subject and the like.
Similarly, I have added a rudimentary version of what linguists refer
to as contrastive focus as evidenced in English sentences with
"emphatic stress," e.g., "No, I meant this Tuesday, not next Tuesday."
Take the notions of topic and subject that have been bandied about in
linguistic theory for so long. Are they solely properties of the
language; what connections do they have to inference, to the discourse
structure, etc.? Both the notions of topic and focus are properties
that designers of logical or other artificial languages do not
generally design in, even though they seem central to language use.
But, by specifying the effects on all the relevant domains (e.g., the
discourse situation, the described situation, the internalization
process, and the process of inference) one actually begins to work out
a fuller account of natural language and, in some cases, to formulate
new hypotheses about natural language itself.
For example, my first cut at getting at the relations between subject
(of the sentence) and topic (of the discourse) is necessarily a crude
one. Linear order isn't used (as it is in some languages) to
designate the "subject" of the sentence. Instead a term may be
underlined. Position in the string of terms is used to indicate which
argument type is designated of the relation designated by the
predicate. To correctly use the predicate 'eat' in Pidgin, for
example, one puts the term designating the eaten thing in first
position and the term designating the eater in second position (just
to be perverse), and so forth. Then you can choose to underline one
term, which is the "subject of the sentence." There are constraints
(surely too strong for the natural language case, but remember, this
is a simple language) dictating that what is being talked about (i.e.,
the "topic" of the discourse) designates the same individual or object
that is designated by the "subject" of the Pidgin sentence. By
underlining different terms, a Pidgin speaker achieves a primitive
equivalent of the active and passive form of sentences in natural
languages. Being the "subject" and designating the "topic" has other
effects in the system. Pronouns in Pidgin are constrained to be used
to designate only the individual that is the current "topic," where
current topic is further defined by the structure of the discourse.
Those are all external facts about the language and how it is used.
But, of course, we are interested as well in which of these external
facts are explicitly represented by the internalization mechanism
(i.e., what does our SIE explicitly represent about the grammar of the
language?). Here we are developing a a space of theoretical
possibilities, including there being no explicit encoding of the
external facts at all. Still we might expect that internalizing
something that has the property of being a "subject" would be
different from internalizing, say, something having the property of
being a "nonsubject." For instance, if u is about the eater, then i
may be stored in memory "in a different place" than it would otherwise
be. Being a subject would then have some implicit effect, but there
would be no explicit representation of something's having had the
property of being a subject of the sentence internally. The current
device we have given Pidgin to get at something like contrastive focus
is similarly crude, but again, what is interesting is how it figures
in the system as a whole.
Thus the project for the language designer is a broad one, and
involves more than the standard language design in which one provides
only a syntactic specification and a semantic one. The task here is
more complicated: (i) to spell out constraints between the language in
the discourse domain and between language and internalization and
inference, and (ii) to provide a theoretical account. In
experimenting with this more general architecture and in developing
theories for our simple artificial language, we may just learn
something about doing it for the real thing.
% end of part 4
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1453 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 5
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 14:52:50 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 13:50:52-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 5
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 5
QUANTIFIERS, REFERRING NOUN PHRASES, AND ELLIPTICAL VERB PHRASES
A Subproject of STASS
Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron
STASS project members Mark Gawron and Stanley Peters are writing a
paper about quantifiers, referring noun phrases including pronouns,
and elliptical verb phrases. They are taking a new look from the
perspective of situation semantics at some old problems that have been
studied under the heading of quantifier scope ambiguities and
ambiguity as to the antecedent of an anaphoric expression (e.g., a
pronoun or an elliptical verb phrase). See, for example, Sag 1977,
Williams 1978, and Bach and Partee 1980. This work also builds in
some distinctions between types of anaphoric function related to those
posited in Evans 1980, Reinhart 1983, and Sells 1985.
The plan is to exploit the relational theory of meaning in explaining
how one utterance of a sentence, e.g., B's utterance in dialogue (1)
(1) A. Are there any canapes left?
B. Yes, nobody ate one mushroom crepe.
can be interpreted as saying that one crepe remains uneaten, while
another utterance of the very same sentence would be interpreted as
saying that all the crepes remain uneaten in dialogue (2).
(2) A. Are all the mushroom crepes still there?
B. Yes, nobody ate one mushroom crepe.
Example (2B) is the type of utterance in which the property people are
denied to have is the (nonparametric) property of eating one mushroom
crepe. Example (2A), in contrast, is the type of utterance in which
the parametric property of eating (the mushroom crepe) c is denied of
people, for one value of the variable c. A central goal of the
analysis is to give an account of how different circumstances can
interact with identical grammatical situations to give different types
of interpretation.
Circumstances also play a crucial role in the account of pronouns and
their uses. The analysis will distinguish among three different fates
that circumstances can dictate for a pronoun: to be used deictically,
coparametrically, or for role-linking -- as exemplified in (3) to (5)
respectively.
(3) A. I hear Mr. Williams had the most popular daughter at the
party.
B. Yeah, John danced with his daughter, and so did about
ten other guys.
(4) A. I hear John had the most popular daughter at the party.
B. Yeah, John danced with his daughter, and so did about
ten other guys.
(5) A. I hear father/daughter dancing was very popular at the
party.
B. Yeah, John danced with his daughter, and so did about
ten other guys.
As these last examples illustrate, there is an interaction between the
contribution the pronoun makes to the interpretation of its clause and
the interpretation that the elliptical verb phrase `so did' gets.
In each case the elliptical verb phrase is interpreted simply as
expressing the same (parametric) property as its antecedent does.
The paper analyzes quantifier ambiguities and anaphoric ambiguities
each on their own terms, and then shows how interactions between the
phenomena, such as those illustrated in (3) to (5), fall out
automatically from the independently motivated analyses. One
particular interaction such an analysis must account for (noted by Sag
and by Williams) is the contrast shown in (6) and (7).
(6) Some teacher read every book.
(7) Some teacher read every book and the principal did too.
Sentence (6) shows an ambiguity similar to that exhibited by (1B) (=
(2B)). Either the (parametric) property ascribed to every book is
that of having been read by some particular teacher t (narrow scope on
`every book'), or the property is that of having been read by some
teacher or other (wide scope on `every book'). In sentence (7),
however, when the elliptical verb phrase `did too' is interpreted
as anaphoric to the verb phrase of the first clause, the wide-scope
reading for `every book' is much less readily available.
A central strategy of the analysis is to account for these various
semantic contrasts by utilizing the circumstances of utterance, and
not by postulating enrichments of syntactic structure. Thus, for
example, in place of coindexing of syntactic structures, Gawron and
Peters assert that circumstances determine coparameterization of their
associated interpretation-types, or similar semantic relationships.
Rules for a fragment of English have been worked out using a
unification-based syntactic and semantic framework -- with
situation-theoretic objects picked out by attribute-value matrices.
% end of part 5
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1507 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 6
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 15:07:39 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 14:09:06-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 6
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 6
STRUCTURE OF WRITTEN LANGUAGES
Geoffrey Nunberg
Project Participants: Mike Dixon, David Levy, Geoffrey Nunberg,
Brian Smith, Tayloe Stansbury
As a part of its research, the Analysis of Graphical Representation
project has spun off a subproject to investigate the structure of
written languages, aimed at providing an explicit framework for
describing the characteristic structural properties of written
languages, both natural and constructed, an area in which research has
heretofore been thin on the ground. Over and above the purely
theoretical interest of these issues (the proof of which pudding will
be found in forthcoming eatings), this research is essential to the
development both of adequate natural-language understanding systems,
and of a new generation of generalized editors, capable of dealing in
a coherent way with documents that incorporate expressions from
several varieties of written language.
Previous research on written natural languages has tended to lump
together several varieties that are probably best kept separate. In
particular, we want to distinguish among "written-down" languages
(i.e., languages for which a writing system is available); "developed
written languages" (languages for which specialized conventions have
evolved for written use, generally in concert with the specialization
of the written language to certain communicative functions); and
"published languages" (i.e., languages that have been used for public
communication of the sort made possible by print and subsequent
technologies). We are interested primarily in written languages of
the third sort, which typically have developed a richer and more
specialized apparatus for marking text structures. For example, the
parenthetical (that is, a string like this one) does not appear in
written languages until well after the introduction of print, a
development that makes sense when we consider its function: it marks
off material that is to be incorporated in an "alternate discourse,"
such as may be required if the reader's knowledge base is not that of
the "ideal reader" that the writer had in mind, or if the
circumstances of interpretation are not entirely foreseeable at the
time of writing. These functions are exemplified in:
1. We include as well the null set (set with no members).
2. Oysters (in season)
The remarks that follow should be taken as applying primarily to the
problem of constructing grammars for published languages.
At least two sorts of grammars are relevant to the description of
published languages. One is the `lexical grammar', which accounts for
the distribution of and dependencies among lexical elements of the
language. Research on written language has tended to assume that the
lexical syntax and semantics of written languages are similar or
identical to the grammars of their spoken equivalents. But this
assumption requires qualification. For one thing, the written language
clearly contains semantic (and arguably, syntactic) categories that
are not relevant to grammatical description of the spoken language.
To take an obvious example, we might consider the written-language
category of "proper expressions," which are marked in texts by
capitalization of word-initial letters. This class includes most of
the class of lexical proper names, such as are defined by various
semantic and syntactic criteria, but it also includes a number of
expressions that would be considered common nouns on purely lexical
grounds (`Frenchman', `Distinguished Flying Cross'), as well as many
adjectives (at least in English), such as `Gallic', `Einsteinian'.
Thus whatever semantic (or ethnosemantic) property is associated with
proper expressions must be explicitly marked in the written-language
lexicon.
The lexical grammar for the written language will also contain a set
of presentation rules (or a graphology), which specify not only the
spellings of lexical items (an area in which there has been a fair
amount of recent research), but also the conditions under which
indicators of morphological structure such as hyphens and apostrophes
are to be inserted. It can be argued that these rules form part of a
coherent system together with the rules for presentation of
text-category indicators (see below).
The `text grammar', by contrast, describes the distribution of a set
of categories and relations defined in terms of the informational
structure of the text, broadly construed--sentences, paragraphs,
direct quotations, "colon expansions," "dash interpolations," and the
like. These are marked in documents by `explicit text-category
indicators', among them certain of the familiar marks of punctuation,
format features like indentation and word- and line-spacing, and such
features as font and face changes and sentence-capitalization. In the
course of our research, it has become clear that the properties of the
text grammar are both rich and nonobvious: not only are they described
inadequately in standard style manuals and textbooks that purport to
describe the conventions of the written language, but their mastery by
competent writers appears to be largely a matter of tacit knowledge,
much like the competent speaker's knowledge of the rules of the spoken
language. What is more, there appears to be little grounds for a
widely-repeated assumption that the features marked by punctuation and
the like are derivative from features of spoken prosodies. There is
no prosodic difference that corresponds to the difference between
semicolon and colon junctures, for example, though the latter are
clearly informationally distinct, as shown by:
3a. He told us the news: we were not permitted to speak with the
director ourselves.
3b. He told us the news; we were not permitted to speak with the
director ourselves.
An adequate semantics for text categories should provide analyses of
the discourse functions associated with each type. Take, for example,
the poorly understood notion of the text-sentence -- roughly speaking,
the sort of string we delimit with an initial capital letter and a
sentence-final delimiter such as a period or question mark, as, for
example, in the second sentence in the following passage:
4. There were a number of factors that contributed to this
development. The Stuarts yielded to the Hanovers; the Whigs
arrived at a new parliamentary strategy: they would oppose Court
policy at every turn. The county families began to send their sons
to university as a matter of course.
We want to know how the discourse interpretation is affected by the
inclusion of all of this information into a single text-sentence (as
well as the informational significance of inclusion of subparts of the
sentence in parentheses, dashes, and so forth). How would the
interpretation of this material differ in context, for example, if the
semicolon were replaced with a period, or the colon with a semicolon?
We also want to know what conditions are imposed on the semantic
well-formedness of text-sentences, and in particular, what relation
there is between the discourse role of the text-sentence and the
informational unity of the lexical sentence, which is traditionally
taken as providing the minimal kernel for text-sentence construction.
Analogously, the text-grammar syntax is responsible to describe the
dependencies that hold among text-categories. Our work in this area
has been based on a realization, new to written-language research,
that such dependencies could be stated in ways that were in large
measure independent of information about the lexical parsing
associated with text-constituents. By way of example, we can consider
the interaction of an "attitudinal category" like the parenthetical
with "structural categories" like the sentence, the paragraph or the
text-clause (roughly, the lexical sentences we conjoin or separate
with semicolons). We note, for example, that a parenthetical cannot
be the initial element of a member of a structural category: a
sentence cannot begin with a parenthesized element, a paragraph cannot
begin with one or more nonterminal parenthesized sentence, and so
forth:
5. *(What is more surprising), they carried no lifeboats.
Note also that a parenthetical initiated internal to a member of a
structural category cannot straddle the boundary of that category:
6. *They finally delivered the air conditioner (in mid-December.
Everyone cheered.)
For the explanation of regularities like these, we will want to look
both at the properties of the parser relevant to written-language
interpretation, and the particular interpretive functions associated
with parentheticals. (Note, by contrast, that quotations are not
subject to the same constraint that operates in (2); thus we can
write, for example: <Reagan announced that aid would be increased to
the Nicaraguan "freedom fighters. They're doing the job there so we
don't have to do it here.">.)
Finally, we are investigating the structure of the presentation rules
associated with text-category indicators. These rules provide us with
two sorts of representations of texts: first, as a linear sequence of
elements, and second, as a two-dimensional arrangement on a page.
Rules of the first type specify the contexts in which certain
indicators can be explicitly rendered. Here again, the rules are less
trivial than handbook descriptions would suggest; for example, we note
that the punctuational indicators associated with structural
categories (that is, the comma, semicolon, colon, and period) must all
cliticize to the lefthand word, and that a word can display only one
such indicator; the choice is determined by reference to a precedence
hierarchy of the form: period > semicolon/colon > comma. Another sort
of rule that has some interest is the type required to handle the
alternation of single and double quotes. Significantly, the form of
such rules presupposes a left-to-right parser, in that the "unmarked"
delimiter (in American, double quotes) is used as the outermost
delimiter when quotes are embedded. Note that different conventions
are relevant in mathematical and constructed languages, where the
unmarked delimiter (say, the parenthesis) is used to delimit the
innermost bracketed expression when bracketed elements are nested. In
these cases, we presume, the (ideal human) parser is presumed to
operate bottom-up.
The rules of two-dimensional presentation, by contrast, are concerned
with such notions as "line," "page," and "margin." It is these, for
example, that determine in which format contexts such indicators as
word-spacing and paragraph-spacing will be presented. Here again, we
are particularly concerned to arrive at understandings that are
sufficiently general to apply both to natural languages and
constructed languages of various types (mathematics or musical
notation, for example), so as to be able, say, to define a notion of
"widow" (i.e., a single line of text isolated from the rest of its
paragraph by a page boundary, or a single line of pretty-printed code
in a document that is separated by a page break from the rest of the
expression that contains it).
% end of part 6
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1522 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 7
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 15:22:21 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 14:11:04-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 7
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 7
SUMMER MEETINGS OF GTDS
Peter Sells
The summer meetings of the GTDS group were primarily reading sessions,
on the topic of cross-linguistic variation in reflexive (and other
related) constructions. Works by von Bremen, Faltz, and Yang
suggested general approaches to a typology of reflexives, while more
particular studies by Sigurdsson, Croft, Shyldkrot and Kemmer, and
Lichtenberk on extended uses of reflexives illustrated the interaction
of reflexive constructions with semantic factors (such as
logophoricity) and with morpho-syntactic factors (such as the use of a
reflexive as a mark of intransitivity). Finally, works by Lebeaux and
Kiparsky suggested certain theoretical approaches to the problem of
cross-linguistic variation.
There already exists at CSLI a considerable amount of material written
on the properties of reflexive constructions in a wide variety of
languages, and the summer meetings were intended as a precursor to a
series of working-group meetings in the academic year, in which
current work in progress will be presented and reviewed, and brought
together as a volume of working papers.
------------------
CSLI SITE DIRECTORS
Although CSLI's headquarters is in Ventura Hall at Stanford
University, its research activities are conducted at the sites of all
three founding institutions: SRI International, Stanford University,
and Xerox PARC.
CSLI has recently appointed site directors to administer CSLI-related
research and staff at the individual sites and to assure coordination
across sites. Tom Wasow, Stanford Professor of Linguistics and
Philosophy, is the director for the Stanford site; David Israel,
researcher in artificial intelligence, is the director for the SRI
site; and Brian Smith, researcher in computer science and philosophy,
is the director for the PARC site.
John Perry, CSLI's previous director, is organizing an Advisory
Committee that will be composed of past directors, site directors, and
senior executives from the three founding institutions. The Advisory
Committee will be concerned with long-range plans for CSLI's structure
and will serve as a resource development group.
------------------
NEW POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWS 1986/87
CSLI is pleased to announce two new postdoctoral fellows, Adrian
Cussins and Craige Roberts.
Cussins received his D.Phil. in 1986 from Oxford University where he
worked in the areas of philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, the
philosophy of psychology, and the theory of content. He hopes to
benefit from CSLI's broad interdisciplinary community and to exploit
his own Oxford philosophical and Edinburgh cognitive science
backgrounds to develop a computational model of nonconceptual
representational processes.
Roberts received her Ph.D. in 1986 from the University of
Massachusetts at Amherst, where she wrote her dissertation on "Modal
Subordination, Anaphora, and Distributivity." She is interested in
the interdisciplinary work on anaphora and discourse being carried out
at CSLI, and hopes to continue her own work on the logical structure
of discourse.
------------------
CSLI VISITING SCHOLARS
Abdelkader Fassi Fehri
Professor of General and Arabic Linguistics
Mohammed V University, Rabat
Dates of visit: September -- October 1986
Fassi Fehri is currently working on the nature of relation-changing
affixes, their homonymy, and the implications of the processes and
correlations induced by affixation for a theory of lexical
organization.
Boaz Lazinger
Director
Division of Computers and Technology
National Council for Research and Development
Ministry of Science, Jerusalem
Dates of visit: July 1986 -- July 1987
Lazinger is studying a systems approach to natural language
understanding, deductive reasoning in document retrieval systems, and
NLP interfaces to existing software.
Peter Ludlow
Dates of visit: September 1986 -- September 1987
Ludlow's work is primarily centered on developing computationally
tractable semantic theories for natural language. In particular, he
is interested in developing a tractable semantics for intensional
contexts and for quantification.
Gordon Plotkin
Department of Computer Science
University of Edinburgh
Dates of visit: August -- October 1986
Plotkin returned to CSLI to continue his work on building models of
situation theory using techniques from domain theory.
Kasper Osterbye
University of Aarhus
Dates of visit: September 1986 -- September 1987
Osterbye's recent work has been on programming languages, especially
dealing with interactive higher-level debugging. At CSLI he is
participating in the Semantics of Programming Languages Project.
Torben Thrane
Center for the Computational Study of the Humanities
University of Copenhagen
Dates of visit: October 1986
Thrane's current work centers on text understanding and anaphoric
resolution, with particular interest in "the universe of discourse."
He is working on a paper in which he investigates the possibilities of
structuring a discourse universe in a way compatible with current
proposals in situational semantics concerning states of affairs,
situations, and situation types.
------------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
AND CALL FOR PAPERS
A meeting on theoretical interactions of linguistics and logic,
sponsored by the Association for Symbolic Logic and the Linguistic
Society of America, will be held at Stanford University on 10 and 11
July 1987. The organizing committee is soliciting abstracts for
presentation at the conference in three categories:
o contributed abstracts of at most 300 words for fifteen-minute
presentations;
o contributed abstracts of at most 1000 words for forty-minute
presentations;
o suggestions for symposia.
Suggestions for symposia are due on 1 February 1987, and all abstracts
are due on 1 March 1987. All communications should state whether the
speakers are members of the LSA or the ASL (or neither), and should be
sent to the following address:
ASL/LSA 87
Richmond H. Thomason
Department of Linguistics
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
Netmail can be directed to thomason@c.cs.cmu.edu.arpa.
------------------
DEPARTMENT OF INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS
(from the New York Times, 7/24/86)
When Twyla Tharp first applied for a dance grant in the 1960s, she was
neither accustomed to the business of raising money nor enthusiastic
about it. As the story goes, her application said: "I write dance,
not grants. Please send money." Miss Tharp got her grant.
% end of part 7
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1533 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 8 (and last)
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 15:33:16 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 14:12:04-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:1, part 8 (and last)
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 8
------------------
CSLI PUBLICATIONS
The following reports have recently been published. They may be
obtained by writing to Trudy Vizmanos, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford,
CA 94305 or publications@csli.stanford.edu.
51. Noun-Phrase Interpretation
Mats Rooth
52. Noun Phrases, Generalized Quantifiers and Anaphora
Jon Barwise
53. Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition
John Perry
54. A Study in the Foundations of Programming Methodology:
Specifications, Institutions, Charters and Parchments
Joseph A. Goguen and R. M. Burstall
55. Quantifiers in Formal and Natural Languages
Dag Westerstahl
56. Intentionality, Information, and Matter
Ivan Blair
57. Graphs and Grammars
William Marsh
58. Computer Aids for Comparative Dictionaries
Mark Johnson
59. The Relevance of Computational Linguistics
Lauri Karttunen
60. Grammatical Hierarchy and Linear Precedence
Ivan A. Sag
------------------
APROPOS
Editor's note
Apropos is a new column to include pieces about a variety of issues
loosely related to CSLI's areas of research. The opinions expressed
here are not necessarily those of CSLI or the editor. We invite our
readers to submit responses and other pieces by writing to the editor
at CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 or by
sending electronic mail to MONTHLY-EDITOR@csli.Stanford.edu.
The following article, by one of CSLI's researchers, appeared in a
somewhat briefer version in the New York Times, Thursday, 2 October
1986.
AN "OFFICIAL LANGUAGE" FOR CALIFORNIA?
Geoffrey Nunberg
Strange as it may seem, the people of the State of California -- the
creators of Marinspeak and Valley Girl Talk -- will be voting this
fall on a measure intended to protect the English language in the face
of baneful foreign influences. Proposition 63 amends the state
constitution to make English California's "official language," and to
prevent state business from being transacted in any other tongue. The
vote is the most important test to date for ex-Senator S. I.
Hayakawa's "U.S. English" organization, whose ultimate goal is to
attach a similar amendment to the U.S. constitution. The
English-firsters can already claim credit for the passage of official
language measures by the legislatures of two states, but the
California proposal is the first time the issue has been put to a
popular vote or has received wide national attention.
The early surveys have shown a majority of voters as favoring
Proposition 63, many of them, apparently, on the assumption that it is
relatively innocuous. But the measure doesn't simply recognize
English as the official state language in the way one might recognize
"California, Here I Come" as the official state song. It specifically
requires the legislature to take all necessary steps to "preserve and
enhance" the role of English as the common state language, and enjoins
it from taking any action that "diminishes or ignores" that role. No
one is quite sure how the courts or legislature will interpret this,
but attorneys on both sides have suggested that it could be used to
end all bilingual education programs, as well as to prohibit the use
of other languages in everything from employment compensation hearings
to government publications and public-service announcements.
The argument most frequently offered for the English language
amendment is that immigrants "will not take the trouble" to learn
English if the government makes services available in other languages.
In a short time, proponents say, we can look forward to having large
permanent non-English-speaking communities in our midst, with the
prospect of separatist movements and ensuing "language wars."
This is not the first time in American history that such spectres have
been raised. Throughout much of the nineteenth century, bilingual
public instruction and administration were common in large parts of
the country. The wave of xenophobic hysteria around the time of the
First World War led to numerous efforts to restrict both immigration
and the use of foreign languages, both perceived as threats to the
Republic. In 1923, for example, the Nebraska supreme court upheld a
law prohibiting foreign language teaching to public-school students,
on the grounds that such instruction would "inculcate in them the
ideas and sentiments foreign to the best interests of this country."
In retrospect, this was all quite silly. The children and
grandchildren of earlier immigrants are proficient in English, and the
pockets of bilingualism that still exist -- among the Pennsylvania
Dutch, the Cajuns, the Finns of Michigan's Upper Peninsula, or Lake
Wobegon's celebrated "Norwegian bachelor farmers" -- are prized both
by locals and state tourist commissions. But of course the
English-firsters are not concerned about the threat of Pennsylvania
Dutch separatism, nor do they appear to have given much thought to the
way their amendment would affect those indigenous populations -- the
Navaho, Eskimos, and Hawaiians, for example -- who are struggling to
keep their languages alive. (Perhaps Hayakawa intends to exempt such
groups by granting them a special "benign minority" status, so as to
allow the use of Navaho, say, by personnel in a reservation school.) I
suspect proponents of the proposition are not even much bothered by
the wave of new Asian immigrants, who are reassuringly polyglot, and
could not coalesce into a monolithic non-English-speaking community.
Their real target is the large Hispanic communities in areas like
California, the Southwest, and south Florida which are threatening not
only because of their size and concentration, but because they are
seen by many as subject to contagion by foreign political interests,
much as were the Germans and Japanese of earlier generations.
But all the evidence shows that these groups are proceeding exactly as
earlier immigrants did. A 1985 Rand Corporation survey reported that
over 95% of first-generation Mexican-Americans born in the U.S. are
proficient in English, and in fact that over 50% of the second
generation speak no Spanish at all. There are important questions, of
course, as to how we can best ease the acculturation of the new
immigrants. Does it make sense to allow immigrant children to take
their math and social studies courses in their native language until
they have learned enough English to enter the regular English-only
course of study? The bulk of current evidence suggests that it does,
though there is disagreement as to which sorts of programs work best.
But these are scarcely constitutional issues, no more than is the
question of whether arithmetic is best taught via the "new math."
What is beyond dispute is that we need have no fear that America will
become a linguistically fragmented state like Canada, where a large
French community has existed since before the English arrived. (Not
that such a situation is necessarily divisive. Would Senator Hayakawa
rather live in multilingual Switzerland, or in largely monolingual
Lebanon? The English-firsters would do well to keep in mind that
"language wars" tend to erupt precisely when one group tries to impose
its language on another. In Northern Ireland, for example, it is
illegal to use Gaelic on street signs and the like, but the statute
scarcely encourages feelings of national unity. In Canada, by
contrast, talk of separatism has almost entirely disappeared since
official bilingualism was established in 1969.)
The English-firsters appear to have lost sight of the enormous
cultural and economic appeal of English, which have made it the most
widely used language in the world, without any official support.
Indeed, the very notion of an English language amendment must seem
bizarre to foreign communities like the French, who are frantically
and fruitlessly writing laws to keep the influence of English at bay;
to them, English needs protecting about as much as crabgrass. To
anyone familiar with the history of the English-speaking world, in
fact, what is most distressing about the prospect of an English
language amendment is that it demeans our own linguistic traditions.
Men like Samuel Johnson and Noah Webster held that the language should
not be subject to state control or interference. The French might
have their academy, but such institutions were unnecessary and
abhorrent in a democratic society, whose citizens would freely agree
on standards of language. This point was not lost on our Founding
Fathers, who debated and rejected proposals to make English an
official language. It is strange that the modern English-firsters,
most of whom would count themselves conservatives, have no faith in
the ability of English to compete unprotected in the linguistic open
market.
Indeed, if the measure is passed, its main effect will be exactly the
opposite of its ostensible goal: it will make it harder for immigrants
who have not yet mastered English to enter the social and economic
mainstream. Take a recent immigrant who finds a job as an agricultural
worker, or cleaning offices at night, and has little direct contact
with English speakers. The amendment won't do anything to help him
learn the language, but it will deny him help in his own language when
he goes to a state employment agency, or tries to find out about
registering his children at a local school. If some advocates have
their way, it will even be impossible for him to get a driver's
license. (Imagine the Europeans insisting that a truck driver
demonstrate proficiency in four languages before being allowed to haul
a load of oranges from Valencia to Copenhagen.)
The English-firsters like to point out that earlier generations of
immigrants were faced with hardships worse than these, and managed to
acculturate themselves nonetheless. But there was nothing ennobling
about the experience, nor did anyone learn English faster as a result.
It is only through a very long and misted glass that someone can look
back with affectionate nostalgia at the reception that our ancestors
underwent at Ellis Island, and conclude that we owe the same treatment
to more recent arrivals.
% end of part 8 and monthly
-------
∂17-Oct-86 1931 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly, 2:2, part 2
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Oct 86 19:30:53 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 13:47:05-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, 2:2, part 2
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
% start of part 2
------------------
THE WEDGE
Is LOST a Natural Language?
Brian Cantwell Smith
Here's a little argument. I'm not sure I believe it, but no matter.
If I understand things right, Barwise and Perry should be committed to
it. I'd like to find out whether they are, or have them correct me,
if not.
First, two premises:
1. An important function (if not the important function) of
natural language is to convey information.
2. Natural language is situated, which means that the
interpretation of an utterance is typically a function not
only of the sentence's meaning, but of other contextual
factors as well, including, for example, who is speaking, the
time and place of the utterance, etc.
Now my goal is to apply these insights to the language of scientific
theories, in general, and to LOST (the "Language Of Situation
Theory") in particular.
Who knows quite what theories are. In recent times they've been
viewed as linguistic -- as sets of sentences. But it's easy to
imagine arguing for a more abstract conception, which would allow one
and the same theory to be expressed in different languages -- as
English and Russian, for example. Something along the lines of a set
of propositions. But whatever you think about this, theories
certainly have to be expressed in language. Since these expressions
are presumably intended to convey information to humans, they should
presumably be in languages that humans can understand.
For reasons like this, one can argue that the various theoretical
languages that are used by theorists to present proofs, do
mathematics, summarize scientific insight, etc., are better understood
as extensions of natural language than as "formal" or non-situated.
Barwise, in particular, has argued this explicitly, pointing out for
example that `2+2=4', qua sentence, is in the present tense.
To put this same point another way, many people (especially in the
last fifty years) have understood theories by analogy with axioms in
the first-order predicate calculus: as sets of sentences, the
entailments of which are supposed to be true. But, just as Barwise
and Perry have challenged the adequacy of first-order logic as a
mathematical vehicle for explaining the information content of natural
language, so (presumably) they challenge the adequacy of first-order
logic as a metaphorical basis on which to understand the language of
scientific discourse.
Putting all this together, we have a simple conclusion: to the extent
that situation semantics accounts for how natural languages work, that
account should also, by rights, be applicable to languages of
scientific theory, including to the language of situation theory
itself ∪ i.e., to LOST. Thus there's is a certain self-referential
aspect to their enterprise (which, by the way, is fine with me).
So let's look at LOST, for a moment. Many of you will recognize it:
it has lots of double angle brackets. Here's a typical sentence:
s1 |= <<Loves, John, Mary; 1>>
According to the foregoing argument, this language, or future
developments of it, should manifest the crucial properties of natural
language, if it is to serve its function: conveying information to
people about the nature of language, information, and the world. For
example, it should be situated, in a sense that they will presumably
spell out. But if it is to possess all of natural language's
essential properties, doesn't that mean that it should eventually be a
full natural language?
I take it that would be strange. For example, one might well wonder,
if it were true, why we should bother defining LOST in the first
place, rather than starting right off with English, or Warlpiri. But
rather than pursue that line here, I want instead to take the other
tack, and to assume that, no, there *are* ways in which LOST will
differ from other natural languages. The question is what those ways
are.
Here are two possibilities. First, whereas natural languages support
various kinds of speech acts (assertions, commands, queries, promises,
etc.), you might think that a theoretical language would only need to
support assertions. If this were true, LOST might best be
characterized as a restriction of natural language to simple
information conveyance. (Note, by the way, that this is already
beyond the scope of standard first-order logic, in which, I take it,
there is no way to claim anything at all -- utterances have no
assertional force.) On the other hand, as Barwise himself has pointed
out, mathematical proofs, to take just one example, are already more
complex even than that. "Let X be 3," for example, is closer to a
performative than to an assertion. Furthermore, the language some of
us are designing with which to interact with the SIE will have at
least commands and queries, as well as assertions (`SIE' is for
`Situated Inference Engine' -- a computational system being designed
to manifest situated inference). We're doing this in part because of
a belief that it is only with respect to a fuller model of
conversation and action that the true nature of inference will emerge.
And inference, I take it, is an important part of situation theory and
situation semantics. So it's not clear that this first restriction
will hold up.
The second way LOST might differ from natural language is odder. It
has often been pointed out (i.e., I've heard it said; I'm no linguist)
that various lexical classes of English are relatively fixed in
membership, including the prepositions, pronouns, determiners,
conjunctions, etc. In fact, at least to my naive reflection, it seems
that only four classes are open: the nouns, verbs, adjectives, and
adverbs. Viewed in this light, LOST has a very interesting property.
To get at it, note that LOST doesn't exactly have adjectives or
adverbs, but does have a definite class of "predicate" or relation
symbols:
|= -- supports
<< ... ; ...>> -- something like "has as major and minor
constituents, and polarity"
[ ... | ... ] -- the relation between a parameterized soa
and a property
and so on and so forth. I'm not sure how many of these operators
there are at the moment; perhaps a dozen or so. Everything else,
however -- and this is what I find so striking -- occurs in a nominal
(term) position. For example, consider a LOST expression giving the
meaning of the sentence "Bartholomew loves Oobleck":
<<Loves, Bartholomew, Oobleck; 1>>
The English sentence has two nouns (`Bartholomew' and `Oobleck') and
one relation word (`loves'); the LOST expression, in contrast, has
four nominals (`Bartholomew', `Oobleck', `loves', and `1') and one
relational expression (`<< ... >>').
What's my evidence that the first argument to `<< ... >>' is a term
position? Several things. First, I take it you can parameterize out
of that position, as in [ x | <<x, Mary; 1>>] (the type of property
that holds of Mary). Second, the position supports complex
expressions, as in |= << [x|<<Loves,x,John>>], Mary>> (a claim that
the property of loving John holds of Mary). Both of these points
suggest that this position is treated in virtually the same way as any
other, undermining any tendency to analyze it differently. There are
admittedly semantic restrictions on expressions appearing in this
position (they must designate relations) but there are semantic
restrictions on arguments to lots of relations -- first argument to
`loves', for example, must be animate. Furthermore, I don't see that
the constraint holding among the objects that fill the roles of the
`<< ... >>' relation is necessarily directed; it seems instead that
there is merely a mutual constraint: the types of objects designated
by the 2nd through nth arguments must be compatibile with the
appropriateness (and arity) conditions of the relation designated by
the 1st. Is there any reason to suppose that the semantic
ill-formedness of <<Died, 2; 1>> lies heavier on the `2' than on the
`Died'?
(There's another line of argument against my position, having instead
to do with LOST sentences of the form `R(a)', rather than with
`|=<<R,a,1>>'. The former, one might argue, doesn't nominalize the
relation R in the way that the latter does. This seems to me right;
it's just that I haven't seen the `R(a)' form used much. If it is
used, then my sense of a difference is false, and we're back to the
claim that LOST doesn't differ in any salient way from any other
natural language.)
Here's my suggestion. Yes, there is a certain sense in which LOST is
supposed to be a natural language. First, it is designed to be used
as an extension of natural language, so that sentences like the
following make sense: "The meaning of `Bartholomew loves Oobleck' is
<<Loves, Bartholomew, Oobleck; 1>>." Second, when it is extended to
provide a rigorous account of the use and scope of parameters, etc.,
and especially when it is extended to deal with inference, LOST may
well involve "speech acts" above and beyond simple declarative
assertions. Third, statements in LOST, like statements in any natural
language, will inevitably be situated. And there are probably other
similarities as well.
But there is a difference. In spite of the foregoing points of
similarity, LOST statements that express the semantical content of
natural language sentences, in so far as possible, will objectify ∪
i.e., will use a nominal to refer to -- those aspects of the content
of the original utterance that (a) would in the original utterance
have been contributed by the circumstances of use, and (b) would have
been signified in the original utterance by nonnominal constructions
like verbs, predicates, relative pronouns, etc. Because of this heavy
demand on objectification (is objectification what semantics really
is?), LOST should be expected to have lots of nouns, and lots of
nominalization operators.
English has lots of nouns, too, and lots of nominalization operators.
What makes LOST really unique is that every other lexical class will
be fixed, finite, and small.
% end of part 2
-------
∂19-Oct-86 1121 HENNISS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Beer theives
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Oct 86 11:21:16 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Oct 86 11:06:36-PDT
From: Kathryn Henniss <HENNISS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Beer theives
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
To whomever it was that absconded with the beer that was in the fridge
at CSLI (the remains of a 12-pack of Henry's) sometime after last
Wednesday. You should:
(1) be ashamed of yourself--the bag that the beer was in
was clearly labelled "GPSG Group's Hooch"
(2) consider replacing what you removed; We meet Wednesday
nights (7:30) and any beer left over from one Wednesday is
expected to remain until the next meeting. (The beer-buyers
in the Group without cars don't appreciate having to do extra
beer-schlepping on their bicycles.)
Somewhat miffed,
KH, for the GPSG Group
-------
∂19-Oct-86 1514 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ullman@navajo.stanford.edu UG reception
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Oct 86 15:14:19 PDT
Received: from navajo.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 19 Oct 86 15:04:57-PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Sun, 19 Oct 86 15:05:45 PDT
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 86 15:05:45 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: UG reception
To: ac@score.stanford.edu
I'm holding a reception for the CS undergrads next SUnday, 10/26,
2-5PM. The faculty is welcome to attend.
---jeff
PS: please RSVP if you are coming.
∂20-Oct-86 0053 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #56
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 00:53:01 PDT
Date: Friday, October 17, 1986 4:18AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #56
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 20 Oct 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 56
Today's Topics:
Applications - Chemistry,
Implementation - Porting Problems,
LP Library - Reviews & Bibliography
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 86 08:53 EDT
From: Ed Fox <"VTOPUS::FOX%vpi.vt.edu"@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: LP and Chemistry
Jacob:
A student of mine, Marc Tischler, who is now at HP,
and I developed an expert system for analytical chemistry
using the Melbourne Australia Prolog interpreter, MU-Prolog
(which has some nice extensions beyond C-Prolog). MU-Prolog
allows interfacing to C routines on our UNIX system, so the
user interface portion could use the Curses package.
An article about this entitled "An Expert System for
Selecting Liquid Chromatographic Separation Methods" will appear
next year in "Computers and Chemistry" in case you are interested.
However, the domain of our system is quite a bit different from
organic synthesis planning.
Regards,
-- Ed Fox
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 86 00:59:34 GMT
From: Thomas C Crayner <tc@ee.ecn.purdue.edu>
Subject: C-Prolog Porting Problems
We are attempting to port "C Prolog", Version 1.3, from
the Vax version to the Computer Consoles Inc. 6/32 machine
(running 4.3BSD). The machine is quite similar to the Vax
in architecture, but there are minor differences which often
cause major problems.
C-Prolog compiles with no unusual errors, but running the
program in boot mode ("prolog -b pl/init <bootcmds") gives
either a memory fault or address error in deref() (in unify.c).
Adb reveals that this is caused by a reference in the 0x40000000
range, the same range used by "input variables." It seems to have
been near the end of "pl/grammar" when this occurred.
One change that was made was to modify the bit masks (PRIM←TAG,
etc.) so that primitives start at 0xc0000000 instead of 0x80000000,
because the stack in this Unix version is based there. Is this
necessary, i.e. is any use of pointers to stack locals (which would
be "negative" on the CCI) done, or can the masks be left alone?
Other than the stack, memory is organized very similarly to the
Vax port. Any assistance would be most appreciated.
-- Peter S. Housel
------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 86 07:48:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: Reviews
I'm in the middle of reading the Bratko book, and I would give
it a very high rating. The concepts are explained very clearly,
there are lots of good examples, and the applications covered
are of high interest. Part I (chapters 1-8) is about Prolog
per se. Part II (chapters 9-16) shows how to implement many
standard AI techniques:
chap. 9 - Operations on Data Structures
chap. 10 - Advanced Tree Representations
chap. 11 - Basic Problem-solving Strategies
chap. 12 - Best-first: a heuristic search principle
chap. 13 - Problem reduction and AND/OR graphs
chap. 14 - Expert Systems
chap. 15 - Game Playing
chap. 16 - Pattern-directed Programming
Part I has 188 pages, part II has 214.
You didn't mention Programming in Prolog by Clocksin & Mellish -
this is also very good, and covers some things that Bratko
doesn't (it's more concerned with non-AI applications), but all
in all, I slightly prefer Bratko's book.
-- John Cugini
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 86 15:47:15 MDT
From: Lauren Smith <ls%lambda@LANL.ARPA>
Subject: Bibliography on its way
I have just sent out the latest update of the Declarative
Languages bibliography. Please notify the appropriate
people at your site - especially if there were several
requests from your site, and you became the de facto
distributor. Again, the bibliography is 24 files.
This is the index for the files, so you can verify that you
received everything.
ABDA76a-AZAR85a BACK74a-BYTE85a CAMP84a-CURR72a DA83a-DYBJ83b
EGAN79a-EXET86a FAGE83a-FUTO85a GABB84a-GUZM81a HALI84a-HWAN84a
ICOT84a-IYEN84a JACOB86a-JULI82a KAHN77a-KUSA84b LAHT80a-LPG86a
MACQ84a-MYCR84a NAGAI84a-NUTE85a OHSU85a-OZKA85a PAPAD86a-PYKA85a
QUI60 RADE84a-RYDE85a SAIN84a-SZER82b TAGU84a-TURN85b
UCHI82a-UNGA84 VALI85-VUIL74a WADA86a-WORL85a YAGH83a-YU84a
There has been alot of interest regarding the formatting of
the bibliography for various types of word processing systems.
The biblio is maintained (in the UK) in a raw format, hence that
is the way that I am distributing it. Since everyone uses
different systems, it seems easiest to collect a group of macros
that convert RAW FORMAT ===> FAVORITE BIBLIO FORMAT and distribute
them. So, if you have a macro that does the conversion please
advertise it on the net or better yet, let me know so I can let
everyone else know about it.
If you have any additions to make, please send them to:
-- Andy Cheese at
abc%computer-science.nottingham.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk
or Lauren Smith at ls@lanl.arpa
Thank you for your interest.
-- Lauren Smith
[ I will be including one file per issue of the Digest until
all twenty four files are distributed starting with the next
issue. -ed ]
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂20-Oct-86 0830 CULY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Ferguson Greenberg Lecture
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 08:30:28 PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 08:16:26-PDT
From: Christopher Culy <CULY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Ferguson Greenberg Lecture
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The First of the
1986-1987 Ferguson-Greenberg Lectures
Dr. Joshua Fishman
Yeshiva University
"Cartoons About Language:
A Case Study of the Visual Representation
of Sociolinguistic Attitudes"
3:15 p.m. October 21, 1986
Jordan Hall (Bldg 420) Rm. 50
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract:
In this paper Dr. Fishman will look at several cartoons the topic of
which is language and consider the following two questions:
1. How do cartoonists know what sort of image to give to language?
Objects, such as tables, are easy to represent, but
language, being abstract, is more difficult.
2. As the society and culture change, how do the visual images
of language change?
Dr. Fishman is a Distinguished University Research Professor, Social
Sciences at Yeshiva University. He has published extensively in the
fields of sociolinguistics and sociology of language, including
Language Loyalty in the United States, Bilingualism in the Barrio,
Language and Nationalism, Language in Socio-Cultural Change, The Rise
and Fall of the Ethnic Revival. He is also general editor of IJSL and CSL.
-------
∂20-Oct-86 0840 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 08:40:03 PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 08:37:24-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12248324760.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch tomorrow in MJH 146 at 12:15. Topic: Prospects for a program in
Applied Math/Scientific Computing - - - Golub and Oliger.
-------
∂20-Oct-86 0956 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU reminder about LOTS
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 09:56:09 PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 09:52:31-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: reminder about LOTS
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 030C, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12248338434.13.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The current discussion on the CSD bboard about crowding at LOTS has reminded me
that perhaps not all of you are aware of a resource available to you. LOTS has
a Systems Concepts machine called MACBETH (formerly EPIC) which runs TOPS20. It
hasn't yet been integrated into the common LOTS systems because it doesn't
support the Common File System. It is being run in much the same way SUSHI is,
as a separate machine with its own files and accounts and with no allocation
scheme in effect (i.e., unlimited connect time).
LOTS is not willing to give MACBETH accounts to an arbitrary subset of its users
(e.g., to all CS students), but they are willing to move entire classes onto the
system. For example, since CS304 is a computing-intensive course, LOTS would be
willing to give all CS304 students an account on MACBETH to do their coursework.
As far as I know, nobody has requested having their class on MACBETH. If you
would like to move your class there, send mail to the faculty liasons at LOTS
by mailing to FL@LEAR. If you have any questions, feel free to contact John
Reuling, our LOTS liason.
-------
∂20-Oct-86 1028 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk reminder
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 10:27:55 PDT
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 20 Oct 86 10:15:58-PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 10:21:59-PDT
From: Jerry Hobbs <HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Talk reminder
To: aic-staff@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Cc: hobbs@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 20-Oct-86 10:21:59.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Robert de Beaugrande from the Institute for the Psychological Study of the Arts
at the University of Florida and the Crump Institute for Medical Engineering
at UCLA will give a talk entitled "Semantic and Pragmatic Issues in
Control: The Evolution of Complex Systems", this afternoon at 3 in EJ228,
SRI. An abstract of the talk is as follows:
Using a generalized concept of control and complexity, models of
natural language can be developed by limiting and enriching models
which incorporate the known properties of physical and biological
systems. The functioning of language is then interpreted in respect
to the development of language as an emergent property of biosystems.
The "levels" of language can be interpreted as a progressive rise
in complexity and indeterminacy from phonology and syntax over to
semantics and pragmatics. The obstacle to linguistic theory is the
attempt to squeeze indeterminacy out of all levels by taking the
simple levels as models for the complex ones, even though the
abstraction of language away from language use abstracts away from the
very processes which limit indeterminacy.
-------
∂20-Oct-86 1043 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Cognitive Science Seminar, October 28, 1986
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 10:43:07 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.53/1.17)
id AA03631; Mon, 20 Oct 86 10:30:58 PDT
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 86 10:30:58 PDT
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8610201730.AA03631@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Cognitive Science Seminar, October 28, 1986
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
--PLEASE POST-- --PLEASE POST--
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, October 28, 11:00 - 12:30*
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``The Hypotheses Underlying Connectionism''
Paul Smolensky
Department of Computer Science & Institute of Cognitive Science
University of Colorado at Boulder
Cognitive models using massively parallel, nonsymbolic computation
have now been developed for a considerable variety of cognitive
processes. What are the essential hypotheses underlying these
connectionist models? A satisfactory formulation of these hy-
potheses must handle a number of attacks:
-Nothing really new can be offered since Turing machines are universal
-Connectionism just offers implementation details
-Conscious, rule-guided behavior is ignored
-The wrong kind of explanations are given for behavior
-The models are too neurally unfaithful
-Logic, rationality, and the structure of mental states are ignored
-Useful AI concepts like frames and productions are ignored.
Firstly, an introduction to connectionist models which describes
the kind of computation they use will be presented and secondly,
a general connectionist approach that faces the challenges listed
above will be introduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Nov 11: Johanna Nichols, Slavic Languages & Literature, UC Berkeley
Nov 25: Stuart Russell, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Jan 27: Geoff Hinton, Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The UC Berkeley Philosophy Department presents David Pears, of UCLA,
talking on "The Structure of Wittgenstein's Later Philosophy",
4:00 p.m., Thursday, 23 October, in the Women's Faculty Lounge.
---------------------------------------------------------------
* Please note: Anne Triesman's talk originally set for 10/28
is now rescheduled for early in the spring semester.
∂20-Oct-86 1253 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk by Livia Polanyi, A.I. Dept., BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 12:53:00 PDT
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 20 Oct 86 12:36:55-PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 12:28:51-PDT
From: Mae Jones <JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Talk by Livia Polanyi, A.I. Dept., BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA
To: nlg@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 20-Oct-86 12:28:51.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Livia Polanyi will give a talk on "The Linguistic Discourse Model: A
Formal Theory of Discourse Structure," on Wednesday, Oct. 22 at 3 p.m.
in the J-wing conference room, SRI International. Following is her
abstract:
In this talk I will present an overview of the Linguistic Discourse
Model (LDM)--a formal theory of discourse syntactic and semantic
structure currently under development at BBN Labs. The LDM framework
accounts for both the regularities of the discourse structures
speakers interactively produce and for the ability of language users
to "know where they are in the talk" despite the many incoherencies
discourse exhibits.
The Model consists of a set of discourse grammars which specify the
constituent structure of possible linguistically and socially
significant discourse units including "plans", "lists",
"elaborations", "stories", "narratives", "conversations", "Planning
sessions", "doctor/patient ineractions," etc. A set of recursive
rules of discourse formation specifies how many units may relate to
one aother and a set of semantic interpretation rules, still to be
developed, will assign a semantic and pragmatic interpretation to each
clause and to the emerging discourse. Under an LDM analysis,
discourse is shown to have a hierarchical structure. Discourse
parsing is treated asthe construction on a clause by clause basis of a
Discourse History Parse Tree. Tree climbing and Tree building rules
determine how the attachment takes place.
The basic unit of discourse formation is the discourse constituent
unit (dcu). For the purpose of joining with other clausesto create
complex discourses, each clause is a one constituent elemental dcu.
Discourse is constructed from individual clausal dcu's through
recursive processes of sequencing and embedding. In addition to the
dcu, the LDM recognizes a hierarchy of discourse unit types. These
higher level units, such as Discourse Units (including stories,
arguments, descriptions), Speech Events such as doctor/patient
interactions, conversations, lectures, etc. and interactions provide
Contexts of Interpretation for the individual dcu. These interpretive
contexts are treated as indices on a "semantic frame" associated with
an individual dcu.
In the talk, both coherent and highly attenuated discourse will be
analyzed. The discoursae parsing process will be emphasized.
Particular attention will be paid to abstracting out an interactively
constructed "plan" arrived at through a highly complex interaction
involving several speakers and numerous interruptions and other
complicating phenomena.
-------
∂20-Oct-86 1646 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Computer Forum speakers
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Oct 86 16:12:18 PDT
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 20 Oct 86 15:49:07-PDT
Date: Mon 20 Oct 86 15:43:37-PDT
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Computer Forum speakers
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
It is once again time to organize the program for the Computer Forum
meeting, so it can be printed and go out to the member companies far
enough in advance for them to make plans. Of course, there will still
be room for some changes, but anything that doesn't get into the
original plan has no guarantee of finding space and/or time. The forum
will be held on February 4 and 5.
Last year's experiment with having the forum sessions all on campus
worked out well, and although there are some problems created by
parallel sessions, the net result was positive and we plan to follow the
same format this year.
My request to each of you is that by next Friday (October 31) you let me know the
following:
What students (with corresponding topics) would you like to have speak?
Preference goes to PhD students who will be finishing before the following
forum meeting, and who have not spoken at a forum before.
Which faculty members would like to make individual presentations? In the
past this has been limited to new faculty, for whom it is an introduction to
the forum members, or for faculty speaking on behalf of newly created
groups whose existence is of interest to the members.
What special sessions/events/programs might you be interested in hosting
(i.e, organizing)? What demands would they have for space and time?
Thanks for your continuing help in making the Forum work.
--t
-------
∂21-Oct-86 0140 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNET@IBM.COM submission to theorynet
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Oct 86 01:40:40 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 21 Oct 86 01:35:41-PDT
Received: from IBM.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Oct 86 01:35:17-PDT
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 86 15:05:36 cdt
From: schmidt@ksuvax1.BITNET (Dave Schmidt)
Subject: submission to theorynet
Resent-date: 20 Oct 1986 17:26:10-EDT (Monday)
Resent-From: TheoryNet@ibm.com
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
Third Workshop on the Mathematical Foundations
of Programming Language Semantics
Tulane University
New Orleans, Louisiana
April 8 - 10, 1987
Sponsored by ACM SIGACT and SIGPLAN
This workshop is the third in a series that is dedicated to bringing together
computer scientists and mathematicians for discussion of problems and directions
in programming language semantics. Computer scientists benefit from exposure
to relevant and potentially useful mathematical ideas, and mathematicians
benefit from exposure to the mathematics-related applications and problems
in the programming semantics area.
The invited speakers are:
Gordon Plotkin, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Neil Jones, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Jimmie D. Lawson, Louisiana State University
Stephen Brookes, Carnegie-Mellon University
John Gray, University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana
Papers are solicited on the following topics:
(1) Theory of complete partial orderings, continuous lattices
and related objects.
(2) Topological and categorical approaches to semantics.
(3) Formal and descriptive aspects of semantics notations.
(4) Applications of formal semantics to computing problems.
This list is not exhaustive, and papers in related areas that fit with
the intentions of the workshop will also be considered.
An author may submit a paper by mailing 4 copies of a preliminary version
to either of the program committee chairmen:
MICHAEL MAIN AUSTIN MELTON
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY
BOULDER, CO 80309 MANHATTAN, KS 66506
(303) 492-7579 (913) 532-6350
CSNET: MAIN@BOULDER CSNET: AUSTIN@KANSAS-STATE
The preliminary version is limited to a length of 12 double spaced,
typed pages. It should provide sufficient detail so that the program
committee can assess the merits of the research. Comparisons with related
work and references are required. The deadline for submission of the
preliminary version is November 17, 1986. Authors will be notified of
acceptance by January 30, 1987. In keeping with the spirit of the workshop,
the final version of an accepted paper will not be required for the workshop's
proceedings until May 20, 1987. The proceedings of the First Workshop on the
Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics is Volume 239 of
Springer-Verlag's Lecture Notes in Computer Science, and it is expected that
the proceedings from this workshop will also appear in LNCS. In addition
to the above mentioned refereeing process, final submissions for the
proceedings will also be reviewed. Since the proceedings will be widely
disseminated, republication of an identical paper in ACM's refereed
publications is likely to be inhibited.
The program committee consists of:
David Benson, Washington State University
Boumedienne Belkhouche, Tulane University
Ernie Manes, University of Massachusetts
Austin Melton, Kansas State University
Michael Mislove, Tulane University
Jon Schultis, University of Colorado
George Strecker, Kansas State University
Adrian Tang, University of Missouri at Kansas City
David Wise, Indiana University
Further information regarding the workshop may be obtained
from the general chairmen:
MICHAEL MISLOVE DAVID SCHMIDT
MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
TULANE UNIVERSITY KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118 MANHATTAN, KS 66506
(504) 865-5727 (913) 532-6350
BitNet: MT05@TCSMUSA CSNET: SCHMIDT@KANSAS-STATE
The local arrangements chairman is:
BOUMEDIENNE BELKHOUCHE
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
TULANE UNIVERSITY
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118
(504) 865-5840
CSNET: BB@TULANE
A final program, listing the accepted papers, invited speakers
and accommodations information will be available from the
chairmen on approximately February 2, 1987.
∂21-Oct-86 0747 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU proceedings for third world contries
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Oct 86 07:47:08 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 21 Oct 86 07:44:34-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Oct 86 07:44:29-PDT
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/21/86
at 09:26:39 CDT
Date: Fri 3 Oct 86 12:32:30-EDT
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: proceedings for third world contries
Resent-date: 21 Oct 1986 10:23:38-EDT (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
In the last STOC we decided to send free proceedings to third
world countries. Ed Robertson has agreed (right away) to collect
names and addresses of potential people or institutions.
We are planning to send fifty (and maybe more) proceedings
of this coming STOC. Please send Ed names and addresses.
His address is
Computer Science Department
Indiana University
101 Lindley Hall
Bloomington, IN 47405
His electronic address is
robertson@iuvax.indiana.edu (internet) or
robertson@indiana.csnet
Thanks for your cooperation, Zvi
-------
∂21-Oct-86 1019 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Oct 86 10:19:14 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 21 Oct 86 10:02:06 PDT
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 86 10:02:06 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"Bounds on the Propagation of Selection into Logic programs"
Bancilhon, Beeri, Kanellakis, and RAmakrishnan, (apparently an
MCC report).
This gives the proof of the result about simple-chain logic
programs being equivalent to a monadic recursion (= only one
argument on recursive predicates) iff the underlying CFG
is regular.
I always knew language theory would come to some use!
---jeff
PS: If anybody wantsan update on the design of the NAIL! ICODE
and its translation into SQL, message rfn@sail.
∂22-Oct-86 0829 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next Talk(s)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 08:29:15 PDT
Date: Wed 22 Oct 86 08:25:48-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next Talk(s)
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12248846937.10.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstract for the next talk follows.
Beta Operations: Efficient implementation of a primitive
parallel operation
Ramsey Haddad (joint work with Evan Cohn)
Stanford University
23 October 1986
MJH352, 12:30PM
ABSTRACT
The Beta Operation was introduced as a parallel programming primitive
by Hillis as a means to reduce the complexity of programming his
hypercube-based Connection Machine. The Beta Operation performs a
combination of sorting and data reduction. (One possible application
would be: sorting numbers in the presence of MANY duplicates.) We
explore efficient ways to perform this operator on the hypercube and
mesh-of-trees.
Let the input size of the problem be N and output size M (note
that 1 <= M <= N). We show how to efficiently perform the
operation in time that is a function of BOTH N and M.
If the parallel time complexity of performing the operation is
expressed solely as a function of the number of inputs, the time
bounds are trivially seen to match those of sorting --- O(log↑2 N) for
the N-node hypercube and O(sqrt N) for the (sqrt N) X (sqrt N)
mesh-of-trees. If it is also clear that if M=1 for this operation, it
can be performed in O(log N) time on either parallel architecture.
What we show is that the Beta Operation can be performed on an N-node
hypercube in O(log N + log↑2 M)$ time. For a (sqrt N) X (sqrt N)
mesh-of-trees, we require O(log N + sqrt M)$ time. Thus, we reduce
the time needed when using the parallel primitive in cases where a lot
of data reduction leaves few outputs (that is, with small M --- for
example, if M is polylog in N).
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
On 30 October, Professor Andrew Yao of Princeton University will speak
at the usual time and place. I don't have a title or abstract yet due
to slow computer networks.
The next few messages will come from Oren, since I will be in frigid
eastern Canada for a week.
-------
∂22-Oct-86 1017 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU It's a girl
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 10:17:44 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 10:14:43-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 07:40:31-PDT
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/22/86
at 09:30:09 CDT
Date: 22 Oct 1986 10:09:08-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Marty Golumbic <GOLUMBIC%ISRAEARN.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: It's a girl
Resent-date: 22 Oct 1986 10:11:21-EDT (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Adina Shlomit Pollak Golumbic says "Hello" to Haifa
Lynn and Marty Golumbic are the proud parents of a baby daughter born
16 October 1986 at 11:30am. She was named Adina Shlomit at services
on the first day of Sukkot. Weighing in at 2.9 kg, the newest Miss G.
wasted no time in calling for an immediate settlement of the nurses'
strike and putting forward a new proposal for super-absorbant Pampers.
Her three sisters, Elana Meira, Yaela Naomi, and Talia Rachel,
join in welcoming the new addition to our family.
∂22-Oct-86 1145 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 KSL-3600-8 is down for the count
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 11:45:31 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 10:50:06-PDT
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-Aim>
To: ksl-lispm@Sumex-Aim
Subject: KSL-3600-8 is down for the count
Date: 22-Oct-86 09:54:24
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2739372863@KSL-EXP-1>
We are unable to locate the IFS tape for S8, which is needed to
reformat the disk in order to alieviate the problems S8 is currently
having with it's filesystem. This tape was last seen in the pocket
inside the machine, but, following Murphy's law, is now missing. All
other IFS tapes are with their machines, as they should be. Why this
one? Anyway, we need to order another one, but this is likely to take
some time. I believe that all user's of S8 have been taken care of. If
not, please contact me (esp. if you had files on S8).
-- Rich
∂22-Oct-86 1206 LES Facilities Committee
To: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
The search committee for the CSD-CF Director position has selected a very
strong candidate, who we will now try to recruit.
I propose that we hold a meeting a week from now at noon on Wednesday, 10/29,
and lasting until about 1:30pm to discuss:
(1) proposed restructuring of cost centers and rate changes,
(2) how to dispense residual cash in the DARPA equipment grant, and
(3) meeting near-term student computing needs
I invite proposals for additional topics.
B.Y.O.B.B.
∂22-Oct-86 1430 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Facilities Committee
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 14:30:14 PDT
Date: Wed 22 Oct 86 14:24:18-PDT
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Facilities Committee
To: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 22 Oct 86 12:06:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12248912201.22.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Fine with me. Noon Wednesday Oct 29.
John Reuling would like to know if there is a way to get student
opinion on computer system policy changes. (It may be that announcing
them is really easier than asking first.) I've volunteered to open up
the discussion and collect the answers for him; I'm waiting until the
undergrads on sushi discussion dies.
It would be easiest for me to set up a temporary bboard on sushi only.
I'd like to make it available on various vaxen (rocky and navajo for
starters) but don't know how to set it up.
-andy
-------
∂22-Oct-86 1616 @Score.Stanford.EDU:CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Open House on the Near West Campus
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 16:16:00 PDT
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 15:57:47-PDT
Date: Wed 22 Oct 86 15:58:11-PDT
From: Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Open House on the Near West Campus
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: cloutier@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12248929292.39.CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Dr. Gibbons received a message from Dean Street regarding an Open House
for those faculty and research or administrative staff associated with
the independent laboratories in the region. The labs mentioned were
Ginzton, HEPL, Photon Sciences Laboratory and CMR but Dr. Gibbons felt
that some of the CS faculty might wish to attend.
On display will be the latest three dimensional model of the regional plan
along with drawings and schematic presentations. The Architects'
Collaborative (the firm who designed the plan), members of the Provost
office and staff involved in facilitating Near West campus redevelopment
will be available to discuss planning efforts with you.
If you would like to attend this open house, please call Linda McCarthy,
Street's secretary to let her know as she will be ordering refreshments.
Her number is 3-0978.
The meeting is being held this Friday, October 24th from noon to 3:00 p.m.
Sorry for the short notice.
-------
∂22-Oct-86 2023 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Talk Reminder
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 20:23:29 PDT
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 20:24:15-PDT
Date: Wed 22 Oct 86 14:08:23-PDT
From: Jerry Hobbs <HOBBS@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Talk Reminder
To: aic-staff@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 22-Oct-86 14:08:23.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Livia Polanyi will give a talk on "The Linguistic Discourse Model: A
Formal Theory of Discourse Structure," today at 3 p.m. in the J-wing
conference room, SRI International. Following is her abstract:
In this talk I will present an overview of the Linguistic Discourse
Model (LDM)--a formal theory of discourse syntactic and semantic
structure currently under development at BBN Labs. The LDM framework
accounts for both the regularities of the discourse structures
speakers interactively produce and for the ability of language users
to "know where they are in the talk" despite the many incoherencies
discourse exhibits.
The Model consists of a set of discourse grammars which specify the
constituent structure of possible linguistically and socially
significant discourse units including "plans", "lists",
"elaborations", "stories", "narratives", "conversations", "Planning
sessions", "doctor/patient ineractions," etc. A set of recursive
rules of discourse formation specifies how many units may relate to
one aother and a set of semantic interpretation rules, still to be
developed, will assign a semantic and pragmatic interpretation to each
clause and to the emerging discourse. Under an LDM analysis,
discourse is shown to have a hierarchical structure. Discourse
parsing is treated asthe construction on a clause by clause basis of a
Discourse History Parse Tree. Tree climbing and Tree building rules
determine how the attachment takes place.
The basic unit of discourse formation is the discourse constituent
unit (dcu). For the purpose of joining with other clausesto create
complex discourses, each clause is a one constituent elemental dcu.
Discourse is constructed from individual clausal dcu's through
recursive processes of sequencing and embedding. In addition to the
dcu, the LDM recognizes a hierarchy of discourse unit types. These
higher level units, such as Discourse Units (including stories,
arguments, descriptions), Speech Events such as doctor/patient
interactions, conversations, lectures, etc. and interactions provide
Contexts of Interpretation for the individual dcu. These interpretive
contexts are treated as indices on a "semantic frame" associated with
an individual dcu.
In the talk, both coherent and highly attenuated discourse will be
analyzed. The discoursae parsing process will be emphasized.
Particular attention will be paid to abstracting out an interactively
constructed "plan" arrived at through a highly complex interaction
involving several speakers and numerous interruptions and other
complicating phenomena.
-------
∂22-Oct-86 2048 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Call for papers - Computational Geometry
Received: from [36.36.0.196] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Oct 86 20:48:40 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 19:32:16-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 19:31:10-PDT
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/22/86
at 19:45:24 CDT
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 86 11:21:29 edt
From: yap@nyu-acf4.arpa (Chee Keng Yap)
Subject: Call for papers - Computational Geometry
Resent-date: 22 Oct 1986 17:28:30-EDT (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
Third ACM Symposium on
COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY
8-10 June 1987
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Papers describing either theoretical results or practical applications in all
areas of Computational Geometry are solicited including (but not limited to):
* design and analysis of geometric algorithms
* data structures for computational geometry
* applications with a geometric flavor, including:
- robotics: collision avoidance, motion planning
- graphics: hidden surface and rendering algorithms
- solid modeling and freeform surface modeling
- pattern recognition: shape decomposition
* mathematical bases for computational geometry
* issues arising from implementation of geometric algorithms
* programming languages issues in geometrical algorithms
Authors should send ten copies of an extended abstract to the program
committee chair
Chee K. Yap
Department of Computer Science
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences - NYU
251, Mercer Street
New York, New York 10012
(212)460-7262,-7273 or yap@nyu.arpa
by December 15, 1986.
Authors are advised to prepare their extended abstracts carefully. A succinct
statement of the problem, the main results, and the significance of these
results should be given at the beginning of the abstract.
The extended paper (not a full paper) should provide sufficient detail to
allow the program committee to evaluate its appropriateness to the
conference. The recommended length is 5-10 pages. Also authors should
indicate on the title page whether they intend to give a short (15 minutes)
or long (25 minutes) presentation. Note that the length of presentation
neither will affect the acceptance of the paper nor
will it be noted in the proceedings.
Authors will be notified of the acceptance of their papers by February 9, 1987.
A copy of each accepted paper, typed on model paper, will be due by March 16,
1987, for inclusion in the conference proceedings.
This conference is sponsored by ACM SIGGRAPH and SIGACT. Proceedings will
be distributed at the Symposium and will be subsequently available for
purchase from ACM.
-------------------------------Symposium Committees----------------------------
Program Committee
Herbert Edelsbrunner Leo J. Guibas
A. Robin Forrest Tomas Lozano-Perez
Steve Fortune Micha Sharir
Alain Fournier Godfried T. Toussaint
Ron L. Graham Chee K. Yap
Conference Chair
Derick Wood
Department of Computer Science
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario
Canada N2L 3G1
(519) 888-4456
∂23-Oct-86 1147 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 23, No. 4
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 11:47:00 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 10:30:02-PDT
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, October 23, No. 4
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
October 23, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 4
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, October 23, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent
Conference Room Cognition" by John Perry
Discussion led by David Israel
(Israel@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall HPSG Theory and HPSG Research
Room G-19 Ivan Sag (Sag@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, October 30, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch this week
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Distributivity
Room G-19 Craige Roberts (Croberts@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition"
by John Perry
Discussion led by David Israel
October 23, 1986
I will discuss the two main points of Perry's paper (a) efficiency and
(b) incrementality (the unburdening of belief) from a resolutely
design-oriented perspective.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Distributivity
Craige Roberts
October 30, 1986
I will offer a theory of the phenomenon of distributivity, illustrated
by examples such as "Four men lifted a piano". On one reading, the
group reading, the men denoted by the subject lifted a piano together.
On the distributed reading, each of the men has the property denoted
by the predicate. I will propose that distributivity is a property of
predications, combinations of a subject and a predicate. The
predicate need not be the syntactic VP, but may be derived via lambda
abstraction or some comparable mechanism. Distributivity may be
triggered either by a quantificational determiner in the subject NP or
by the presence of an explicit or implicit adverbial distributivity
operator on the predicate. A group reading arises when neither the
subject nor an adverbial element of the predicate contributes the
quantificational force underlying distributivity. It will be shown
that this theory, in conjunction with a theory of the semantics of
plurality along lines suggested by Godehard Link, predicts correct
interpretations for a range of examples, and also permits an account
of anaphoric phenomena associated with distributivity. In addition,
it provides the basis of a simple theory of plural anaphora.
--------------
MORPHOLOGY/SYNTAX/DISCOURSE INTERACTIONS GROUP
The first meeting of the Morphology/Syntax/Discourse Interactions
group this Fall will be on Tuesday October 28, at 12:30 (abstract
and title below). Subsequent meetings will be on Mondays, at 12:30,
on the general topic of anaphora and in several instances on the
particular topic of reflexives. --Peter Sells
Relation-changing Affixes and Homonymy
Abdelkader Fassi-Fehri
October 28, 12:30, Trailer Classroom, CSLI
Of special relevance to a natural theory of affixation are the
following questions:
a) What is the exact nature of the changes that a lexical unit
undergoes as the result of an affixation process (role or argument
reduction or increase, valency reorganization, etc.), and which
level of representation is the most appropriate to state these
changes?
b) Given that languages use different systems of homonymic forms of
affixes to express different valencies (or the same valency
organized in different ways), is there a possible account which
will predict which homonymy affixation would be natural, and which
one would be accidental?
We propose a theory of lexical organisation that answers these
questions.
--------------
PIXELS AND PREDICATES
Abstract Film -- A Dynamic Graphic Art Form
Larry Cuba
1:15pm, Tuesday October 28, 1986, CSLI trailers
Paralleling the development of the theatrical film industry, there is
a history of individual artists creating an alternative film art
guided by the esthetics of music and painting rather than drama.
Theatrical-style films are narrative, telling a story. Abstract films
are non-narrative, and use non-representational imagery.
Film artist Larry Cuba will discuss the dynamic graphic art form of
abstract film and present a number of his computer animated films. A
selection of abstract films by other artists produced with
non-computer tecnhiques will also be screened.
8 abstract films will be shown, time permitting:
Larry Cuba: "3/78" 1978,
"Two Space" 1979,
"Caculated Movements" 1985
Oscar Fischinger: "Composition In Blue" 1935,
"Allegretto" 1936
Norman Mclaren: "Synchromy" 1972
Paul Glabicki: "Five Improvisations" 1980
Bill Yarrington: "Chants/chance" 1983
--------------
SYNTAX OF SOUTH ASIAN LANGUAGES WORKSHOP
A workshop on the syntax of South Asian languages, organized by Paul
Kiparsky and Mary Dalrymple, will be held at CSLI on October 25 and
26. Non-Stanford participants will include Kashi Wali (Syracuse, New
York), P. J. Mistry (California State University, Fresno), and Alice
Davison (University of Illinois), as well as K. P. Mohanan, visiting
professor at Stanford University. The schedule of presentations is
posted in the Linguistics Department. Contact Mary Dalrymple or the
Stanford Linguistics Department (dalrymple@csli.stanford.edu) for more
information.
-------
∂23-Oct-86 1418 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Report]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 14:18:34 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 14:16:08-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Report]
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249172857.39.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils has asked that I forward the annual faculty report below to you. He
has also asked that I advise you that the Dean's office feels that this
report is very important. Please fill in the blanks and return the report
to me by December 1, 1986.
Thanks,
Anne
---------------
Return-Path: <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Oct 86 11:43:43-PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 10:12:17-PDT
From: Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Report
To: richardson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: austin-kitzmiller@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249128465.14.AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
STANFORD UNIVERSITY-SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
ANNUAL FACULTY REPORT FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 1985-86
Dear Colleague,
It is time again for a Faculty Report. This office finds it very
useful to have the information outlined below, and I appreciate your
taking time to fill out the form carefully. I realize that this represents
only a summary of your contributions to the School and misses completely
your goodwill and spirit which are equally important to our mission.
Please give this completed form to your departmental secretary by December
1, 1986. Thanks for your help with this chore and for your contributions
to the School and the University.
Cordially,
Jim Gibbons
Dean
(Please note: Information requested pertains to the period 9/1/85 to 8/31/86
only.)
Name ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Last First Middle
Academic Rank ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Department ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Teaching - Please indicate by quarter, course title, number of units and
enrollment. Also include course or curriculum development, computer
education software tutorials, specially prepared television presentations
or other relevant work.
Academic Advising
1. Number of freshman advisees. ←←←←←←←←←←
2. Number of other undergraduate advisees.←←←←←←←←←←
3. Number of graduate advisees. ←←←←←←←←←←
Supervision of Ph.D Candidates
1. Number of students for which you
are principal dissertation advisor. ←←←←←←←←←←
2. Number of students for which you are
on reading committee. ←←←←←←←←←←
Publications (Please indicate nature of work, such as books, monographs,
journals, technical reports, etc., giving title, date, pages and
publisher or issuing agency. Include only items actually published and
for archival journals include papers accepted for publication. Do not
include papers submitted for publication.)
Books and contributions to books.
Archival Journal Articles
Refereed Symposia Publications.
Technical Reports.
Presentations at Meetings and Symposia.
Research Projects
Project title and Names of Principal Approx. annual
Funding Source and co-Principal dollar value of
Investigators.(if project for which
any). you are responsible.
University Services Other Than Teaching and Research. (Include administrative
duties and other committee work.)
Professional Activities Outside the University. (Include offices in
professional organizations, services to government agencies or industry,
editorship of journals, invited presentations, and outside administrative
or public service.)
Honors and Awards
Other. (Describe below any relevant activities or make any comments that
do not fit under previous categories.)
-------
-------
-------
∂23-Oct-86 1433 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Open House on the Near West Campus]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 14:33:27 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 14:31:15-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Open House on the Near West Campus]
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU, admin@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249175610.39.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This open house will take place in Tressider's Oak Lounge East.
-------
---------------
Return-Path: <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Oct 86 15:57:47-PDT
Date: Wed 22 Oct 86 15:58:11-PDT
From: Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Open House on the Near West Campus
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: cloutier@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12248929292.39.CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Dr. Gibbons received a message from Dean Street regarding an Open House
for those faculty and research or administrative staff associated with
the independent laboratories in the region. The labs mentioned were
Ginzton, HEPL, Photon Sciences Laboratory and CMR but Dr. Gibbons felt
that some of the CS faculty might wish to attend.
On display will be the latest three dimensional model of the regional plan
along with drawings and schematic presentations. The Architects'
Collaborative (the firm who designed the plan), members of the Provost
office and staff involved in facilitating Near West campus redevelopment
will be available to discuss planning efforts with you.
If you would like to attend this open house, please call Linda McCarthy,
Street's secretary to let her know as she will be ordering refreshments.
Her number is 3-0978.
The meeting is being held this Friday, October 24th from noon to 3:00 p.m.
Sorry for the short notice.
-------
-------
∂23-Oct-86 1445 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU NWC Open House
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 14:41:37 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 14:39:18-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: NWC Open House
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU, admin@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249177074.39.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Sorry folks - I should have included this with my last message...
Since the Near West Campus is such a hot item presently, the NWC Open House
will be a good opportunity for all.
-------
∂23-Oct-86 1757 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu stuff recieved
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 17:57:38 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 23 Oct 86 17:30:45 PDT
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 86 17:30:45 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: stuff recieved
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Book: "Logic for Computer Science", J. H. Gallier (U. of Penn)
Also papers by Gallier:
"Fast Algorithms for testing unsatisfiability of ground horn clauses"
(an O(n log n) algorithm)
"Extending SLD-resolution to equational Horn clauses using E-unification"
(with S Raatz)
"Hornlog: a graph-based interpreter for general Horn clauses"
Allows clauses of the form :- BODY, i.e., no head, which
allows "integrity constraints" to be introduced into the logic program,
---jeff
∂23-Oct-86 1810 LES Facilities Retry
To: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
One committee member can't meet next week. Let me try another date --
noon on Tuesday, Nov. 4. If this doesn't work for someone, we will go
ahead with the 10/29 meeting. I will confirm the outcome.
∂23-Oct-86 2051 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Oct 86 20:51:29 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 23 Oct 86 20:40:05 PDT
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 86 20:40:05 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: stuff recieved
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu, ullman@navajo.stanford.edu
Re: Fast algorithms for testing unsatisfiability of gound horn clauses.
Apparently, Gallier is unaware of Beeri+Bernstein's algorithm for testing
implication of fd's. fd's are nothing buth ground Horn clauses.
Moshe
∂24-Oct-86 0512 @Score.Stanford.EDU:CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Open House on the Near West Campus
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 05:12:55 PDT
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Oct 86 18:01:24-PDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct 86 18:01:02-PDT
From: Mary Cloutier <CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Open House on the Near West Campus
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: cloutier@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249213799.15.CLOUTIER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Sorry that I forgot to mention that the Open House is being held in
the Oak Lounge East, Tressider Memorial Union. This is at l2:00 - 3:00
tomorrow, Friday, October 24th.
-------
∂24-Oct-86 0814 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #60
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 08:14:21 PDT
Date: Thursday, October 23, 1986 4:35AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #60
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 24 Oct 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 60
Today's Topics:
Query - Parsing Code,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part D
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Oct 86 08:13:00 EDT
From: John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: parsing systems
In the C&M book, Chapter 9 has a nice treatment on how
to build a parsing system in Prolog, eg, by defining an
operator '-->' with the interpretation: 'generates in a
BNF grammar'. Thus one merely enters the grammar for
the language of interest, and the parsing is done
automatically.
Thank you in advance for anticipated generosity.
-- John Cugini
------------------------------
Subject: Part D
DA83a Da Silva J.G.D. & Watson I. A Pseudo Associative Store with
Hardware hashing Proc. IEE, Part E, 1983
DAM82a Damas L. & Milner R. Principal Type Schemes For Functional
Programs Proc. ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages,
pp 207-212, 1982
DARL75a Darlington J. Application of Program Transformation to
Program Synthesis Proc of International Symposium on Proving and
Improving Programs, Arc et Senans, France 1975
DARL76a Darlington J. & Burstall R.M. A System that Automaticaly
Improves Programs Acta Informatica, Vol 6,p41-60
DARL77a Darlington J. Program Transformation and Synthesis Present
Capabilities Report 77/43 Dept of Computing, Imperial College (Also in
Artificial Intelligence Journal Vol 16, 1981) 1977
DARL79a Darlington J. A Synthesis of Several Sorting Algorithms Acta
Informatica, Vol 11, no 1 1979
DARL80a Darlington J. An Abstract Scheme For a Multiprocessor
Implementation of Applicative Languages Proc. of Joint SRC/Newcastle
Univ. Workshop on VLSI, Machine Architecture and Very High Level
Languages 1980
DARL80b Darlington J. Synthesis of Implementations For Abstract Data
Types Report 80/4 Dept of Computing, Imperial College 1980
DARL80c Darlington J. The Design of Efficient Data Representations
Dept of Computing, Imperial College 1980
DARL80d Darlington J. & Feather M. A Transformational Approach To
Modification Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research
Report 80/3 1980
DARL81a Darlington J. The Structured Description of Algorithm
Derivations To Appear in Amsterdam Conf. on Algorithms October 1981
DARL81b * Darlington J. & Reeve M. ALICE- A Multi-Processor Reduction
Machine for the Parallel Evaluation of Applicative Languages Proc of
1981 ACM Conf on Functional Programming Languages & Computer
Architecture
DARL82a Darlington J. & Henderson P. & Turner D.A. Functional
Programming and its Applications- An Advanced Course Cambridge
University Press 1982
DARL82b Darlington J. Program Transformation in DARL82a 1982
DARL83a * Darlington J. The New Programming:Functional & Logic
Languages Distributed Computing- A Review for Industry, SERC,
Manchester 1983
DARL83b * Darlington J. & Reeve M. ALICE- and the Parallel Evaluation
of Logic Programs Invited Paper, 10th Annual Int. Symposium on
Computer Architecture,1983
DARL83c * Darlington J. Unification of Logic and Functional Languages
Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, Date Unknown
DARL85a * Darlington J. & Field A.J. & Pull H. The Unification of
Functional and Logic Languages Department of Computing, Imperial
College Doc 85/3 February 1985
DARL86a * Darlington J. & Field A.J. & Pull H. The Unification of
Functional and Logic Languages in DEGR86a, pp 37-72 1986
DAVIE86a * Davie B.S. & Milne G.J. The Role of Behaviour in VLSI
Design Languages Department of Computer Science, University of
Edinburgh Internal Report CSR-199-86 July 1986
DAVIS78a Davis A.L. The Architecture and System Method of DDM1: A
Recursively Structured Data Driven Machine Proc. 5th Int. Symp on
Comp. Arch., pp 210-215 April 1978
DAWS?? * Dawson M. A LISP Compiler For ALICE Department of Computing,
Imperial College
DAYK84a * Daykin J.W. Inequalities For The Number Of Monotonic
Functions Of Partial Orders Theory Of Computation Report No 65 Dept of
Computer Science, University of Warwick March 1984
DEBE82a * Debenham J.K. & McGrath G.M. The Description In Logic Of
Large Commercial Data Bases : A Methodology Put To The Test
Australian Computer Science Communications, 5, pp 12-21 1982
DEBE83a * Debenham J.K. & McGrath G.M. LOFE : A Language For Virtual
Data Base The Australian Computer Journal, Vol 15, No 1, pp 2-8
February 1983
DEGR84a * DeGroot D. Restricted And-Parallelism Proc. Int. Conf. 5th
Generation Computer Systems, 1984, pp 471-478 1984
DEGR85a * DeGroot D. Alternate Graph Expressions for Restricted
And-Parallelism IEEE Spring Compcon 1985, pp 206-210 1985
DEGR85b * DeGroot D. & Chang J-H Une Comparison de Deux Modeles
d'Execution de Parallelisme "et" a Comparison of Two And-Parallel
Execution Models Hardware and Software Components and Architectures
for the 5th Generation, March 5-7 1985, pp 271-280 1985
DEGR86a * DeGroot D. & Lindstrom G. Logic Programming : Functions,
Relations, and Equations Prentice Hall 1986
DELI79a Deliyanni A. & Kowalski R.A. Logic and Semantic Networks CACM
Vol 22,No 3,p184-192
DELV85a * Delves L.M. & Mawdsley S.C. DAP-Algol: A Development System
for Parallel Algorithms Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 2, pp 148-153
1985
DEMB85a * Dembinski P. & Maluszynski J. And-Parallelism With
Intelligent Backtracking For Annotated Logic Programs 1985 IEEE
Symposium on Logic Programming, pp 29-38 1985
DENN75a Dennis J.B. & Misunas D.P. A Preliminary Architecture for a
Basic Dataflow Processor Proc. 2nd Annual Symposium on Computer
Architecture SIGARCH vol 3, no 4 , Jan 75, pp 126-132 1975
DENN77a * Dennis J.B. A Language Design for Structured Concurrency
Massachusetts Institue of Technology, Laboratory for Computer Science
Computation Structures Note 28-1 February 1977
DENN79a Dennis J.B. The Varieties of Data Flow Computers
Massachusetts Institue of Technology, Laboratory for Computer Science
Computation Structures Group, Memo 183 August 1979
DENN79b * Dennis J. & Weng K. An Abstract Implementation for
Concurrent Computation with Streams Massachusetts Institue of
Technology, Laboratory for Computer Science Computation Structures
Group Memo 180 also in Proceedings of the 1979 International
Conference on Parallel Processing, pp 35-45 July 1979
DERA85a * Deransart P. & Maluszynski J. Relating Logic Programs and
Attribute Grammars Research Report, LITH-IDA-R-85-08 Department of
Computer and Information Science, Linkoping University, Sweden April
1985
DERA86a * Deransart P. Some Ideas For Specifying Prolog Semantics
Quelques Idees Pour Une Specification De La Semantique De Prolog
PS/106 1986
DERA86b * Deransart P. & Ferrand G. An Operational Formal Definition
of Prolog A Note for the AFNOR-BSI Group on Prolog Normalization
PS/112 1986
DERA86c * Deransart P. & Ferrand G. Logic Programming Methodology and
Teaching PS/127 1986
DERS82a * Dershowitz N. Orderings for Term-Rewriting Systems
Theoretical Computer Science, 17, pp 279-301 1982
DERT84a Derthick M. Variations on the Boltzmann Machine Learning
Algorithm CMU-CS-84-120 Dept of Comp Sci, Carnegie-Mellon Univ August
1984
DETT85b * Dettmer R. A Declaration of Hope : The Promise of
Functional Programming IEE Electronics and Power, pp 819-823
November/December 1985
DETT86a * Dettmer R. Flagship A Fifth Generation Machine IEE
Electronics and Power, pp 203-208 March 1986
DEU76a Duetsch & Peter L. & Bobrow & Daniel G. An Efficient,
Incremental, Automatic Garbage Collector CACM Vol 19,no 9, pp 522-526,
1976
DIEL85a * Diel H. Types of Parallelism in Machine Architectures
Supporting Logic Programming IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth
Generation Computer Architecture, UMIST, Manchester July 15-18 1985
DIET85a * Dietrich R. Relating Resolution and Algebraic Completion
for Horn Logic Arbeitspapiere der GMD 177 Gesellschaft Fur Mathematik
und Datenverarbeitung MBH November 1985
DIJK82a Dijkstra E.W. Lambek and Moser Revisited in BROY82a, pp 19-22
1982
DIJK82b Dijkstra E.W. Repaying our Debts in BROY82a, pp 135-141 1982
DIJK82c Dijkstra E.W. A Tutorial on the Split Binary Semaphore in
BROY82a, pp 555-564 1982
DIJK85a Dijkstra E.W. Invariance and Non-Determinacy in HOA85a 1985
DISS86a * Diss M. The Use Of OBJ In Protocol Specifications presented
at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium On The Specification Language
OBJ And Applications, Imperial College Friday, 18th April, 1986
DODD85a * Dodd A. Minutes of the Prolog-2 Standardisation
Sub-Committee on Built-In Predicates held on June 17th 1985 PS/55, 2
pages June 1985
DODD85b * Dodd A. Minutes of the Meeting of the Prolog-2
Standardisation Sub-Committee on Built-In Predicates, held on Friday
27th September 1985 PS/76, 2 pages October 1985
DODD85c * Dodd A. Arithmetic for the Prolog Standard First Draft
PS/90, 6 pages December 1985
DOMO83a * Domolki B. & Szeredi P. Prolog in Practice Information
Processing 1983, Paris, pp 627-636 also in MPROLOG Collection of
Papers on Logic Programming, November 1984
DONA85a * Donahue J. & Demers A. Data Types Are Values ACM
Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, vol 7, no 3 pp
426-445 July 1985
DOOR85a * Doores J.W. Module Facilties in ICL Prolog ICL, undated, 2
pages PS/47 c. June 1985
DOWL84a * Dowling W. & Gallier J.H. Linear-Time Algorithms For
Testing The Satisfiability Of Propositional Horn Formulae Journal of
Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 3, pp 267 - 284 October 1984
DOWN76a Downey P.J. & Sethi R. Correct Computation Rules For
Recursive Languages SIAM Journal of Computing 5(3), pp 378-401,
September 1976
DRAB85a * Drabent W. An Experiment with Domain Construction for
Denotational Semantics Research Report, LOGPRO, LITH-IDA-R-85-17
Department of Computer and Information Science, Linkoping University,
Sweden December 1985
DRAB86a * Drabent W. & Maluszynski J. Proving Run-Time Properties of
Logic Programs Research Report, LOGPROG, LITH-IDA-86-23 Department of
Computer and Information Science, Linkoping University, Sweden July
1986
DUCE84a * ed. Duce D.A. Distributed Computing Systems Programme IEE
Digital Electronics and Computing Series no 5 Peter Peregrinus Ltd.,
1984
DUCE86a * Duce D. Experience of Specifying Graphics Software With OBJ
presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium On The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications Friday, 18th April, 1986
DUCK85a * Duckworth R.J. & Brailsford D.F. & Harrison L. A Structured
Data Flow Computer Internal Report, Comp Sci Group, Univ of Nottingham
October 14, 1985
DYBJ83a * Dybjer P. Semantics And Specification - A Short
Introduction Declarative Programming Workshop, University College
London pp 140-145 11-13th April 1983
DYBJ83b * Dybjer P. Algebraic Models Of Functional Languages
Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London pp 146-184
11-13th April 1983
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂24-Oct-86 0835 OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH / WEDNESDAY 10/29 10:00am.
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 08:35:25 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Oct 86 08:31:01-PDT
From: Margaret Olender <OLENDER@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: NEXT WEEK'S PLANLUNCH / WEDNESDAY 10/29 10:00am.
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(194)+TOPSLIB(120)+PONY(0) 24-Oct-86 08:31:01.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
P.S. Note change in day and time....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KNOWLEDGE PROGRAMMING USING FUNCTIONAL REPRESENTATIONS
Tore Risch
Syntelligence
10:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, October 29
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
SYNTEL is a novel knowledge representation language that provides
traditional features of expert system shells within a pure functional
programming paradigm. However, it differs sharply from existing
functional languages in many ways, ranging from its ability to deal
with uncertainty to its evaluation procedures. A very flexible
user-interface facility, tightly integrated with the SYNTEL
interpreter, gives the knowledge engineer full control over both form
and content of the end-user system. SYNTEL executes in both LISP
machine and IBM mainframe/workstation environments, and has been used
to develop large knowledge bases dealing with the assessment of
financial risks. This talk will present an overview of its
architecture, as well as describe the real-world problems that
motivated its development.
-------
∂24-Oct-86 1024 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 MacSyma
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 10:22:52 PDT
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Fri 24 Oct 86 10:22:42-PDT
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-Aim>
To: KSL-Explorer@Sumex-Aim,
KSL-Project-leaders@Sumex-Aim
Subject: MacSyma
Date: 24-Oct-86 09:54:31
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2739545670@KSL-EXP-1>
Is there any interest in running DOE-MacSyma on Explorers in the KSL?
-- Rich
∂24-Oct-86 1048 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 10:48:49 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 24 Oct 86 10:33:15 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 86 10:33:15 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: stuff recieved
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu, vardi@navajo.stanford.edu
Apparently Moshe is unaware of the fast algorithm for testing
emptiness of context-free grammars. FD's are nothing more than CFG's,
and the Beeri-Bernstein algorithm was known long before they published it.
Actually, Gallier assumes equalities are known, so the test is
more complicated than CFG-emptiness; it uses the Sethi-Tarjan
work on "congruence closures."
---jeff
∂24-Oct-86 1147 LES re: Facilities Retry
To: Facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 24 Oct 86 00:02:08 pdt.]
As Tom Binford points out, Tuesday Noon conflicts with the faculty lunch,
which is currently scheduled to be a general blah-blah session. Inasmuch
as nearly everyone can make it, I propose that we go ahead with the Facilities
Committee meeting at that time.
∂24-Oct-86 1159 BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU honors
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 11:59:04 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Oct 86 11:53:33-PDT
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: honors
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-4776
Message-ID: <12249409044.30.BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am helping Carolyn Tajnai gather information for the next edition
of our departmental newsletter. Please forward to me (berg@score)
descriptions of any honors you have received since June (or any
honors not listed in the June 1986 newsletter.)
It is hoped that this newsletter will be distributed before Thanksgiving.
I'd appreciate your responding at your earliest convenience.
My thanks for your kind cooperation.
Kathryn Berg
-------
∂24-Oct-86 1436 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Donald Knuth!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 14:35:59 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Oct 86 14:31:20-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Donald Knuth!
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, staff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
students@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU, gibbons@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
eustis@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, campus-report@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249437768.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
One of the best parts of my job is being able to send out
announcements like the following:
1) Don Knuth was awarded a doctoral degree honoris causa from the School of
Engineering and Applied Science of the University of Pennsylvania
at a special convocation to mark the 40th anniversary of the creation
of ENIAC on October 16, 1986.
2) He will be conferred the doctor honoris causa degree by the Universite of
Paris-Sud [the first computer scientist to be awarded this by this
university] on October 28, 1986.
3) He will be awarded the Steele Prize by the American Math Society in
January 1987 for the teaching of mathematics in his books The Art of
Computer Programming.
Congratulations, Don!
-------
∂24-Oct-86 1627 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Having trouble with Stanford travel?
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 16:27:45 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Oct 86 16:24:31-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Having trouble with Stanford travel?
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12249458372.40.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Mike Genesereth is being hassled by the Stanford Travel Office.
Have you had difficulties? hassles? problems?
Mostly with Janice Simonson and her operation -- expense reports, etc.
If you have had problems with American Express travel, that is
relevant also.
I'll compile the information, and see if we have something to pursue.
Carolyn
-------
∂24-Oct-86 1730 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Setting Qual dates
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 17:29:55 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Oct 86 17:26:56-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Setting Qual dates
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12249469734.28.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
In the revised Ph.D. requirements that were approved at the June 27, 1986
faculty meeting, it was encouraged that qual dates for the coming
academic year be set early on. It would be very helpful to the
students if these dates were set by Thanksgiving to allow adequate
planning and preparation time for exams. Also suggested was that each
area offer the qual twice during the academic year. Naturally, this
would not include those areas where quals are scheduled in an ongoing,
individual manner (NA, MTC).
I'd like to continue the policy of having all quals coordinated
through my office. It's important that I know which students are
taking quals and when. I'll be happy to arrange rooms, post
announcements, etc.
Victoria
-------
∂24-Oct-86 1740 avg@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 17:36:32 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 24 Oct 86 17:24:15 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 86 17:24:15 PDT
From: Allen Van Gelder <avg@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: stuff recieved
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu, ullman@navajo.stanford.edu,
vardi@navajo.stanford.edu
> From: Moshe Vardi <vardi>
>
> Re: Fast algorithms for testing unsatisfiability of gound horn clauses.
>
> Apparently, Gallier is unaware of Beeri+Bernstein's algorithm for testing
> implication of fd's. fd's are nothing buth ground Horn clauses.
>
> Moshe
Who in turn were probably unaware that they were re-solving the emptiness
problem for CFGs.
∂24-Oct-86 1819 chertok%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU Language Processing talk 10/28
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 18:18:51 PDT
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.53/1.17)
id AA06843; Fri, 24 Oct 86 17:57:03 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 86 17:57:03 PDT
From: chertok%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8610250057.AA06843@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Language Processing talk 10/28
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu, allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Jacques Mehler, Director of the Laboratory of Psychology, National
Center of Scientific Research in Paris, and editor of the journal
COGNITION, will be speaking on Tuesday, October 28th at 4pm in
the Beach Room of Tolman Hall. He will be speaking on:
``Language Processing in Different Linguistic Environments:
Developmental and Cross-Cultural Effects.''
∂24-Oct-86 2207 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: stuff recieved
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Oct 86 22:07:29 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 24 Oct 86 21:51:37 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 86 21:51:37 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: stuff recieved
To: avg@navajo.stanford.edu, nail@navajo.stanford.edu,
ullman@navajo.stanford.edu
Galliere had a paper in JLP that didn't deal with equality. There he had
a linear time algorithm. Later on he added equality, which boosted the
complexity to nlogn.
I admit that I didn't realize the connection to the emptiness problem for
CFG, though it's quite obvious. Is that problem known to be in LINEAR
time?
Incidentally, as pointed out by Kanellakis, the implication problem for
fd's turns out to be a special case of the generator problem for finitely
presented algebras. Kozen's algorithm for the latter problem (in his 1976
thesis) specialized to fd's is also linear.
Moshe
∂25-Oct-86 0142 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Nominations for ORSA/CSTS prize
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Oct 86 01:42:02 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 25 Oct 86 01:36:31-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 25 Oct 86 01:36:09-PDT
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/23/86
at 11:46:57 CDT
Date: 21 October 1986, 16:41:06 PDT
From: Nimrod Megiddo <MEGIDDO@ibm.com>
Subject: Nominations for ORSA/CSTS prize
Resent-date: 23 Oct 1986 10:08:27-EDT (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS FOR THE THIRD ORSA/CSTS PRIZE
This is a call for nominations for the 1987 Operations Research Society
of America (ORSA) Computer Science Technical Section (CSTS) Prize.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the prize are:
(i) to promote the production of excellent works advancing the state-of-
the-art in the domain of the Operations Research -- Computer Science
interface, including consideration of works in:
(a) the application of Operations Research models and methodologies
towards the solution of problems in Computer Science (for example, the
optimal placement of data processing capabilities in a distributed
database environment),
(b) the application of sound computing concepts and practices towards
better design, specification, implementation, use and analysis of
Operations Research algorithms, languages and methods (for example,
structured pseudocode methods by which algorithms may be specified),
(c) the development of theoretical mechanisms to better understand
computing as it relates to Operations Research (for example, the
algorithmic complexity of linear optimization procedures),
and
(d) the computational testing of Operations Research algorithms (for
example, statistical comparisons of algorithms in controlled computing
environments);
(ii) to publicize and reward the contributions of those authors and
researchers who have advanced the state-of-the-art;
and
(iii) to increase the visibility of excellent works in the field.
ELIGIBILITY
To be eligible for the prize, a work must in general:
(i) be published in the open literature, (for example, a book, a
technical report, or an article in a scholarly journal),
(ii) be pertinent to the domain of the Operations Research -- Computer
Science interface,
and
(iii) be written in English (or an accurate translation must be submitted
with the nomination materials).
CRITERIA
The criteria used by the Award Committee include:
(i) magnitude of the contribution towards advancing the state-of-the-art
understanding or the technical ability in the Operations Research --
Computer Science interface,
(ii) originality of the ideas and methods,
and,
(iii) clarity and expository quality of the work.
PROCEDURES
The award is given annually unless no work is deemed worthy in any given
year. The third award will be announced during the CSTS business meeting
at the Joint National ORSA/TIMS Meeting in St. Louis in October 1987. It
will consist of a certificate and a $500 prize. The results will also be
made public through the CSTS Newsletter and OR/MS Today. The winning
material may also be published in the Newsletter, subject to limits on
space and copyright regulations.
Nominations will be accepted from anyone in any suitable form. The
nominations must include the title(s), author(s)'s name(s) and
address(es), place(s) and date(s) of publication, at least 5 (five) copies
of all relevant material(s) (that is, copies of the nominated work(s)) and
accurate translations of any works not in English. Supporting materials
and justifications are certainly welcome but are not mandatory.
The award committee for 1987 consists of Donald Goldfarb (Columbia
University), Nimrod Megiddo (IBM and Tel Aviv University, Chairman)
and Christos Papadimitriou (Stanford University).
Send nominations by March 1, 1987 along with five copies of the written
work to:
Nimrod Megiddo
ORSA/CSTS Prize
IBM Research, Almaden Research center
Department K53
650 Harry Road
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
∂25-Oct-86 0241 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU ACM Thesis Award
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Oct 86 02:41:16 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sat 25 Oct 86 02:37:52-PDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 25 Oct 86 02:37:41-PDT
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/24/86
at 13:02:16 CDT
Date: Thu 23 Oct EDT 1986 11:47
From: dsj.alice%btl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: ACM Thesis Award
Resent-date: 23 Oct 1986 17:46:07-EDT (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
The 1986 ACM Doctoral Dissertation Awards have now been announced,
and two theory theses are this years Co-Winners:
"Computational Limitations for Small Depth Circuits"
(Johan Hastad, MIT)
"Full Abstraction and Semantic Equivalence"
(Ketan Mulmuley, CMU)
"Distinguished Dissertation" Awards also went to
"All the Right Moves: A VLSI Architecture for Chess"
(Carl Ebeling, CMU)
"The Design and Analysis of a High Performance Smalltalk System"
(David Ungar, Berkeley)
All four theses will be published by MIT Press.
∂25-Oct-86 1329 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM MONDAY MORNING
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Oct 86 13:29:43 PDT
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Sat 25 Oct 86 12:46:55-PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 25 OCT 86 12:40:21 PDT
Date: 25 Oct 86 12:40 PDT
From: Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: MONDAY MORNING
To: LINGUISTS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <861025-124021-2124@Xerox>
The lexical project is starting a series of presentations on the
unaccusative hypothesis.
The first one will be this monday: P. Kiparsky will give his views on
the matter and I will talk about:
Impersonal Passives in Dutch: Do we need the Unaccusative Hypothesis?
This will most likely spill over into the next meeting, which will be a
week later.
The following meetings will be rather irregularly spread over the
quarter and be interspersed with meetings on other topics. If you want
to keep posted, send me a message.
For most of you this should just be a reminder but for some, this is the
first notice for these talks; to the latter group, my apologies for
being late.
Annie
∂27-Oct-86 0653 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU X3J13 Meeting Dallas Dec 10-12
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Oct 86 06:53:28 PST
Date: 27 Oct 1986 06:30-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: X3J13 Meeting Dallas Dec 10-12
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: X3J13@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]27-Oct-86 06:30:46.MATHIS>
The second meeting of X3J13 will be held from 1pm, Wednesday,
December 10, 1986, until noon, Friday, December 12, 1986, at the
Sheraton Park Central in Dallas, Texas. Arrangements have been
made by Ellen Waldrum of Texas Instruments.
Many aspects of these early meetings are attempts to determine
the best things for this committee. There was some feeling that
this three day format was better than a two day format from both
travel and work perspectives. Having the meeting in a hotel makes
somethings easier, but it also makes the meal service more
expensive. TI graciously offered to help offset some of these
costs, but I thought that was the wrong precedent to be setting.
At the first meeting, it seemed that most people brought lunches
back to the meeting room so they could keep discussing various
issues; that is why we arranged a lunch for Thursday. At every
other TI sponsored meeting I have ever attended (once before)
there was an informal dinner (everyone ordering from the menu and
paying their own) at the Trail Dust (which is good and very
informal). We could make these arrangements for Wednesday night.
All of these food arrangements are optional.
Other aspects of the meeting (agenda, discussion papers, etc.)
will be covered in subsequent messages. -- Bob Mathis
The following is from Ellen Waldrum:
X3J13 December Meeting Registration Form; mail to:
Beverly Williams
Texas Instruments
P.O. Box 655474
MS 3651
Dallas, Texas 75265
A block of rooms is available at the Sheraton Park Central. The
rate will be $60 a night (plus tax). Please check the
appropriate dates and supply a credit card number if you wish to
have the room guaranteed. Coffee, juice, breakfast rolls, and
fruit will be available for the morning sessions and coffee and
soft drinks will be available for the afternoon sessions. Lunch
has been arranged for the Dec. 11 meeting. The cost per person
for this food service is $25. Please include a check for this
amount with the registration form if you wish to partake. Delta
Airlines has agreed to give participants a 40% discount.
Unfortunately, the reference number needed for reservations is
not available yet. It will be posted to the X3J13 mailing list
as soon as it is known. There has been some interest expressed
in having a group dinner at the Trail Dust the evening of Dec.
10 with an extra cost. If enough people want to participate,
reservations will be made. If you are interested, please note
this in the appropriate space below. If you have questions about
room or airline reservations, please call Beverly at
214-997-2108. Questions of a more general nature about the
arrangements should be directed to Ellen Waldrum at 214-995-6716
or net mail address Waldrum%TI-CSL@CSNET-RELAY.
Name:
------------------------------------------------------
Institution:
----------------------------------------------
Street Address:
--------------------------------------------
City: State: Phone:
----------------- ---- ----------------
Reservations: Dec. 9: Dec. 10: Dec. 11:
----- ----- -----
Credit Card: AE MC Visa Number:
--- --- --- ---------------------
Food Service: Yes No
--- ---
(Please make check payable to Texas Instruments)
Dinner at Trail Dust: Yes No
---- ----
The room rate is only guaranteed for reservations made before
November 17 so please mail this form as soon as possible.
∂27-Oct-86 1027 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Oct 86 10:27:46 PST
Date: Mon 27 Oct 86 10:23:47-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12250190058.15.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Tomorrow's CSD lunch will be on the subject of the latest plans for the
Near West Campus which is a matter of great interest (having to do with
which bldgs. will go where and when they will be built)! Jane Johnston
and Gordon Kino will be joining in the discussion.
-------
∂27-Oct-86 1127 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU NRC Fellowships
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Oct 86 11:27:10 PST
Date: Mon 27 Oct 86 11:20:49-PST
From: NRC
Subject: NRC Fellowships
Sender: EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: psotka@ari-hq1.arpa
Tel: (415) 723-3561
NRC Fellowships
at the
Army Research Institute
The National Research Council (NRC) and the Army Research Institute
(ARI) are entering an agreement to provide recent graduates and
established scientists an opportunity to compete for research
associate awards. One of the Associateship Programs with ARI will
focus on Intelligent Traning Systems (ITS) research. Ideally the
candidate will be interested in research on semantic memory, knowledge
representation, qualitative modelling, student modelling, causal
reasoning, or any of the other important research topics connected
with ITS. There are two levels of competition: recent Ph.D.s (5 yrs
and under) and senior scientists (more than 5 yrs). Associates are
expected to work some time at ARI. Computational resources include
Xerox and Symbolic Lisp machines, a Vax cluster, and PCs. Tenure is
for one to two years. Stipend varies from about $25,000 on up, to be
negotiated. Official applications are to the NRC, but for more
information, contact:
Joseph Psotka, Ph.D.
Army Research Institute
ATTN: PERI-IC
5001 Eisenhower Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22333-5600
(202)274-5540
Psotka@ari-hq1
To apply:
Associateship Programs
(ARI)
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, DC 20418
(Jamie Marks has the application form if you are interested)
-------
∂27-Oct-86 1413 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA I'm going to be away.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Oct 86 14:13:06 PST
Date: Mon 27 Oct 86 13:33:23-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: I'm going to be away.
To: Communications@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12250224573.46.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Just a reminder. I'll be away at the DAI workshop
from Tuesday morning until Friday night.
See you on Monday,
Rice.
-------
∂27-Oct-86 1518 LES Meeting Place
To: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
The Facilities Committee meeting on November 4 at noon will be in
Jacks 220 (Chairman's Conference Room). Inasmuch as the time of the
meeting is immoral, don't tell anyone that you are going.
∂28-Oct-86 0325 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #62
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 03:24:56 PST
Date: Monday, October 27, 1986 4:21AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #62
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 28 Oct 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 62
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 86 15:15:20 MDT
From: Lauren Smith <ls%lambda@LANL.ARPA>
Subject: Part F
FAGE83a
Fages F. & Huet G.P.
Complete Sets Of Unifiers And Matches In Equational
Theories
Proc. 8th Colloquium on Trees In Algebra And
Programming
Springer Verlag, LNCS 159, pp 205-220, 1983
FAHL83a
Fahlman S.E. & Hinton G.E. & Sejnowski T.J.
Massively Parallel Architectures for AI: NETL,THISTLE,and
Boltzmann Machines
Proc. National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Aug 1983
p109-113
FAIR82a
Fairburn J.
Ponder, And Its Type System
Cambridge Computer Lab Technical Report 31, 1982
FAIR85a *
Fairbairn J.
Design and Implementation of a Simple Typed Language
Based on the Lambda Calculus
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Tech Rep no 75
(also submitted as PhD thesis in December 1984)
1985
FARK83a *
Farkas Zs. & Szeredi P. & Santane-Toth E.
LDM - A Program Specification Support System
to be published in "Logic Programming and its Applications",
(eds. Canaghem M. van & Warren D.)
in the series "Advances in Artificial Intelligence"
Ablex Publ. Corp., 1983
revised version of paper published in Proceedings of the
First International Logic Programming Conference, Marseille,
pp 123-128, 14-17 September 1982
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1982
1983
FARR79a
Farrell E.P. et al
A Concurrent Computer Architecture and Ring Based
Implementation Proc 6th Int. Symp. on Comp. Arch., pp 1-11
April 1979
FAUS82a
Faustini A.A.
An Operational Semantics for Pure Dataflow
Springer Verlag LNCS 140
1982
FAUS83a
Faustini A.A. Mathews S.G. & Yaghi A.G
The pLUCID Programming Manual
University of Warwick Distributed Computing Report No. 4 ,
1983
FEHR84a *
Fehr E.
Expressive power of Typed and Type-Free Programming Languages
Theoretical Computer Science 33 (1984) pp 195-238
North Holland
1984
FEHR84b *
Fehr E.
Dokumentation eines PROLOG-Interpreters implementiert in der
funktionalen Sprache BRL
GMD Nr 122
November 1984
FENT86a *
Fenton N.E. & Whitty R.W.
Axiomatic Approach to Software Metrication Through Program
Decomposition
The Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 4, pp 330-339
1986
FILG82a *
Filgueiras M.
On The Implementation of Control in Logic Programming
LanguagesUniversidade Nova de Lisboa, Tech rep UNL
8/82
1982
FINN85a *
Finn S.
The Simplex Programming Language
Department of Computing Science, University of Stirling
27th March 1985
FISC79a *
Fischer M.J. & Ladner R.E.
Propositional Dynamic Logic of Regular Programs
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 18, pp 194-211
1979
FOLE?
Foley J.
A Multi-Ring Dataflow Machine
PhD Thesis, Dept of Computer Science, Univ. of
Manchester In Preparation
FOO86a *
Foo N.Y.
Dewey Indexing of Prolog Traces
Computer Journal, Vol 29, no 1, pp 17-19
1986
FOST86a *
Foster I.T. & Kusalik A.
The Logical Treatment of Secondary Storage
submitted to International Logic Programming Conference,
Salt Lake City, USA
November 1985
FOST86b *
Foster I.T. & Gregory S. & Ringwood G. & Satoh K.
A Sequential Implementation of PARLOG
Dept of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report DOC 86/2
accepted for 3rd International Logic Programming Conference,
Imperial College
March 1986
FOST86c *
Foster I.T.
The Compilation of PARLOG For The Sequential PARLOG machine
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
February 1986
FOST86d *
Foster I.T.
The Parlog Programming System (PPS), Version 0.2
Department of Computing, Imperial College
20 June 1986
FRAN86a *
Francez N. & Hailpern B. & Taubenfeld G.
Script : A Communication Abstraction Mechanism and its
Verification Science of Computer Programming, 6, pp 35-88
1986
FREI74a
Freidman D.P.
The Little LISPer
Science Research Associates, Palo Alto
1974
FREI76a *
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
CONS Should Not Evaluate Its Arguments
Proceedings 3rd International Colloquium on Automata
Languages and Programming
pp 257-284
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
FREI76b *
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S
Garbage Collecting A Heap Which Includes A Scatter Table
Information Processing Letters, Vol 5, No 6, pp 161-164
December 1976
FREI77a
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
Applicative Multiprogramming
Tech rep no 72, Indiana univ., Bloomington
1977
FREI77b
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
Aspects of Applicative Programming for File Systems
SIGPLAN notices Vol 12 no 3 march 77 pp 41-55
1977
FREI78a
Friedman D.P. Wise D.S.
A Note on Conditional Expressions
CACM 21(11), pp 931-933, November 1978
FREI78b *
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
Functional Combination
Computer Languages, 3, pp 31-35
1978
FREI78c
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
Unbounded Computational Structures
Software, Practise and Experience, 8, pp 407-415
1978
FREI79a *
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
Reference Counting Can Manage The Circular Environments
of Mutual Recursion Information Processing Letters, 8, no
2, pp 921-930
1979
FREI80a
Freidman D.P. & Wise D.S.
An Indeterminate Constructor for Applicative programming
Conf. Record of ACM Symp. on Princ. of Prog. Langs.,
Las Vegas
1980
FREN86a *
Frenkel K.A.
Evaluating Two Massively Parallel Machines
Communications of the ACM, Vol 29, No 8, pp 752-758
August 1986
FRIB84a *
Fribourg L.
Oriented Equational Clauses As A Programming Language
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 2, pp 165-178
August 1984
FRIB85a *
Fribourg L.
SLOG : A Logic Programming Language Interpreter Based
On Clausal Superposition And Rewriting
IEEE 1985 International Symposium On Logic Programming
pp 172-184
1985
FROS85a *
Frost R.A.
Using Semantic Concepts to Characterise Various Knowledge
Representation Formalisms: A Method of Facilitating the
Interface of Knowledge Base System Components
Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 2, pp 112-116
1985
FUCH85a
ed. Fuchs H.
1985 Chapel Hill Conference on Very large Scale
Integration ISBN 0 88175 103 0
Blackwell Scientific Pubs.
1985
FUJIM85a *
Fujimoto R.M.
The Simon Simulation And Development System
Dept of Computer Science, University of Utah
presented at Summer Computer Simulation Conference
July 1985
FUJIT83a
Fujita M. & Tanaka H. Moto-oka T.
Verification with PROLOG and Temporal Logic
Faculty of Eng. Univ. of Tokyo
FUJIT85a *
Fujita M. & Ishisone M. & Nakamura H. & Tanaka H.
& Moto-oka T.
Using the Temporal Logic Programming Language Tokio for
Algorithm Description and Automatic CMOS Gate Array
Synthesis
in WADA86a, pp 246-255
1985
FURU83a *
Furukawa K. & Takeuchi A. & Kunifuji S.
Mandala: A Concurrent Prolog Based Knowledge Programming
Language/System
ICOT Research center, Technical Report TR-029
November 1983
FURU83b *
Furukawa K. & Nakajima R. & Yonezawa A.
Modularization and Abstraction in PROLOG
Document ETL
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-022
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 2, 1983 )
August 1983
FURU83c
Furukawa K.
Mandala: A Knowledge Programming Language on Concurrent
Prolog ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0028
October 1983
FURU84a *
Furukawa K. & Kunifuji S. & Takeuchi A. & Ueda K.
The Conceptual Specification of the Kernel Language Version 1
( Also in Workshop on Implementation of Concurrent Prolog,
Rehovot, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-054
March 1984
FURU84a *
Furukawa K. & Takeuchi A. & Kunifuji S. & Yasukawa H. & Ohki M.
& Ueda K.
Mandala: A Logic Based Knowledge Programming System
( Also in Second Japanese Swedish Workshop on Logic Programming
and Functional Programming, Uppsala, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-076
August 1984
FURU84b
Furukawa K.
Syntactic Parsing with POPS - Its parsing Time Order and the
Comparison With Other Systems
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0073
September 1984
FURU86a
Furukawa K.
ICOT's Project - A Project Report
a talk delivered at the Third Weizmann Institute Workshop
1986
FUTA85a
Futatsugi K. & Goguen J.A. & Jouannaud J-P & Meseguer J.
Principles of OBJ2
In Proc. 1985 Principles of Programming Languages
1985
FUTO82a *
Futo I. & Szeredi J.
A Discrete Simulation System Based On Artificial
Intelligence Methods
Discrete Simulation and Related Fields, pp 135-150
(ed. Javor A.)
North Holland Publishing Company
IMACS, 1982
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1984
1982
FUTO85a *
Futo I.
Combined Discrete/Continuous Modeling and Problem Solving
1985 SCS MultiConferences on AI Graphics and Simulation
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1984
1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂28-Oct-86 0923 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Preliminary class lists
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 09:23:21 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 09:17:50-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Preliminary class lists
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU,
TAs@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12250440196.21.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hello.
The preliminary class lists have arrived for this quarter. I have them in
my office in CSD TAC (Computer Science-Tresidder) if you'd like to come by
and pick yours up.
Claire
-------
∂28-Oct-86 1052 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU YIKES! NO GOLD BIKES!
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 10:51:56 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 10:22:31-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: YIKES! NO GOLD BIKES!
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: lunch@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
"Where, oh where, have our little bikes gone?
Where, oh where, can they be?"
You know the tune. It's a familiar story with a monthly recurrence.
The original fleet of 10 gold bikes was reassembled and only 6
were available on Oct. 1. Those were six running bicycles and
now there are two. One runs and one has a flat front tire, and
that ought to be fixed soon. so, the question remains as to the
whereabouts of the other four.
You who take advantage of the bicycles know exactly what I'm
talking about and are probably familiar with that "one-way"
trip the bikes often take. If you care to have a bike picked up
from where you've left it, reply to this message with the info.
If you happen to know where a bike is sitting idle, you could
reply to this message also.
We try our best to keep functional bikes available, but to be
perfectly honest with you, it's not possible without some
"co-op"eration. so, bike riders unite and reassemble your
fleet! No one else can do it for you..(especially because people
like me with their own bikes don't care! Ha! Ha!)
So, to quote the famous philosopher, P.W. Herman,
"WHERE'S MY BIKE?!!?"
thanks for your time and consideration.
the C.S.L.I. bike service.
-------
∂28-Oct-86 1054 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Halloween Party
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 10:54:29 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 10:38:19-PST
From: Turing's Ghost
Subject: Halloween Party
Sender: EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, consultants@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Reply-To: brad@csli.stanford.edu
Tel: (415) 723-3561
&&&&&&
&&&&&&
&&&&&
&&&&&
**** &&&&& ****
**** ***&&&&&**** ****
******** ********
***** *****
*** CSLI Halloween Party ***
*** ***
*** 3:30 - 5:30 ***
*** Friday October 31 ***
*** ***
*** ***
*** Ventura Hall ***
*** ***
*** Come and celebrate ***
*** ***
**** ***
*** ***
**** ***
******** ****
********* *******
****************************
↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\/\/\/\/\\/\\\\/\/\/\/\/\//\/
-------
∂28-Oct-86 1121 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
Received: from PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 11:21:14 PST
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 28 Oct 86 11:19:19 pst
Date: 28 Oct 1986 1119-PST (Tuesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu>
To: andy@sushi
Cc: facil@sail, pallas@pescadero.stanford.edu, reuling@sushi
Subject: Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
> John Reuling would like to know if there is a way to get student
> opinion on computer system policy changes. (It may be that announcing
> them is really easier than asking first.) I've volunteered to open up
> the discussion and collect the answers for him; I'm waiting until the
> undergrads on sushi discussion dies.
Huh? You refer to only one aspect of a more complex model:
(1) the facilities committee sets (or at least reviews/approves)
*proposed* policy changes (note: students can propose changes too),
(2) student members on the facilities committee report proposed changes
to the students and relay concerns, alternative suggestions, and
other comments from the students back to the committee,
(3) once decisions are made, student members relay the info and
explain the decision process to the students.
It is certainly a good idea to encourage more student input, but I
think you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on "announcing them
is really easier than asking first". If policy changes are made as
outlined in the points above, then the issue of announcing/asking
becomes moot. I believe that most technical changes (e.g., new
programs) can follow the "install first (with advance warning for major
or sensitive changes - saving old copies as prudent) and smooth any
ruffled feathers that may result" model is a reasonable approach for
most (if not all) day-to-day matters. This is the only reasonable way
John R can get any work done! Perhaps this is what you were referring to?
--- Bruce
∂28-Oct-86 1158 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 11:58:19 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 11:56:29-PST
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: student opinion on "computer system policy changes"
To: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU, reuling@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Bruce Hitson <hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu>" of Tue 28 Oct 86 11:19:00-PST
Message-ID: <12250469076.39.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I agree that many changes can be made "install first then fix" but it
isn't clear that Bruce's model (facilities committee reviews, student
members solicit input, decision is made, student members explain) is
followed when it is appropriate. Undergrads on sushi and lookup on
lots are two recent decisions that would have benefited from this.
A good solution must avoid micro-management from advisory boards;
John should be left alone. At the same time, there are lots of
power centers that have to be accomodated.
Bruce is right that the problem is more general than I mentioned.
-andy
-------
∂28-Oct-86 1244 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Psychology Colloquium
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 12:44:09 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 11:37:38-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Psychology Colloquium
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
Psychology Colloquium
Jacques Mehler
Centre Nationale de Recherches Scientifiques, Paris
"Language processing in French and English."
Wednesday, 3:45 p.m.
Jordan Hall, Room 50 (in the basement)
-------
∂28-Oct-86 1349 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 10AM
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Oct 86 13:49:03 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Tue, 28 Oct 86 13:44:47-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA12448; Tue,
28 Oct 86 13:47:07 PST
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 13:47:02-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 10AM
To: planlunch←reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 28-Oct-86 13:47:02.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
P.S. Note change in day and time....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KNOWLEDGE PROGRAMMING USING FUNCTIONAL REPRESENTATIONS
Tore Risch
Syntelligence
10:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, October 29
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
SYNTEL is a novel knowledge representation language that provides
traditional features of expert system shells within a pure functional
programming paradigm. However, it differs sharply from existing
functional languages in many ways, ranging from its ability to deal
with uncertainty to its evaluation procedures. A very flexible
user-interface facility, tightly integrated with the SYNTEL
interpreter, gives the knowledge engineer full control over both form
and content of the end-user system. SYNTEL executes in both LISP
machine and IBM mainframe/workstation environments, and has been used
to develop large knowledge bases dealing with the assessment of
financial risks. This talk will present an overview of its
architecture, as well as describe the real-world problems that
motivated its development.
-------
∂29-Oct-86 0615 PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 06:15:40 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 06:08:24-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12250667856.9.PATASHNIK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Here are the next two AFLBs:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
30-Oct-86 : Andy Yao (Princeton)
Title and abstract still in the networks somewhere
***** Time and place: October 30, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
6-Nov-86 : Robert W Floyd (Stanford)
Programs are random walks are programs
To determine moments and other expected values of variables resulting
from random walks or from programs with pseudorandom components, a
certain systematic method seems effective:
* Introduce explicit variables to track all parameters of interest.
* By operator strength reduction (e.g., finite difference) methods,
semilinearize the computational steps.
* Introduce explicit deterministic variables that track expected values
of the random ones by linear recurrence. A well known theorem about
conditional expected values is useful.
* Find invariants of the resulting program and solve for final values.
Typically, this entails finding eigenvectors of a triangular linear
system.
The method has determined several means and variances in coalesced
hashing, and high moments of certain random walks. It uses no higher
mathematical notions than those mentioned above, and tends to provide
a firm sense of direction to the analysis.
***** Time and place: November 6, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
-------
∂29-Oct-86 1003 hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
Received: from PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 10:03:37 PST
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Oct 86 09:45:53 pst
Date: 29 Oct 1986 0945-PST (Wednesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu>
To: facil@sail
Cc: hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu, karp@sumex
Subject: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
The following messages touch on a number of issues the facilities
committee has addressed and will continue to deal with. I'm forwarding
them to this list in the hope that they will stimulate some useful
discussion in our upcoming meeting.
--- Bruce
P.S. Only the original and my replies are included.
------- Forwarded Messages
Replied: 28 Oct 86 12:48
Return-Path: <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 28 Oct 86 11:35:25 pst
Date: Tue 28 Oct 86 11:37:07-PST
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: More Unix cycles for CSd
To: hitson@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU, les@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-Id: <12250465552.22.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Given recent bboard discussions, there seems to be a demand for
Unix cycles in the CSD (some people don't like Sushi, Rocky is too
slow and is unreliable).
I suggest we convert all the CSD-CF Sun workstations to run Sun Unix.
I'm making two assumptions here:
(a) That these workstations are now severely under utilized. As I am
not around MJH all that much anymore, I may be wrong about this.
(b) That the reason for the under utilization is because these machines
are running the V-system. Precisely why this is, I don't know, but
I will hazard a guess that it has to do with lack of documentation,
lack of the software that people want to use, unreliability, and need
for accounts on a local Unix system to act as a fileserver.
My impression is that we're wasting these machines and that this is a
way to eliminate the waste and provide a LOT of CHEAP cycles for CSD.
As I remember, you two are on the CSD facilities committee, and hence
are the right people to suggest this to.
Peter
-------
Return-Path: <hitson>
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Tue, 28 Oct 86 12:48:00 pst
Date: 28 Oct 1986 1247-PST (Tuesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson>
To: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: hitson@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU, les@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: More Unix cycles for CSd
In-Reply-To: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> / Tue 28 Oct 86 11:37:07-PST.
<12250465552.22.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Thanks for your message - I wish more people would make *constuctive*
suggestions such as this. A couple of quick points:
> I suggest we convert all the CSD-CF Sun workstations to run Sun Unix.
"convert...to run" is probably not the best approach, rather, "configure
to that they can run" is probably more appropriate. It is strictly a
matter of religion whether the default boot sequence gives you Sun
Unix, V-System, or something else. Both/all should be available;
additionally, it would be nice if there were instructions on each
workstation telling how to boot "interesting" configurations (or at
least where to find info). I've lobbied for this in the past, but my
words seem to have fallen on deaf ears - this effort will continue.
This avenue is being actively pursued. The diskless workstations need
to have file servers available in order to run Sun Unix, and these have
already been purchased [I believe one is in the basement now]. Thus, it
is only "a matter of time" before what you suggest will be possible.
> I'm making two assumptions here:
>
> (a) That these workstations are now severely under utilized. As I am
> not around MJH all that much anymore, I may be wrong about this.
I think "severely under utilized" is not correct. The machines I am
familiar with that are in semi-public places are regularly in use.
> (b) That the reason for the under utilization is because these machines
> are running the V-system. Precisely why this is, I don't know, but
> I will hazard a guess that it has to do with lack of documentation,
> lack of the software that people want to use, unreliability, and need
> for accounts on a local Unix system to act as a fileserver.
I disagree with a number of these guesses. My guess as to why the
machines are not used more heavily has to do with their physical
placement in the building. Most (all?) are in student offices (some on
student desks), and other non-public or at best semi-public places.
The only *truly* public machine (ignoring for the moment issues of
access to MJH) is in the basement.
Your point w.r.t. documentation is a good one. I would advocate that
CSD-CF obtain (purchase if necessary) enough V-system manuals so that
one can be attached to each workstation. Similarly, basic information
about Sun-Unix and other systems should be provided with each public
workstation. Minimal information should be a page describing "how to
boot X" on each machine.
Another point that should not be forgotten is that machines running V
are available as resources to all other V users. An "obviously idle"
machine (translation - nobody sitting in front of the keyboard) can and
I would claim often *is* in active use running servers, acting as
a remote computation resource, etc. If you look at these machines in a
more general way, they are part of the department's "large scale loosly
coupled multiprocessor with over 40 Sun2, Sun3, and MicroVaxII
processors". I should add that I am in the V-group, but I think I'm
being objective when I say that these machines are fairly heavily used
and that it is useful for both the department as a whole to have the
ability to run V in this 40-plus processor configuration (and of
course, it is helpful for the V group as well). Perhaps the V group
needs to work a little harder to show people all the wonderful things
that can be done using V.
One thing that makes a workstation useless pretty fast is lack of a
mouse. There has in the past (and maybe still now?) been a problem
with mouse pads for the optical mice being stolen - CSD-CF should
immediately attend to this (last I knew, the machine in the basement of
MJH was affected). They have been attentive to this in the past, but
those mouse pads continue to be a popular theft item.
> My impression is that we're wasting these machines and that this is a
> way to eliminate the waste and provide a LOT of CHEAP cycles for CSD.
I think you overestimate the amount of "excess bandwidth" remaining in
these machines. Even if you had all 10 running Sun Unix right now, you
support (at most) 10 more users - and my guess that you would
effectively support only 3-4 more users. Another point is that these
machines provide a different type of bandwidth - single user high
performance workstation bandwidth. If you want a timesharing system
for reading mail and netnews, this is probably not the way to go about
it.
So, in summary,
(1) we are moving in the direction to make department workstations
capable of running Sun Unix and other things, however,
(2) I don't think this will help much with the problem you describe
namely, perceived lack of [general purpose] Unix cycles,
(3) improved documentation is needed whatever these machines end
up running,
(4) other avenues may be needed [e.g., trade in a Dec20 for a Vax8x00
or obtain additional timeshared Unix cpu cycles] to improve
the situation w.r.t. general purpose Unix cycles.
Well, this is only a quick beginning - there are many other issues to
to discuss and more elaboration is needed on the ones I've mentioned
briefly above. I'll forward your messages and this reply to the
facilities committee as a basis for future discussions. Please keep
those suggestions coming!!!
--- Bruce
Return-Path: <hitson>
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Oct 86 09:34:36 pst
Date: 29 Oct 1986 0934-PST (Wednesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson>
To: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: hitson, les@sail
Subject: Re: More Unix cycles for CSd
In-Reply-To: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> / Tue 28 Oct 86 13:39:59-PST.
<12250487919.22.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
> Regarding current use of these Suns: when you see people using them,
> are they actually running programs on them (mail, editors, text
> processing, assignments), or are they merely using them as terminals?
> My guess is that it's largely the latter.
It is true that many people simply use these as fancy terminal
emulators to access timesharing systems. I think that this is largely
due to ignorance of what resources they really have at their disposal.
There are a non-zero number of more sophisticated users who use VEMACS
(as you might have guessed, a version of EMACS that runs under V), and
a few that use LaTeX and Show (document previewer). Using only these
three V-system supported tools, editing, document compilation, and
previewing of output provides a convenient "desktop publishing"
capability to V users - this has existed for at least a year now.
Remote compilation is another typical use of the V-System. A mail
interface is also available (I'm using it now).
> Also, you say that if we had 10 Suns running Unix we'd add at most
> 10 concurrent users. Since these machines are as fast or faster
> than a 780, seems to me each of them could easily support say 5 users -
> most remote via an ethernet connection, in a timesharing mode, with
> these people reading mail, etc, from the fileserver. Perhaps this
> conflicts with the normal view of a Sun as a single-user workstation,
> but my view is: put the cycles out there (on Sushi, Suns, Rocky, etc)
> and let people decide how they want to use them.
My remarks were based on my idea of the "intended use" of these
systems. If we wanted general purpose timesharing systems, we would
not have bought fancy (and expensive) bitmapped displays, and put the
workstations on people's desks. Instead, we would have bought cpus
only, put them into a processor pool, locked them in the basement
somewhere, and let people access them in the way you suggest. Now in
the current configuration, you could run the systems as timesharing
systems as you suggest, but the physical setup is not optimal - when a
random user comes up to a workstation sitting on a desk and pushes the
boot button when they want to run their own application, the
timesharing users get nuked. In my view, the Suns provide a different
resource that (I think) the department needs - high performance
engineering workstations. I guess you are arguing that general purpose
Unix cpu cycles might be more valuable. Perhaps we are both right.
> I agree with your point that the V-group should work harder to show
> CSD all the wonderful things that the V-system can do. I also agree
> with your points about documentation. In fact, two years ago I sent
> a msg to the entire dsg suggesting these points and a number of others.
> I got fairly encouraging replies from Lantz and Cheriton, and while my
> impression is that some progress has been made in that time, I feel
> that little enough has been made that it's time to stop waiting and
> give up on the V-system as a general-purpose tool for the department.
> This may be a harsh, but it is I think, fair.
I won't comment on this except to say that as a researcher in
distributed systems, I'm constantly torn between advancing my research
interests vs supporting new (non-research) features and fixing bugs in
V (or any other system). Allocating resources: a tough problem in general...
Final thought: I'll ask David Cheriton if he's interested in conducting
something like a "Seminar on Making the Best Use of the V-System".
Perhaps this can be generalized (by working with other interested
parties at Stanford) to be "How to Make the Best Use of [Graduate]
Computing Resources" at Stanford. As with most things, it is a matter
of the amount of effort involved. Will you be willing to invest some
energy in helping to make this (or something similar) happen?
Historically (and probably into the future as well), the impetus will
(need to) come from the students and others who want to use the
machines. A chicken-and-egg problem I admit...
--- Bruce
------- End of Forwarded Messages
∂29-Oct-86 1101 REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU Colloquium list reminder
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 11:01:43 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 10:58:12-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Colloquium list reminder
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: CSD@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks Hall 030c, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12250720610.35.REULING@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This is a reminder about submitting and reading colloquium notices.
Colloquium announcements are available on the SU-EVENTS bboard or
su.events newsgroup on most CSD machines. If you wish to receive
colloquium announcements as mail, send a note to LISTS@SCORE asking
to be added to the Colloquium mailing list.
To post a colloquium notice, send it to COLLOQ@SCORE. It will be
redistributed to many bay area colloquium bulletin boards, including
SU-EVENTS, as well as to personal mailboxes on the list.
If you would like your CSD Colloquium notice to be included in the
weekly CSD Colloquium Announcement, send it to SUBMIT-COLLOQ@SCORE.
These messages are batched together and distributed to the
COLLOQ@SCORE list; in addition, hard copies are sent out via US Mail
to those on our physical colloq mailing list. These notices will also
appear in the <CS.PUBLIC> files TODAY.TXT, WEEK.TXT, and TALKS.TXT,
available on Score and Sushi and will be available to Sunrise Club
members on Sierra.
-John
-------
∂29-Oct-86 1214 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU German translation
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 12:14:26 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 12:11:08-PST
From: Peter Sells <Sells@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: German translation
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Dr. Hadumod Bussmann, of the University of Munich, is visiting the Bay Area
for 6 months in preparation for an English translation of her book "Lexikon
der Sprachwissenschaft", a glossary of linguistic terms and ideas. She is
looking for someone with good knowledge of German and linguistics to act as
translator for the English version; this is a large and long-term project.
If you might be interested in finding out more about this, or know someone
else that might be, please let me know.
Peter
-------
∂29-Oct-86 1248 binford@su-whitney.arpa Meeting Place
Received: from WHITNEY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 12:47:52 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Oct 86 12:51:47 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 86 12:51:47 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest's message of 27 Oct 86 1518 PST
Subject: Meeting Place
Les
I will be out of town on Nov 4 for an invited talk at FJCC.
tom
∂29-Oct-86 1429 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday/Black Friday dates
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 14:29:09 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 14:14:09-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday/Black Friday dates
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12250756283.17.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Gray Tuesday has been moved to late Autumn Quarter this year. This is
not necessarily a permanent move and will be re-evaluated at the end
of the academic year. It has been scheduled for Tuesday, December 9
at 2:30. Black Friday will take place Tuesday, June 2, same time.
Please mark your calendars.
Victoria
-------
∂29-Oct-86 1459 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU reminders
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 14:59:49 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 14:54:22-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: reminders
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
1. CSLI Publications
Requests for the Monthly, the Calendar, and changes in mailing lists
should be sent to REQUESTS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU or to EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU.
Requests for all other publications should be sent to
PUBLICATIONS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU or to TRUDY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU.
In fact, Emma, Trudy, and I do the right things with whatever
requests we receive, so don't worry if you don't send
requests to exactly the right mailboxes. BUT do send them
to one of these places. Other alternatives may not work.
2. Visitors
Please let Leslie, Jamie, or me know as soon as possible if you
have invited a visitor -- especially if you would like your visitor
to have office space or to meet with CSLI researchers. We need
as much lead time as possible to make such arrangements.
Thanks,
Betsy
-------
∂29-Oct-86 2042 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Oct 86 20:42:24 PST
Date: Wed 29 Oct 86 20:13:29-PST
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
To: hitson@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU
cc: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU, karp@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Bruce Hitson <hitson@pescadero.stanford.edu>" of Wed 29 Oct 86 09:45:00-PST
Message-ID: <12250821697.34.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I feel compelled to correct a remark that was made in Bruce's exchange
with Peter. It went, "Since these machines are as fast or faster than
a 780 . . ." and it was referring to Sun 2/120 and Sun 2/50
workstations. This is, as I understand it (based on hearsay
evidence), far from correct. A Sun 3 with enough memory and a local
disk will outperform a 780. A Sun 2 similarly equipped will not. A
Sun 2 without a local disk and less than 4 megabytes of memory (the
machines in question have only 2 Mb) running Sun Unix does not present
even a single user with the appearance of a high-performance
workstation. The same machine running V does.
joe
-------
∂29-Oct-86 2335 LES re: Unix/Workstations resource discussion...
To: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: Karp@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 29 Oct 86 20:13:29-PST.]
Actually, we have bought enough memory to upgrade all the Sun 2s to 4 meg.
∂30-Oct-86 0312 JJW Ignorant and Mt St Coax switched
To: MJH-LispM@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
By switching console cables at the processors, I've made Ignorant be the
machine used in MJH 360, and Mt St Coax in MJH 324. This was done to be
able to save a world load with Macsyma on the MJH 360 machine, which now
has the Eagle disk. Ignorant is still the SYS host and namespace server.
If Mt St Coax or Ignorant is your home system, you will probably want to
switch to the other and copy your files. Otherwise, this change should
have no effect except that you should be aware of the new location of
Ignorant.
Joe
∂30-Oct-86 1202 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice No Planlunch next week
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 11:59:23 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Thu, 30 Oct 86 11:45:19-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA15787; Thu,
30 Oct 86 11:47:36 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 11:47:32-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: No Planlunch next week
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(193)+TOPSLIB(120) 30-Oct-86 11:47:32.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
There will be no PLANLUNCH next week. The next scheduled seminar
is for the week of Nov. 17.
=Amy Lansky
-------
∂30-Oct-86 1226 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu CS 545 talk
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 12:26:48 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 30 Oct 86 12:07:50 PST
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 86 12:07:50 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: CS 545 talk
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
I'm giving the 545 talk tomorrow 3:15, 352 MJH on the
current status of NAIL!.
---jeff
∂30-Oct-86 1242 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Bats at Berkeley? mooooo!
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 12:42:04 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 10:41:25-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Bats at Berkeley? mooooo!
To: aflb.su@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12250979701.40.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
For newcomers and forgetful oldtimers:
BATS is the Bay Area Theory Seminar. It is a monthly
theoretical computer science seminar series that rotates between
Berkeley, Stanford, DEC-SRC, IBM Almaden or UC Santa Cruz. Usually,
they take place on Fridays with the format being roughly: a talk at
10AM, a talk at 11AM, lunch at noon (provided by the host
institution), a talk at 1PM, a talk at 2PM. The four speakers are
usually drawn from the five institutions.
For everyone:
The first BATS this year will be in Berkeley on Friday,
November 14. The four speakers will be Amos Fiat of Berkeley, Martin
Abadi of Stanford, Larry Stockmeyer of IBM, Moshe Vardi of IBM.
Upcoming messages will give abstracts and travel info as they become
available.
The second BATS will be at DEC-SRC (downtown Palo Alto) in
December. The third BATS will be at Stanford in January. If anyone
from Stanford would like to be considered for giving a talk at one of
these two BATS, send me a note.
Ramsey Haddad
-------
∂30-Oct-86 1403 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 14:03:30 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 13:49:36-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12251013958.26.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will NOT be a senior faculty meeting on November 4. There will be,
however, a meeting scheduled at a future date (not too) to discuss the
possible new appointment of Janos Komlos. More information to follow.
-Anne
-------
∂30-Oct-86 1456 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, October 30, No. 5
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 14:54:52 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 13:49:14-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, October 30, No. 5
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
(Sorry for the delay; Turing was down for 18 hours)
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
October 30, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 5
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, October 30, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch this week
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Distributivity
Room G-19 Craige Roberts (Croberts@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, November 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Concepts of Language" by Noam Chomsky
Conference Room Discussion led by Thomas Wasow
(Wasow@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall The Construction of Thought
Room G-19 Adrian Cussins (Adrian@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "Concepts of Language" by Noam Chomsky
Chap. 2 of "Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use"
discussion led by Thomas Wasow
November 6, 1986
Chomsky argues against concepts of language that treat it as something
external to the speaker; language, so conceived, is alleged to be an
"epiphenomenon." Instead, Chomsky says that the object of study in
linguistics should be the internalized knowledge of the speaker--that
is, what he has previously called grammar and now refers to as
"I-language." This, he claims, is more concrete, since it has a
physical reality in the "mind/brain." His position seems to be at
odds with the claim (frequently made around here) that language is
"situated" and should not be studied apart from its context of use.
Are these views really incompatible, and, if so, who is wrong?
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
The Construction of Thought
Adrian Cussins
November 6, 1986
How could the physical world make available the transition between a
way of being which does not admit experience or thought to a way of
being which does? How could it be that `in' the world there are
things which think `about' the world?
I shall outline my conception of what it would be to provide a
psychological theory that answers these questions and I shall consider
the theory's relation to philosophical, linguistic, neurophysiological
and computational accounts.
I shall leave a couple of copies of my thesis with the receptionist
should anyone want further details, but no reading will be
presupposed.
-------
∂30-Oct-86 1616 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU More BATS info
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 16:16:17 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 16:10:37-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: More BATS info
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12251039629.29.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
true to my word ...
---------------
BATS will be held at Berkeley on Friday, November 14 in Sibley Auditorium
in the Bechtel Engineering Center.
The schedule is as follows:
10:00 Larry Stockmeyer (IBM): Flipping Persuasively in Constant Time
11:00 Martin Abadi (Stanford): How much do you really have to trust your
oracle?
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Amos Fiat (Berkeley): Fibonacci Lattices: Theory and Application
2:00 Moshe Vardi (IBM): An automata-theoretic approach to automatic
program verification
Driving directions will follow later.
FLIPPING PERSUASIVELY IN CONSTANT TIME
Larry Stockmeyer, IBM Almaden Research Center
ABSTRACT:
A persuasive coin is a sufficiently unbiased source of randomness
visible to sufficiently many processors in a distributed system. In the
absence of failures, it suffices for any processor to flip a coin and
broadcast the result. However, if processors can fail, either because
their random number generators are faulty or because they are actually
malicious, the problem becomes more interesting. As in other
contexts, the purpose of randomization in a distributed system is to
defeat an adversary which cannot predict the random choices. Rabin and
Ben-Or have shown that coins can be particularly effective in a
distributed system, where they can be used to obtain algorithms that
with high probability beat impossibility results for deterministic
algorithms. In this talk we describe an algorithm for a persuasive
coin where the number of rounds of message exchange among the processors
is constant, independent of the number n of processors in the system as
well as the number of faults, provided the total number of faulty
processors does not exceed a certain constant multiple of n/log n.
Several versions of the protocol will be discussed. The different
versions handle different amounts of information which the faulty
processors have about the messages of correct processors.
This is joint work with Cynthia Dwork and David Shmoys.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Encrypted questions:
How much do you have to trust your oracle?
Martin Abadi, Stanford University
We consider the problem of computing with encrypted data. Player A wishes to
know the value of f(x) for some x, but lacks the power to compute it. Player B
has the power to compute f and is willing to send f(y) to A if she sends him y,
for any y. Informally, the problem f is ``encryptable'' if A, using her
inferior resources, can transform the ``cleartext instance'' x into an
``encrypted instance'' y, obtain f(y) from B, and infer f(x) from f(y) in such a
way that B cannot infer x from y.
We define the framework needed to say precisely what an encrypted instance
reveals about a cleartext instance. We discuss specific encryption functions
for problems of importance in cryptography. We prove several theorems about
the relationship between encryptability and computational complexity. For
instance, if the polynomial hierarchy does not collapse at the second level,
there is no polynomial-time encryption function for SAT that reveals at
most the size of cleartext instances. The proof of this theorem involves a
strengthening of Karp and Lipton's results on the nonuniform complexity of NP.
This is joint work with Joan Feigenbaum of AT&T Bell Laboratories.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Fibonacci Lattices: Theory and Application
Amos Fiat
We deal with questions relating to uniformly distributed sets of points
on the infinite integral plane. The theory of Fibonacci lattices
is developed and placed in context within the
general theory of irregularities of distribution. This leads to
generalizations and extensions of the classical theory.
The theory of Fibonacci lattices yields efficient and often
optimal solutions for a variety of optimization
problems in computer science: architectures for general
purpose systolic computers, VLSI layout problems,
2D search algorithms, mesh connected sorting networks,
and allocation of parallel memories for 2 dimensional
applications.
These results are simple, highly usable, and perform better for
practical problem sizes than at the limit.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Moshe Y. Vardi
Almaden Research Center
We describe an automata-theoretic approach to automatic verification of
concurrent finite-state programs by model checking. The basic idea underlying
this approach is that for any temporal logic specification we can construct
a finite-state automaton that specify the same computations. The
model-checking algorithm that results from this approach is rather simple
and clean. We use this approach to extend model-checking to probabilistic
concurrent finite-state programs.
-------
∂30-Oct-86 1706 ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU PDP DISCUSSION GROUP
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Oct 86 17:06:21 PST
Date: Thu 30 Oct 86 17:02:10-PST
From: Adrian Cussins <ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: PDP DISCUSSION GROUP
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
A number of us are interested in forming a committed discussion
group to talk about work in the the two new PDP volumes: "Parallel
Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition"
(eds) D.E. Rumelhart and J.L. McClelland and the PDP Research Group
(Bradford Books, 1986). The aim would be partly the autodidactic one of
using the resources of the group to understand the more difficult parts (ie.
helping each other out) but also to understand the consequences of the PDP
approach for work in cognitive science generally. For example, what kind of
representation is employed in PDP models? The phrase, "sub-conceptual
semantics" is sometimes used. What does this mean? What implications do
PDP models have for natural language processing? Or perceptual Processing?
Or cognitive processing? Is the PDP approach more suited to situated
cognition that von Neumann models? (PDP representation is not formal, etc.)
We would probably begin meeting next quarter, but it would be a good
idea to have read some of the material before then, so would any interested
people let me know, perhaps also preferences for a meeting time.
- Adrian
-------
∂31-Oct-86 0759 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD/CSL Reunion
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 07:57:32 PST
Date: Fri 31 Oct 86 07:48:55-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD/CSL Reunion
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12251210441.18.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The reunion was announced in Nils' newsletter in June, but apparently
was not noted by all.
John Levy is spearheading the reunion. The committee:
John Levy, John Shoch, Linda Lorenzetti, Amy Lansky, Skip Stritter,
Bill White, Marc Kaufman, Tom Bredt and I.
Dates:
Thursday, March 26 - evening reception at Faculty club
Friday, March 27 - all day sessions, banquet at Faculty club
Sat., March 28 - demonstrations and picnic
All CSD/CSL alumni, former faculty, and friends are invited to
participate. There will be more information in Nils' November
newsletter.
Carolyn
-------
∂31-Oct-86 0932 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU FTCS17 Call for Papers -- important changes
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 09:32:49 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 31 Oct 86 09:27:06-PST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 31 Oct 86 09:25:54-PST
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/31/86
at 11:10:11 CST
Date: 29 October 1986, 09:48:52 PST
From: Flaviu Cristian <FLAVIU@ibm.com>
Subject: FTCS17 Call for Papers -- important changes
Resent-date: 31 Oct 1986 12:03:53-EST (Friday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
FTCS17
THE SEVENTEENTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM
ON FAULT-TOLERANT COMPUTING
sponsored by IEEE Computer Society's Technical
Committee on Fault-Tolerant Computing
Pittsburgh, PA, July 6-8, 1987
--------------------------------------------------
: Please note the changes in Symposium dates and :
: location and paper submission dealine! :
:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←:
The Fault-Tolerant Computing Symposium has, since 1971, become the
most important forum for discussion of the state-of-the-art in
fault-tolerant computing. It addresses all aspects of specifying,
designing, modeling, implementing, testing, diagnosing and evaluating
dependable and fault-tolerant computing systems and their components.
A special theme of the conference will be the practical application of
fault-tolerance to the design of safety critical systems, real-time
systems, switching systems and transaction systems.
Papers relating to the following areas are invited:
a) design methods and algorithms for distributed
fault-tolerant software systems,
b) specification, design, testing, verification of reliable software,
c) specification, design, testing, verification, and diagnosis of
reliable hardware
d) fault-tolerant hardware system design and architecture,
e) reliability, availability, safety modeling and measurements,
f) fault-tolerant computing systems for safe process control,
digital switching, manufacturing automation, and on-line
transaction processing.
Authors should submit 6 copies of papers before the submission
deadline December 5, 1986 to the program co-chairmen: Flaviu
Cristian, IBM Research K55/801, 650 Harry Rd., San Jose, Ca
95120-6099, USA, and Jack Goldberg, SRI International, 333
Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, Ca 94025. Papers in areas a, b, and f
should be sent to F. Cristian, and papers in areas c, d, and e to
J. Goldberg.
Papers should be no longer than 5000 words, should include a clear
description of the problem being discussed, comparisons with extant
work, and a section on major original contributions. The front page
should include a contact author's complete mailing address, telephone
number and net address (if available), and should clearly indicate the
paper's word count and the area to which the paper is submitted.
Submissions arriving late or departing from these guidelines risk
rejection without consideration of their merits.
The Symposium chair and vice-chair are John Shen and Dan Siewiorek,
both from Carnegie Mellon University, USA. The program co-chairmen
are: Flaviu Cristian, IBM Research, USA, and Jack Goldberg, SRI
International, USA. Publicity chairman is Bella Bose, Oregon State
Univ., USA.
The program committee consists of: Jacob Abraham, USA, Vinod Agarwal,
Canada, Sheldon Akers, USA, Philip Bernstein, USA, Bill Carter, USA,
Jim Gray, USA, Reinhold Gueth, Switzerland, Hirokazu Ihara, Japan,
Ravi Iyer, USA, Kozo Kinoshita, Japan, John Knight, USA, Herman
Kopetz, Austria, Leslie Lamport, USA, Jean-Claude Laprie, France,
Gerard Le Lann, France, Nancy Leveson, USA, Barbara Liskov, USA, Bev
Littlewood, UK, Ed McCluskey, USA, Michael Melliar-Smith, USA, David
Parnas, Canada, David Rennels, USA, Richard Schlichting, USA, Fred
Schneider, USA, Dan Siewiorek, USA, Dale Skeen, USA, Basil Smith, USA,
Yoshi Tohma, Japan, Wing Toy, USA, Kishor Trivedi, USA. Ex Officio
member: Tom Anderson, UK, TC chairman.
∂31-Oct-86 1013 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 10:13:45 PST
Date: Fri 31 Oct 86 10:10:08-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12251236149.47.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
fyi
---------------
Return-Path: <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>
Received: from glacier.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Oct 86 19:21:59-PST
Received: from odie.stanford.edu by glacier.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 30 Oct 86 19:18:20 pst
Received: by odie.stanford.edu; Thu, 30 Oct 86 16:06:47 PST
Date: 30 Oct 1986 1606-PST (Thursday)
From: Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>
To: cis-people@glacier.stanford.edu
Cc: pelzl@odie.stanford.edu, plummer@sierra.stanford.edu
Subject: DRAMs
Intel has offered to donate several thousand 64K and 256K CMOS DRAMs to
groups at Stanford that could use them in their research projects. If
you would like some of these, please let me know. They are anxious to
give them to us ASAP.
Jim Plummer
-------
∂31-Oct-86 1204 KAHN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA MACLISP --> INTERLISP
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 12:03:07 PST
Date: Fri 31 Oct 86 12:00:10-PST
From: Michael Kahn <KAHN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: MACLISP --> INTERLISP
To: ksl-dolphins@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12251256181.75.KAHN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Certainly this request has been seen before.....
Anybody here at Stanford have his/her hands on a MACLISP to InterLISP
conversion program?
Michael (Kahn@sumex)
-------
∂31-Oct-86 1345 SELLS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Next Meeting of MSDI Group
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 13:45:42 PST
Date: Fri 31 Oct 86 12:59:23-PST
From: Peter Sells <Sells@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Next Meeting of MSDI Group
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The next meeting of the Morphology/Syntax/Discourse Interactions group will
be on Monday November 10th, at 12.30, when Mary Dalrymple will be talking
(abstract below). Other presenters this quarter will be Masayo Iida (Nov.
24th) and Suzanne Kemmer (Dec. 8th).
Long-Distance Reflexivization and Focus in Marathi
Mary Dalrymple
Marathi, an Indo-Aryan language, has two reflexives: long-distance aapaN
and short-distance swataah. The long-distance reflexive may appear in
subordinate clauses when its antecedent is the subject of a higher clause;
it may appear only in certain positions in simple clauses. The
short-distance reflexive may appear in simple clauses and in subject
position in tensed subordinate clauses.
I will discuss the basic properties of the two reflexives and give an
LFG-style feature analysis that accounts for their distribution. I will
also discuss some examples which show that the distribution of the
long-distance reflexive changes when focusing is involved.
-------
∂31-Oct-86 1536 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU bats date now uncertain
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Oct 86 15:35:39 PST
Date: Fri 31 Oct 86 15:28:07-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: bats date now uncertain
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12251294037.47.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
whoops....
It turns out that the 14th is not a convenient day to have the BATS at
Berkeley. The new date has not yet been determined.
Stay tuned.
-------
∂02-Nov-86 2231 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Nov 86 22:30:59 PST
Received: from ames-io.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 2 Nov 86 22:26:46-PST
Received: from MER by IO with VMS ;
Sun, 2 Nov 86 22:26:34 PST
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 86 22:26:34 PST
From: WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: @sig03.dis
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Wednesday, Nov. 5, 1986, 7:30 PM
Tom Attwood /Systems Consultant
The Central Storage Facility for Ames Research's
Central Computation Facility
CYDROME
1589 Centre Pointe Drive, Milpitas
Near Montague & Capital, east of 17
For directions: 408/943-9460
Wheelchair Access
For more information: Mary Fowler, 415/972-6531, 839-6547
∂03-Nov-86 0159 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #63
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 01:59:20 PST
Date: Saturday, November 1, 1986 4:36AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858-0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #63
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 3 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 63
Today's Topics:
Query - Access to C-Prolog parser,
LP Library - Mode for GNU Emacs 17.64
& Declarative Language Bibliography - Part G
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Oct 86 07:54:00 EST
From: John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: getting at the C-Prolog parser
I have the awful feeling there's an easy way to do this,
but since I can not figure it out:
In C-Prolog, is there an easy, efficient way to translate
between a string and a compound term, ie something like:
full←name(a(b,c), "a(b,c)")
Regular old name/2 only works for atomic terms. The easy
way to do this is to output the string or term to a file,
close the file, re-open it as input, and then read it back
in the "other way", ie put and read OR write and get, but
this seems inefficient. The efficient way is to write a
term-parser/de-parser, but why bother since there's
already one buried in C-Prolog itself?
In FORTRAN, e.g., one can do pseudo-IO, ie read and write
to a string, rather than a file. A similar function
would do the trick in C-Prolog.
Thank you for any thoughts on this.
-- John Cugini
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 86 12:07:21 GMT
From: umerin@flab.uucp
Subject: Prolog mode for GNU Emacs 17.64
Lots of requests for prolog mode for GNU Emacs I received.
Since I couldn't reply to all of them I decided to post it
here.
-- Masanobu UMEDA
umerin@flab.fujitsu.junet
----------------------------------------------------------------
;; Run Prolog under Emacs (GNU Emacs 17.64)
;; Copyright (C) 1986 Masanobu UMEDA (umerin@flab.fujitsu.junet)
;; This file is part of GNU Emacs.
;; GNU Emacs is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. No author or distributor
;; accepts responsibility to anyone for the consequences of using
;; it or for whether it serves any particular purpose or works at
;; all, unless he says so in writing. Refer to the GNU Emacs
;; General Public License for full details.
;; Everyone is granted permission to copy, modify and
;; redistribute GNU Emacs, but only under the conditions
;; described in theGNU Emacs General Public License. A copy of
;; this license is supposed to have been given to you along with
;; GNU Emacs so you can know your rights and responsibilities.
;; It should be in a file named COPYING. Among other things, the
;; copyright notice and this notice must be preserved on all
;; copies.
(require 'shell)
(make-variable-buffer-local 'shell-prompt-pattern)
(defvar prolog-mode-syntax-table nil "")
(defvar prolog-mode-abbrev-table nil "")
(defvar prolog-eof-string "\↑D"
"End of file string sent to inferior prolog process.")
(if (not prolog-mode-syntax-table)
(let ((i 0))
(setq prolog-mode-syntax-table (make-syntax-table))
(set-syntax-table prolog-mode-syntax-table)
(modify-syntax-entry ?← "w")
(modify-syntax-entry ?\\ "\\")
(modify-syntax-entry ?/ ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?* ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?+ ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?- ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?= ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?% "<")
(modify-syntax-entry ?< ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?> ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?\' "\""))
)
(define-abbrev-table 'prolog-mode-abbrev-table ())
(defun prolog-mode-variables ()
(set-syntax-table prolog-mode-syntax-table)
(setq local-abbrev-table prolog-mode-abbrev-table)
(make-local-variable 'paragraph-start)
(setq paragraph-start (concat "↑%%\\|↑$\\|" page-delimiter)) ;'%%..'
(make-local-variable 'paragraph-separate)
(setq paragraph-separate paragraph-start)
(make-local-variable 'indent-line-function)
(setq indent-line-function 'prolog-indent-line)
(make-local-variable 'comment-start)
(setq comment-start "%")
(make-local-variable 'comment-start-skip)
(setq comment-start-skip "%+ *")
(make-local-variable 'comment-column)
(setq comment-column 40)
(make-local-variable 'comment-indent-hook)
(setq comment-indent-hook 'prolog-comment-indent))
(defun prolog-mode-commands (map)
(define-key map "\t" 'prolog-indent-line))
(defvar prolog-mode-map (make-sparse-keymap))
(define-key prolog-mode-map "\e\C-x" 'prolog-consult-region)
(prolog-mode-commands prolog-mode-map)
(defun prolog-mode ()
"Major mode for editing Prolog code for Prologs.
Commands:
Blank lines and '%%...' separate paragraphs. '%'s start comments.
\\{prolog-mode-map}
Entry to this mode calls the value of prolog-mode-hook
if that value is non-nil."
(interactive)
(kill-all-local-variables)
(use-local-map prolog-mode-map)
(setq major-mode 'prolog-mode)
(setq mode-name "Prolog")
(prolog-mode-variables)
(run-hooks 'prolog-mode-hook))
(defun prolog-indent-line (&optional whole-exp)
"Indent current line as Prolog code.
With argument, indent any additional lines of the same clause
rigidly along with this one (not yet)."
(interactive "p")
(let ((indent (prolog-indent-level))
(pos (- (point-max) (point))) beg)
(beginning-of-line)
(setq beg (point))
(skip-chars-forward " \t")
(if (zerop (- indent (current-column)))
nil
(delete-region beg (point))
(indent-to indent))
(if (> (- (point-max) pos) (point))
(goto-char (- (point-max) pos)))
))
(defun prolog-indent-level ()
"Compute prolog indentation level."
(save-excursion
(beginning-of-line)
(skip-chars-forward " \t")
(cond
((looking-at "%%") 0) ;Large comment
;starts
((looking-at "%") comment-column) ;Small comment
;starts
((bobp) 0) ;Beginning of
;buffer
(t
(let ((empty t) ind more less)
(if (looking-at ")")
(setq less t) ;Find close
(setq less nil))
;; See previous indentation
(while empty
(forward-line -1)
(beginning-of-line)
(if (bobp) (setq empty nil))
(skip-chars-forward " \t")
(if (not (or (looking-at "%") (looking-at
"\n")))
(setq empty nil)))
(setq ind (current-column)) ;Beginning of
;clause
;; See its beginning
(if (looking-at "(")
(setq more t) ;Find open
(setq more nil))
(end-of-prolog-clause)
(or (bobp) (forward-char -1))
;; See its tail
(if (looking-at "[,(;>]")
(if (and more
(looking-at "[↑,]"))
(+ ind tab-width) ;More indentation
(max tab-width ind)) ;Same indentation
(if (looking-at "-")
tab-width ;TAB
(if (or less
(looking-at "[↑.]"))
(max (- ind tab-width) 0) ;Less indentation
0) ;No indentation
)
)
))
)))
(defun end-of-prolog-clause ()
"Go to end of clause in this line."
(beginning-of-line 1)
(if (null comment-start)
(error "No comment syntax defined")
(let* ((eolpos (save-excursion (end-of-line) (point))))
(if (re-search-forward comment-start-skip eolpos'move)
(goto-char (match-beginning 0)))
(skip-chars-backward " \t")
)
)
)
(defun prolog-comment-indent ()
"Compute prolog comment indentation."
(if (looking-at "%%")
0
(save-excursion
(skip-chars-backward " \t")
(max (1+ (current-column)) ;Insert one space at
;least
comment-column))
)
)
!
;;;
;;; Inferior prolog mode
;;;
(defvar inferior-prolog-mode-map nil)
(if inferior-prolog-mode-map
nil
(setq inferior-prolog-mode-map (copy-alist shell-mode-map))
(prolog-mode-commands inferior-prolog-mode-map)
(define-key inferior-prolog-mode-map "\e\C-x"
'prolog-consult-region))
(defun inferior-prolog-mode ()
"Major mode for interacting with an inferior Prolog process.
The following commands are available:
\\{inferior-prolog-mode-map}
Entry to this mode calls the value of prolog-mode-hook with no
arguments, if that value is non-nil. Likewise with the value
of shell-mode-hook. prolog-mode-hook is called after
shell-mode-hook.
You can send text to the inferior Prolog from other buffers
using the commands send-region, send-string and
\\[prolog-consult-region].
Commands:
Tab indents for Prolog; with argument, shifts rest
of expression rigidly with the current line.
Paragraphs are separated only by blank lines and '%%'. '
%'s start comments.
Return at end of buffer sends line as input.
Return not at end copies rest of line to end and sends it.
\\[shell-send-eof] sends end-of-file as input.
\\[kill-shell-input] and \\[backward-kill-word] are kill
commands, imitating normal Unix input editing.
\\[interrupt-shell-subjob] interrupts the shell or its current
subjob if any.
\\[stop-shell-subjob] stops, likewise. \\[quit-shell-subjob]
sends quit signal, likewise."
(interactive)
(kill-all-local-variables)
(setq major-mode 'inferior-prolog-mode)
(setq mode-name "Inferior Prolog")
(setq mode-line-format
"--%1*%1*-Emacs: %17b %M %[(%m: %s)%]----%3p--%-")
(prolog-mode-variables)
(use-local-map inferior-prolog-mode-map)
(make-local-variable 'last-input-start)
(setq last-input-start (make-marker))
(make-local-variable 'last-input-end)
(setq last-input-end (make-marker))
(setq shell-prompt-pattern "↑| [ ?][- ] *") ;Set prolog prompt pattern
(run-hooks 'shell-mode-hook 'prolog-mode-hook))
(defun run-prolog ()
"Run an inferior Prolog process, input and output via buffer *prolog*."
(interactive)
(switch-to-buffer (make-shell "prolog" "prolog"))
(inferior-prolog-mode))
(defun prolog-consult-region ()
"Send the region to the Prolog process made by M-x run-prolog."
(interactive)
(save-excursion
(send-string "prolog" "[-user].\n") ;Reconsult mode
(send-region "prolog" (mark) (point))
(send-string "prolog" prolog-eof-string) ;Send eof to prolog process.
)
)
(defun prolog-consult-region-and-go ()
"Send the region to the inferior Prolog, and switch to *prolog* buffer."
(interactive)
(prolog-consult-region)
(switch-to-buffer "*prolog*"))
--
=============================================================
-- Masanobu UMEDA
NOTES: Views and conclusions contained in this article are
the authors' and should not be interpreted as representing
the official opinion or policy of Fujitsu.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 86 17:06:57 MDT
From: Lauren Smith <ls%f@LANL.ARPA>
Subject: Part G
GALI86a
Gallimore R. & Coleman D.
Rigorous Program Development Using OBJ
RMG/SIGFM/0
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The
Specification Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial
College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GALL84a
Gallier J.H. & Raatz S.
Graph-Based Logic Programming Interpreters
Dept of Computer and Information Science, University of
Pennsylvania,
MS-C15-84-61
November 1984
GANZ85a
Ganzinger H. & Hanus M.
1985 IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, July 15-18,
1985
Boston, Massachusetts
pp 242-253
1985
GERR86a
Gerrard C.P.
Experience With OBJ In The Specification Of A Configuration
Management System
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The
Specification Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GERR86b
Gerrard C.P.
Experience With OBJ In The Design Of A Configuration
Management System
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The
Specification Language OBJ And Applications,
Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GIAN84a
Giannesini F. & Cohen J.
Parser Generation And Grammar Manipulation Using Prolog's
Infinite Trees
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 3, pp 253-266
October 1984
GIER80a
Gierz G. & Hofmann K.H. & Keimel K. & Lawson J.D.
& Mislove M. & Scott D.S.
A Compendium of Continuous Lattices
Springer Verlag
1980
GLAS84a
Glaser H. & Hankin C. & Till D.
Principles of Functional Programming
Prentice Hall International, 1984
GLAU78a
Glauert J.R.W.
A Single-Assignment Language for Data Flow Computing
MSc Dissertation, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester,
January 1978
GLAU85a
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Sleep M.R.
An Active Term Rewrite Model for Parallel Computation
Document, Alvey DACTL group, March 1985
GLAU85b
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Sleep M.R.
DACTL Report 3/5
Document, Alvey DACTL group, March 1985
GLAU85c
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Reeve M.J. &
Sleep M.R. & Watson I.
DACTL0: A Computational Model and an Associated Compiler Target
Language
University of East Anglia
May 1985
GOEB85a
Goebel R.
The Design and Implementation of DLOG, a Prolog-Based Knowledge
Representation System
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 385-401
1985
GOEB86a
Goebel R.
A Logic Data Model For The Machine Representation Of Knowledge
Technical Report CS-86-07
Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
June 1985
GOGU67a
Goguen J.A.
L-Fuzzy Sets
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications
Vol 18 no 1, pp 145-174
1967
GOGU68a
Goguen J.A.
Categories of Fuzzy Sets
Phd Dissertation
Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. of california, Berkeley
1968
GOGU68b
Goguen J.A.
The Logic of Inexact Concepts
Synthese, Vol 19, pp 325-373
1968-69
GOGU69a
Goguen J.A.
Categories of V-Sets
Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society,
Vol 75, no 3, pp 622-624
1969
GOGU71a
Mathematical Representation of Hierarchically organised
Systems in "Global Systems Dynamics"
(ed. Attinger E. & Karger S.)
Basel, Switzerland
pp 112-128
1971
GOGU72a
Goguen J.A.
Systems and Minimal Realisation
Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control,
Miami Beach, Florida
pp 42-46
1972
GOGU72b
Goguen J.A.
Minimal Realisation of Machines in Closed Categories
Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society
Vol 78, no 5, pp 777-783
1972
GOGU72c
Goguen J.A.
Hierarchical Inexact Data structures in Artificial Intelligence
Problems
Proc. 5th Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences
Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 345-347
1972
GOGU72d
Goguen J.A. & Yacobellis R.H.
The Myhill Functor, Input-Reduced Machines, and Generalised
Krohn-Rhodes Theory
Proc. 5th Princeton Conf. on Information Sciences and Systems
Princeton, New Jersey
pp 574-578
1972
GOGU72e
Goguen J.A.
On Homomorphisms, Simulation, Correctness and Subroutines for
programs and Program schemes
Proc. 13th IEEE Symp. on Switching and Automata Theory
College Park, Maryland
pp 52-60
1972
GOGU73a
Goguen J.A.
Realisation is Universal
mathematical System Theory
Vol 6, no 4, pp 359-374
1973
GOGU73b
Goguen J.A.
System theory concepts in Computer Science
Proc. 6th Hawaii Int. Conf. on Systems Sciences
Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 77-80
1973
GOGU73c
Goguen J.A.
The Fuzzy Tychonoff Theorem
Journal of mathematical Analysis and applications
vol 43, pp 734-742
1973
GOGU73d
Goguen J.A.
Categorical Foundations for general Systems Theory
in "Advances in Cybernetics and Systems research"
(ed. Pichler F. & Trappl R.)
Transcripta Books, London
pp 121-130
1973
GOGU74a
Goguen J.A.
Semantics of Computation
Proc. 1st Int. Symp. on Category Theory Applied to
Computation and Control
(1974 American Association for the Advancement of
Science, San francisco)
Univ. of massachusetts at Amherst, 1974, pp 234-249
also published in LNCS vol 25, pp 151-163,
springer-verlag
1975
GOGU74b
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W.
Initial Algebra Semantics
proc. 15th IEEE Symp. on Switching and Automata
pp 63-77
1974
GOGU74c
Goguen J.A.
Concept Representation in Natural and Artificial languages:
Axioms, extensions and Applications for Fuzzy sets"
Int. Journal of man-Machine Studies
vol 6, pp 513-561
1974
reprinted in "Fuzzy Reasoning and its Applications"
(ed. Mamdani E.H. & Gaines B.R.)
pp 67-115
Academic Press
1981
GOGU74d
Goguen J.A.
On Homomorphisms, Correctness, termination, Unfoldments and
Equivalence of Flow Diagram Programs"
Journal of Computer and System Sciences,
vol 8, no 3, pp 333-365
1974
GOGU74e
Goguen J.A.
Some Comments on Applying Mathematical System Theory
in "Systems Approaches and Environmental Problems"
(ed. Gottinger H.W. & Vandenhoeck & Rupert)
pp 47-67
(Gottingen, Germany)
1974
GOGU75a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Factorisation, Congruences, and the Decomposition of Automata
and Systems in "Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science"
LNCS Vol 28, pp 33-45, Springer-Verlag
1975
GOGU75b
Goguen J.A.
Objects
International Journal of general systems, vol 1, no 4,
pp 237-243
1975
GOGU75c
Goguen J.A.
Discrete-Time Machines in Closed Monoidal Categories, I,
Journal of Computer and System sciences, Vol 10, No 1,
February, pp 1-43
1975
GOGU75c
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Abstract Data types as Initial algebras and the Correctness
of Data Representations
Proc. Conf. on Computer Graphics, Pattern recognition, and
Data Structure (Beverly Hills, California), pp 89-93
1975
GOGU75d
Goguen J.A. & Carlson L.
Axioms for Discrimination Information
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Sept '75
pp 572-574
1975
GOGU75e
Goguen J.A.
On Fuzzy Robot Planning
in "Fuzzy Sets and Their Applications to Cognitive and
Decision Processes (ed. Zadeh L.A. & Fu K.S. & Tanaka K. &
Shimura M.) pp 429-448
Academic Press
1975
GOGU75f
Goguen J.A.
Robust Programming Languages and the Principle of Maximum
Meaningfulness
Proc. Milwaukee Symp. on Automatic Computation and Control
(Milwaukee, Wisconsin)
pp 87-90
1975
GOGU75g
Goguen J.A.
Complexity of Hierarchically Organised Systems and the
Structure of Musical Experiences
Int. Journal of General Systems, vol 3, no 4, 1975,
pp 237-251 originally in UCLA Comp. Sci. Dept. Quarterly,
October 1975, pp 51-88
1975
GOGU76a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Some Fundamentals of Order-Algebraic Semantics
Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Mathematical Foundations of
Computer Sciences
(Gdansk, Poland, 1976)
LNCS vol 46, 1976, pp153-168, Springer-Verlag
1976
GOGU76b
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.W. & Wright J.B.
Parallel Realisation of Systems, Using Factorisations
and Quotients in Categories
Journal of Franklin Institute, vol 301, no6, June '76,
pp 547-558
1976
GOGU76c
Goguen J.A.
Correctness and Equivalence of Data Types
Proc Symp. on Mathematical Systems Theory (Udine, Italy)
Springer Verlag Lecture Notes
(ed. Marchesini G.)
pp 352-358
1976
GOGU76d
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Rational Algebraic Theories and Fixed-point Solutions
Proc. IEEE 17th Symp on Foundations of Computer Science
(Houston, Texas), 1976, pp 147-158
1976
GOGU77a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Initial Algebra Semantics and Continuous Algebras
JACM, vol 24, no 1, January 1977, pp 68-95
1977
GOGU77b
Goguen J.A.
Abstract Errors for Abstract Data Types
in "Formal Descriptions of Programming Concepts"
(ed. E.Neuhold)
North-Holland, 1978, pp 491-522
also in
Proc. IFIP Working Conf. on Formal Description of
Programming Concepts
(ed. Dennis J.)
MIT Press, 1977, pp 21.1-21.32
1977
GOGU77c
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Putting Theories Together to Make Specifications
Proc. 5th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence
(MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts), 1977, pp 1045-1058
1977
GOGU77d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Correctness of Recursive Flow Diagram Programs
Proc. Conf. on Mathematical Foundations of Comp. Sci.
(Tatranska Lomnica, Czechoslovakia)
pp 580-595
1977
GOGU77e
Goguen J.A.
Algebraic Specification Techniques
UCLA Comp. Sci. Dept. Quarterly
Vol 5, no 4
pp 53-58
1977
GOGU78a
Goguen J.A. & Varela F.
The Arithmetic of Closure
Journal of Cybernetics, Vol 8, 1978
also in "Progress in Cybernetics and Systems research,
vol 3" (ed. Trappl R. & Klir G.J. & Ricciardi L.)
Hemisphere Pub Co. (Washington D.C.)
1978
GOGU78b
Goguen J.A. & Ginali S.
A Categorical Approach to General Systems
in "Applied General Systems research"
(ed. Klir G.)
Plenum Press
pp 257-270
1978
GOGU78c
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G.
An Initial Algebra Approach to the Specification, Correctness and
Implementation of Abstract data Types
in "Current Trends in Programming, vol 4, Data Structuring"
pp 80-149
(ed. Yeh R.)
Prentice Hall
1978
GOGU78d
Goguen J.A.
Some Design Principles and Theory for OBJ-0, a Language for
Expressing and Executing Algebraic Specifications of
Programs Proc. Int. Conf. on Mathematical Studies of
Information Processing
(Kyoto, Japan)
pp 429-475
1978
GOGU78e
Goguen J.A. & Linde C.
Structure of Planning Discourse
Journal of Social and Biological Structures, Vol 1
pp 219-251
1978
GOGU79a
Goguen J.A. & Shaket E.
Fuzzy Sets at UCLA
Kybernetes, vol 8
pp 65-66
1979
GOGU79b
Goguen J.A. & Varela F.
Systems and Distinctions; Duality and Complementarity
International Journal of General Systems, vol 5
pp 31-43
1979
GOGU79c
Goguen J.A. & Tardo J.J.
An Introduction to OBJ: A Language for writing and
Testing formal algebraic specifications
Reliable Software Conf. Proc. (ed. Yeh R.)
(Cambridge, Massachusetts)
pp 170-189
Prentice Hall
1979
GOGU79d
Goguen J.A.
Algebraic Specification
in "Research Directions in Software Technology"
(ed. Wegner P.)
pp 370-376
MIT Press
1979
GOGU79e
Goguen J.A.
Some Ideas in Algebraic Semantics
Proc. 3rd IBM Symp on Mathematical Foundations of Computer
Science
(Kobe, Japan)
53 pages
1979
GOGU79f
Goguen J.A.
Fuzzy Sets and the Social Nature of Truth
in "Advances in Fuzzy Set Theory and Applications"
(eds. Gupta M.M. & Yager R.)
pp 49-68
North-Holland Press
1979
GOGU79g
Goguen J.A. & Tardo J. & Williamson N. & Zamfir M.
A Practical Method for Testing Algebraic Specifications
UCLA Computer Science Quarterly, Vol 7, no 1
pp 59-80
1979
GOGU80a
Goguen J.A.
Thoughts on Specification, Design and Verification
Software Engineering Notes, Vol 5, no 3
pp 29-33
1980
GOGU80b
How to Prove Algebraic Inductive Hypotheses Without
Induction: with Applications to the Correctness of Data
Type Implementation Proc. 5th Conf. on Automated Deduction,
(Les Arcs, France)
(eds. Bibel W. & Kowalski R.)
LNCS, vol 87
pp 356-373
Springer Verlag
1980
GOGU80c
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
The Semantics of CLEAR, a Specification Language
in "Abstract Software Specification"
(eds Bjorner D.)
(Proc. 1979 Copenhagen Winter School)
LNCS, vol 86
pp294-332
1980
GOGU80d
Goguen J.A. & Linde C.
On the Independence of Discourse Structure and Semantic
Domain Proc. 18th Annual Meeting of the Association for
Computational Linguistics, Parasession on Topics in
Interactive Discourse (Univ. of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania) pp 35-37
1980
GOGU81a
Goguen J.A. & Parsaye-Ghomi K.
Algebraic Denotational Semantics Using Parameterised
Abstract Modules Proc. Int. Conf on Formalising Concepts
(Peniscola, Spain)
(ed. Diaz J. & Ramos I.)
LNCS, vol 107
pp 292-309
Springer verlag
1981
GOGU81b
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
An Informal Introduction to CLEAR, a Specification
Languagein "The Correctness Problem in Computer Science"
(eds. Boyer R. & Moore J.)
pp 185-213
Academic Press
1981
GOGU81c
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Completeness of Many-Sorted Equational Logic
SIGPLAN Notes, Vol 16, no 7, pp 24-32, 1981
also in SIGPLAN Notes, vol 17, no 1, pp 9-17, 1982
extended version as Tech Rep CSLI-84-15, Center for the
Study of
Language and Information, Stanford Univ.,
September 1984
GOGU82a
Goguen J.A.
ORDINARY Specification of KWIC Index Generation
Proc Workshop on Program Specification
(ed. Staunstrup J.)
LNCS, Vol 134
pp 114-117
Springer Verlag
1982
GOGU82b
Goguen J.A.
ORDINARY Specification of Some Constructions in Plane
Geometry
Proc Workshop on Program Specification
(ed. Staunstrup J.)
LNCS, Vol 134
pp 31-46
Springer verlag
1982
GOGU82c
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Algebras, Theories and Freeness: An Introduction for
Computer Scientists
in "Theoretical Foundations of Programming Methodology"
(eds. Broy M. & Schmidt G.)
pp 329-348
D. Reidel
1982
GOGU82d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Security Policies and Security Models
Proc 1982 Berkeley Conf on Computer Security
IEEE Computer Society Press
pp 11-20
1982
GOGU82e
Goguen J.A.
Universal Realisation, Persistent Interconnection and
Implementation of Abstract Modules
Proc 9th Int Colloquium on Automata, Languages and
Programming
(Aarhus, denmark)
LNCS, Springer Verlag
1982
GOGU82f
Goguen J.A.
Rapid Prototyping in the OBJ Executable Specification
Language
Proc Rapid Prototyping Workshop
(Columbia, Maryland)
1982
also in Software engineering Notes, ACM Special
Interest
Group on Software engineering, vol 7, no 5, pp 75-84,
1983
GOGU83a
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J. & Plaisted D.
Programming with Parameterised Abstract Objects in
OBJ in "Theory and practise of Software technology"
(eds. Ferrari D. & Bolognani M. & Goguen J.A.)
pp 163-193
North-Holland
1983
GOGU83b
Future Directions for Software Engineering
in "Theory and Practise of Software Technology"
(eds. Ferrari D. & Bolognani M. & Goguen J.A.)
pp 243-244
North-Holland
1983
GOGU83c
Goguen J.A. & Ferrari D. & Bologanani M.
Theory and Practise of Software Technology
North Holland
1983
GOGU83d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Correctness of recursive Parallel Non-Deterministic
Flow Programs
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, vol 27, no 2
pp 268-290
October 1983
GOGU83e
Goguen J.A.
Parameterised Programming
IEEE TOSE, vol SE-10, no 5, september 1984, pp 528-543
preliminary version in Proc. Workshop on Reusability in
Programming,
ITT, pp 138-150
1983
GOGU83f
Goguen J.A. & Linde & Weiner J.
Reasoning and Natural explanation
International Journal of man-Machine Studies, Vol 19
pp 521-559
1983
GOGU83g
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Introducing Institutions
Logics of programs
(Carnegie-mellon Univ., Pittsburgh PA, June 1983)
LNCS, vol 164, Springer Verlag
pp 221-256, 1984
GOGU84a
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Unwinding and Inference Control
1984 Symp on Security and privacy, IEEE, pp 75-86
1984
GOGU84b
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Equality, types, Modules and generics for Logic
Programming
Tech Rep no. CSLI-84-5, Center for the Study of Logic
and Information, Stanford University, March 1984
also in Proc. 2nd int. Logic Programming Conf., Upsala,
Sweden, pp 115-125
1984
GOGU84c
Goguen J.A. & Bustall R.M.
Some Fundamental Properties of Algebraic Theories: A
Tool for Semantics of Computation, Part 1: Comma Categories,
Colimits and Theories
Theoretical Computer Science, vol 31, no 2,
pp 175-209
1984
GOGU84d
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Some Fundamental properties of Algebraic Theories: A Tool for
Semantics of computation, Part 2: Signed and Abstract theories
Theoretical Computer Science, vol 31, no 3
pp 263-295
1984
GOGU84e
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Equality, Types, Modules and (Why Not ?) Generics for
Logic programming Journal of Logic programming, vol 1,
no 2 pp 179-210
August 1984
GOGU84f
Goguen J.A. & Murphy M. & Randle R.J. & Tanner T.A.
& Frankel R.M. & Linde C.
A Full Mission Simulator study of Aircrew performance:
The measurement of Crew Coordination and descisionmaking
factors and their relationships
to Flight task performance
Proc. 20th Annual Conf on Manual control, vol II
(eds. Hartzell E.J. & Hart S.)
NASA Conference publication 2341, pp 249-262
1984
GOGU84g
Goguen J.A. & Linde C. & Murphy M.
Crew Communication as a factor in Aviation Accidents
Proc 20th Annual Conf on Manual control, vol II
(eds. Hartzell E.J. & Hart S.)
NASA Conference Publication 2341, pp 217-248
1984
GOGU85a
Goguen J.A. Meseguer J.
EQLOG: Equality, Types and Generic Modules for Logic
Programming
In Functional and Logic Programming, Prentice Hall
1985
GOGU85b
Goguen J.A. & Jouannaud J-P & Meseguer J.
Operational Semantics for Order-Sorted Algebra
In Proc. ICALP 1985
GOGU85c
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Initiality, Induction and Computability
to appear in "Algebraic Methods in Semantics"
(ed. Nivat M. & Reynolds J. )
Cambridge U.P.
chapter 14, pp 459-540 approx.
1985
GOGU85d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Completeness of Many-Sorted Equational Logic
to appear in Houston Journal of Mathematics
1985
GOGU85e
Goguen J.A. & Futatsugi K. & Jouannaud J.-P.
& Meseguer J.
Principles of OBJ2
Proc 1985 Symp on Principles of programming languages,
ACM
pp 52-66
1985
GOGU86a
Goguen J.A.
Aspects of the Past Present and Future of OBJ
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The
Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GOGU86b
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
EQLOG : Equality, Types, and Generic Modules for Logic
Programming in DEGR86a, pp 295-364
1986
GOLD81a
Goldfarb W.
The Undecidability Of The Second Order Unification
Problem
Theoretical Computer Science 13, pp 225-230, 1981
GOLS82a
Golshani F.
Growing Certainty With Null Values
Research Report 82/22
Department of Computing, Imperial College
December 1982
GOOD83a
Goodall A.
Language Of Intelligence (PROLOG)
Systems International p21-24 Jan 1983
GOOD85a
Good D.I.
Mechanical Proofs about Computer Programs
in HOA85a
1985
GORD79a
Gordon M.J. & Milner R. & Wadsworth C.P.
Edinburgh LCF
Lecture Notes In Computer Science, Vol 78
Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1979
GORD85a
Gordon M.
HOL : A Machine Oriented Formulation of Higher order
Logic Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Technical Report no 68
July 16 1985
GOST79a
Gostelow K.P. & Thomas R.E.
A View of Dataflow
Proc. Nat. Comp. Conf., Vol 48, pp 629-636
1979
GOTO82a
Goto A. & Moto-oka T.
Basic Architecture of Highly Parallel Processing System
for Inference Document Univ. of Tokyo, Dec 1982
GRAH84a
Graham P.C.J.
Providing Architectural Support For Expert Systems
ACM SIGARCH, 12, 5, pp 12-18
December 1984
GREE85a
Greene K.J.
A Fully Lazy Higher Order Purely Functional Programming
Language with Reduction Semantics
CASE Center Technical Report No. 8503
CASE Center, Syracuse University, New York
December 1985
GREG80a
Gregory S.
Towards The Compilation Of Annotated Logic Programs
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research
Report 80/16
June 1980
GREG83a
Gregory S.
Getting Started With PARLOG
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
October 1983
GREG84a
Gregory S.
Implementing PARLOG On The Abstract Prolog Machine
Research Report DOC 84/23
Department of Computing, Imperial College
August 1984
GREG84b
Gregory S.
How To Use PARLOG (C-Prolog Version)
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
October 1984
GREG84c
Gregory S.
How To Use PARLOG (micor-PROLOG Version)
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
August 1984
GREG85a
Gregory S.
Design, Application and Implementation of a Parallel
Programming Language
PhD Thesis, Dept of Computing, Imperial College, Univ.
of London
September 1985
GREG85b
Gregory S.
Sequential Parlog Machine Specification (Draft)
Department of Computing, Imperial College
24 Jan 85
Minor Revisions 16 Feb 85, 16 Mar 85
Major Revision 16 May 85
GRIE77a
Gries D.
An Exercise in Proving Parallel Programs Correct
CACM, 20, no 12, pp 921-930
1977
GRIS71a
Griswold R.E. & Poage J.F. & Polonsky J.P.
The Snobol-4 Programming Language
Prentice Hall
1971
GRIS84a
Griswold R.E.
Expression Evaluation in the Icon Programming Language
Proceedings of 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional
Programming
Austin, Texas
pp 177-183
1984
GRIT81a
Grit D.H. & Page R.L.
Deleting Irrelevant Tasks in an Expression-Oriented
Multiprocessor System ACM Transactions on Programming
Languages and Systems, Vol 3, No 1, pp 49-59
January 1981
GUES76a
Guessarian I.
Semantic Equivalence of Program Schemes and its
Syntactic Characterization Proceedings 3rd
International Colloquium on Automata Languages and
Programming
pp 189-200
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
GUNN84a
Gunn H.I.E. & Harland D.M.
Polymorphic Programming II. An Orthogonal Tagged High
Level Architecture Abstract Machine
Software - Practise and Experience, Vol 14(11),
pp 1021-1046
November 1984
GUNT??
Gunter C.A.
The Largest First-Order-Axiomatizable Cartesian Closed
Category of Domains Computer Laboratory, Univ of Cambridge
GURD78a
Gurd J. & Watson I. & Glauert J.
A Multi-Layered Data Flow Computer Architecture
Internal Report, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester
1978
GURD85a
Gurd J. & Kirkham C.C. & Watson I.
The Manchester Prototype Dataflow Computer
CACM, vol 28, p 34-52,
1985
GUTT75a
Guttag J.V.
The Specification and Application to programming of
Abstract Data Types PhD dissertation, Univ. of Toronto,
Dept of Comp Sci
1975
GUTT77a
Guttag J.V.
Abstract Data Types and the Development of Data
Structures
CACM Vol 20, no 6, pp 396-404, June
1977
GUTT78a
Guttag J.V. & Horowitz E. & Musser D.R.
Abstract Data Types and Software Validation
CACM Vol 21, pp 1048-1064, december
also USC Information Sciences Institute Tech. Rep.
Aug 76
1978
GUTT78b
Guttag J.V. & Horning J.J.
The Algebraic Specification of Abstract Data Types
Acta Informatica, 10, 1, pp 27-52
1978
GUTT80a
Guttag J.V.
Notes on Type Abstraction (version 2)
IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng. Vol SE-6, no 1, pp 13-23,
January
1980
GUTT82a
Guttag J.
Notes On Using Types and Type Abstraction In Functional
Programming in DARL82a
1982
GUZM81a
Guzman A.
A heterarchical Multi-Microprocessor Lisp Machine
1981 IEEE Computer Society Workshop on Computer
Architecture for Pattern Analysis and Image Database
Management, Hot Springs, Virginia
pp 309 - 317
November 11-13, 1981
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂03-Nov-86 0936 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: 3mb net problems
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 09:36:01 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 09:34:30-PST
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: 3mb net problems
To: TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12252013284.10.TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12252016095.13.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I saw this message saying "We are going to attempt to solve the
problem that we are having with the Jacks 3mb net," but it went on to
talk about curing a symptom instead of the disease. Exactly how many
machines are really dependent on the 3mb net (assuming that's the only
obstacle to retiring it)?
joe
-------
∂03-Nov-86 0947 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Support
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 09:47:15 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 09:43:26-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Student Support
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU, bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU,
bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU, tajnai@Score.Stanford.EDU,
les@Sail.Stanford.EDU, rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252017720.14.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We have a potential financial crisis looming concerning the support of
PhD students. Simply put, not enough of them are being supported by
research projects. Last year the department spent over $100,000
supporting otherwise unsupported students. Many of these were carried
by the department because research projects could not afford them. This
year, in addition to supporting some of the new first-year students, the
department is still picking up the tab for some of the second-year
students.
We need to get the various research projects who do have funds for
student support to let Sharon Bergman know asap how many (and which)
students they will be willing to support---starting now.
Concerning the future, the department needs to take the following steps
to avoid financial disaster:
1) In addition to providing info about how many students you can support
now, I would like faculty members to let Sharon and me know
[Nilsson@score, cc: Bergman@score, Bscott@score] how many NEW first-year
PhD students they are pretty certain of supporting during the next
academic year 1987/1988.
2) I'll combine this estimate with an estimate of how many fellowships
the new students are likely to have and how many first-year students the
department can support (not many!) to arrive at a total number of how
many students we can guarantee support for.
3) Then we'll have to instruct the admissions committee that they must
correspondingly limit the number of new PhD students the department can
accept next year. The faculty may choose to allow the admissions
committee to admit some additional students on a
come-if-you-like-but-we-can't-guarantee-support basis. But to preserve
our financial viability, I think we must limit the number of
guaranteed-supported admittees to a number that will be determined by
how you respond to this request for firm info about how many new
first-year students you will be able to support next year.
Remember that supporting first-year students should be considered a
necessary and worthwhile investment by research projects in getting such
students past their first-year courses, comps, shopping around for
research areas, etc.
Since the admissions committee will be formulating its plans soon, it
will be helpful to have this information within the next few weeks.
There will be a faculty lunch devoted to discussing PhD admissions
matters (and we can have a faculty meeting about the subject if
people think that's a good idea). -Nils
-------
∂03-Nov-86 1003 TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: 3mb net problems
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 10:03:19 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 10:00:40-PST
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: 3mb net problems
To: PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
cc: facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU, TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12252016095.13.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12252020858.10.TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Basically only a few machines.. Sail,dovers,boise (which I will provide
a 3comm board for and we can switch over to 10mb) a few altos/IFS (used for
dover fonts), and a few Gateways. So, we are not quite ready to retire it.
tom
-------
∂03-Nov-86 1046 binford@su-whitney.arpa 3mb net problems
Received: from WHITNEY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 10:46:18 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Oct 86 11:02:40 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 86 11:02:40 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.arpa>
To: TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU
Cc: PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, facil@Sail.Stanford.EDU, TOM@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Thomas Dienstbier's message of Mon 3 Nov 86 10:00:40-PST
Subject: 3mb net problems
We still have some 3Mb Ethernet.
∂03-Nov-86 1100 @Score.Stanford.EDU:YEAGER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 11:00:05 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 10:56:39-PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 10:58:36-PST
From: Bill <Yeager@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: [Joyce Pelzl <pelzl@odie.stanford.edu>: DRAMs]
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12251236149.47.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12252031404.52.YEAGER@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
-------
∂03-Nov-86 1554 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar 11/11/86
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Nov 86 15:53:53 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.57/1.17)
id AA13935; Mon, 3 Nov 86 15:21:04 PST
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 86 15:21:04 PST
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8611032321.AA13935@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar 11/11/86
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, November 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``Form, Meaning, and Grammatical Categories"
Johanna Nichols
Slavic Languages and Literatures
UC Berkeley
A number of recent studies falsify what I call the "Saussurean
dogma" which dominates structuralist, functionalist, and
cognitively-oriented grammar. The assumption being (given
Saussure's view of the linguistic sign) that form exists only to
code meaning and therefore either meaning and form are indepen-
dent, or meaning can influence form (e.g. iconically), but form
cannot determine meaning and form cannot encode anything but
meaning. The category of inalienable possession shows that form
determines meaning: inalienable possession will be present only,
and almost invariably, if a language marks possession on the pos-
sessed noun rather than with a genitive case. Formal categories
such as stative vs. active verbs in stative-active languages, or
reflexive verbs in Russian, encode themselves rather than encod-
ing any element of meaning. Paradoxically, it is only paradigmat-
ic categories, the only kind that Saussure could handle, that
subvert the Saussurean dogma. Syntagmatic categories seem to
support it, and to encode cognitive and communicative categories.
But syntagmatic categories, for example, genres and expository
devices, are a radically different kind of animal from standard
grammatical categories, with a different kind of sign function.
Examples are presented from expository conventions in Russian
scientific prose, which encode (by representation) the broader
Russian world view, and Russian and Northeast Caucasian riddles,
which encode (by encapsulation or embodiment) theories of
language use and language structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Nov 25: Stuart Russell, Computer Science, UC Berkeley
Jan 27: Geoff Hinton, Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The Linguistics Group Meeting presents Ariel A. Bloch, Professor of Near Eastern
Studies, speaking on "Plurals of Multiplication, Plurals of Division"
on Tuesday, November 11, 1985, at 8:00 P.M. in Room 117 Dwinelle Hall.
---------------------------------------------------------------
∂04-Nov-86 0921 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU First-year Ph.D. support
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:21:26 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 11:33:33-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: First-year Ph.D. support
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252037767.21.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I think that supporting first-year Ph.D. students is one of
the best uses we can make of our funds.
I realize we are in a financial crisis, the chairman has to
cut budgets as best he can.
However, we take in over $1M/year and lost $400K. The support
of Ph.D. students takes about $100K/year, and cannot be blamed
for the financial crisis; neither can it make much of a dent in the problem.
The reasons for supporting 1YPhD's on the department budget are:
1. Offering a "fellowship" is a much more attractive offer than
an RA-ship, in many students' minds.
2. For most of our 1YPhD's, a year without serious RA responsibilities
allows them the time they need to take courses and learn what
CS is all about--which is especially important for those with
limited background in the field.
3. Assigning them to RA's immediately is either bad for the student
or bad for the project, or both. If support of a 1YPhD is a good
"investment," then the PI has to expect the student will eventually
work on his project. That leads to some of the messy cases where
students appear to be mistreated. If only some of the PI's
support 1YPhD's and expect nothing in return, then such support
becomes a tax on stupidity.
I suggest we try one of the following schemes:
A. Instead of a full fellowship, give them 2/3 fellowship,
1/6 TA and 1/6 RA-- the latter provided by coersion if necessary--it's
small potatoes.
This would save enough that 1YPhD support would at least assume
its share of the budget deficit.
B. Tax all projects proportionally (don't ask "proportionally to what?")
for support of 1YPhD's, who are then supported annonymously from
a pool. This is similar to the scheme used at CMU and Cornell,
I think.
---jeff
-------
∂04-Nov-86 0925 @Score.Stanford.EDU:cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu Re: First-year Ph.D. support
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:25:50 PST
Received: from pescadero.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 16:09:43-PST
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Nov 86 16:10:27 pst
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 86 16:10:27 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@Pescadero>
Subject: Re: First-year Ph.D. support
To: ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU, ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
I agree with Jeff's comments. Moreover, I dont understand why we cant
use Computer Forum money for this. I think we have our priorities mixed
up if we dont use that money first on student support and second on
other things.
In addition, asking projects to pay for RA's without expecting them to do
anything is effectively another tax on research money. Some of us are already
having problems with the overhead rate and funding agencies complaining about
the cost of Stanford research.
I would certainly like to help out but right now and for the future,
picking up additional RA's would mean laying off some I already have.
In general, I perceive the problem is that we are using up our gift funds
compensating for lack of support money from the university. Its time
we did a correction.
(Or am I ill-informed on this?)
∂04-Nov-86 0928 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: First-year Ph.D. support
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:28:10 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 16:43:58-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: First-year Ph.D. support
To: cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU
cc: ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU, ac@Score.Stanford.EDU,
NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "David Cheriton <cheriton@Pescadero>" of Mon 3 Nov 86 16:25:13-PST
Message-ID: <12252094275.28.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Within about a month I hope to have mastered an understanding of
the CSD budget, our sources of funds, and our expenses, sufficiently
well to present a clear picture of these matters to the faculty so that
we can all make an informed choice about how to spend department
funds. The matter is in fact more complicated than merely spending
forum money on students or on "other things." The whole process of
budgeting, of allocating "operating funds," etc. is undergoing a
process of "reform" in the whole university as well as in the SOE.
One can't be guaranteed that "reform" means we'll get a better deal,
but at least the picture will be clarified to the point that effective
arguments can be made. The pre-reform situation is that good arguments
get lost in a sea of confusion. In the meantime, I'm happy that there
is discussion about support of first-year students. -Nils
-------
∂04-Nov-86 0929 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:29:12 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 16:53:36-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12252096031.15.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Comprehensive Committee had already scheduled a meeting
for the day previously announced for Gray Tuesday. The
new suggested dates are either Thursday, Dec. 11, or Tuesday,
Dec. 16. Please let me know if you have a preference for
either day. (The time would still be 2:30-5.)
Victoria
-------
∂04-Nov-86 0933 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CS300 last slot
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:33:22 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 23:58:08-PST
Date: 03 Nov 86 2359 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CS300 last slot
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Just one lecture for CS300 remains unfilled, namely this Thursday (11/6)
from 2:45 to 4:00pm. It would be a shame to waste this opportunity
to inform new students about departmental research programs. Speak now
or wait till next year!
∂04-Nov-86 0935 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #64
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:35:22 PST
Date: Monday, November 3, 1986 4:41PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #64
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 4 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 64
Today's Topics:
Administration - Request,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 16:40:30-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Request
[cwr]
Chaps,
Please send to PROLOG-REQUEST before you abandon your account, move on
to greener pastures etc. indicating that is the case. The 'echo' from
the backlash of useless, USER-UNKNOWN mailer daemon messages has been
rather loud lately.
Thank you.
-- ed
------------------------------
Date: Sun 2 Nov 86 07:34:10-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography - Part I
ICOT84a *
ICOT Working Group WG5
Several Aspects on Unification
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0046
February 1984
ICOT84a *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal Digest
No 1 June 1983, No 2 September 1983, No 3 January 1984
1984
ICOT84b *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 3
January 1984
ICOT84c *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 4
March 1984
ICOT84d *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 5
October 1984
ICOT85a *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 6
February 1985
ICOT85b *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 7
March 1985
ICOT85c *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 10
December 1985
ICOT86a *
Fifth Generation Computer Systems ICOT Journal
No 11
March 1986
IDA83a *
Ida T. & Sato M. & Hayashi S. & Hagiya M. & Kurokawa T.
& Hikita T. & Futatsugi K. & Sakai K. & Toyama Y.
& Matsuda T.
Higher Order: Its Implications to Programming Languages
and Computational Models
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0029
October 1983
IDA84a *
Ida T. & Konagaya A.
Comparison of Closure Reduction and Combinatory Reduction
Schemes.
ICOT Technical Report TR-072
August 1984
IDA84b *
Ida T. & Tanaka J.
Functional Programming with Streams - Part II
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp 261-276
1984
INGA78a *
Ingalls D.
The Smalltalk-76 Programming System Design and
Implementation Proceedings of 5th ACM Annual Conference
on Principles of Programming Languages
pp 9-16
1978
INMO84a
Inmos
IMS T424 Transputer Data Card
January 1984
INMO84b
Inmos
OCCAM Data Card
June 1984
INMO84c *
Inmos
Occam User Group Newsletter, No.1
Summer 1984
INMO84d
Inmos
IMS T424 Transputer : Preliminary Data
August 1984
INMO84e *
Inmos Ltd
Occam Programming Manual
Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science
January 1984
INMO85a *
Inmos
Occam User Group Newsletter, No 2
January 1985
INMO86a *
Inmos
Databook
1986
INMO86b *
Inmos
Occam User Group Newsletter, No. 4
January 1986
INMOS86c *
Inmos
Occam User Group Newsletter, No. 5
July 1986
INTE86a *
FCP : Flat Concurrent Prolog for the ISPC
Intel Scientific Computers
Artificial Intelligence Note 108
July 1986
INTE86b *
FCP : Matrix Multiply on the ISPC
Intel Scientific Computers
Artificial Intelligence Note 109
July 1986
INTE86c *
FCP : Symbolic Differentiation on the ISPC
Intel Scientific Computers
Artificial Intelligence Note 110
July 1986
INTE86d *
FCP : Virtual Machine Demonstration on the ISPC
Intel Scientific Computers
Artificial Intelligence Note 111
July 1986
ISHI85a *
Ishizuka M. & Kanai N.
Prolog-ELF Incorporating Fuzzy Logic
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 479-486
1985
ISL81a
Islam N. & Myers T.J. & Broome P.
A Simple Optimiser for FP-like Languages
Proc. ACM Conf. on Functional Programming Languages
and Computer Architecture, New Hampshire, pp 33-40
october 1981
ITO83a *
Ito N. & Masuda K.
Parallel Inference machine Based on the Data Flow Model
( Also in "Proceedings of Int'l Workshop on High-Level
Computer Architecture", Los Angeles, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-033
December 1983
ITO83b
Ito N. & Masuda K. & Shimizu H.
Parallel Prolog Machine Based on the Data Flow Model
ICOT Research Center, Technical report TR-035
September 1983
ITO83c *
Ito N. & Onai R. & Masuda K. & Shimizu H.
Prolog Machine Based on the Data Flow Mechanism
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0007
May 1983
ITO85a *
Ito N. & Kishi M. & Kuno E. & Rokusawa K.
The Dataflow-Based Parallel Inference Machine To Support
Two Basic Languages in KL1
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer
Architecture, UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
ITO85b *
Ito H. & Ueno H.
ZERO : Frame + Prolog
in WADA86a, pp 78-89
1985
ITO85c *
Ito N. & Shimizu H. & Kishi M. & Kuno E. & Rokusawa K.
Data-flow Based Execution Mechanisms of Parallel and
Concurrent Prolog
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 1, pp 15-41
1985
ITOH85a *
Itoh E. & Makagawa H.
Heuristics Applied in Tree Manipulation Algorithm
Synthesis
in WADA86a, pp 44-55
1985
IWAT84a
Iwata K. & Kamiya S. & Sakai H. & Matsuda S. & Shibayama S.
& Murukami K.
Design and Implementation of a Two-Way Merge Sorter and its
Application to Relational Database Processing
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-066
May 1986
IYEN84a *
Iyengar S.S. & Sadler T. & Kundu S.
A Technique for Representing a Tree Structure with
Predicates by a Forest Data Structure
Technical Report No 84-029
Department of Computer Science, Louisianna State
University
1984
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂04-Nov-86 0940 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:38:38 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 07:59:52-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252261011.10.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15 --- general discussion of your choosing!
-------
∂04-Nov-86 0939 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Annual IBM Party
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:37:39 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 07:16:17-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Annual IBM Party
To: csd-list@Score.Stanford.EDU, csl-everyone@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252253076.9.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Annual IBM Party is scheduled for Wednesday, Dec. 3, Red and Gold
Lounges of the Faculty Club, from 5 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Gregory F. Pfister, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, will present the
EE380 seminar at 4:15, Skilling Auditorium.
The IBM Research Parallel Processing Project (RP3)
Abstract
A technical overview of RP3 will be presented, focussing on three
areas: (1) The RP3 architecture: We are building a segment of a system
with an aggregate performance of 1000 MIPS, incorporating up to 512
32-bit microprocessors. Its entire 4G byte main store can be divided
between truly shared and truly local memory during execution. A
single, distributed full-function Unix(tm) system will run on RP3, and
parallel extensions to common programming languages will initially be
used. (2) Hot Spot Contention: In any multistage network with
distributed routing, non-uniform traffic can severely degrade network
performance; 0.125% "hot spot" nonuniformity can produce 55%
degradation. "Combining" eliminates the problem for some cases of
interest. (3) Environment for Parallel Execution (EPEX): EPEX allows
parallel execution on VM/SP S/370 systems, giving real speedup on
multiprocessor S/370s and "virtual speedup" predictions for more
highly parallel systems. More than 25 complete, large applications
have already been implemented under EPEX.
-------
∂04-Nov-86 0958 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Important 1987 dates
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 09:58:22 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 09:53:59-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Important 1987 dates
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252281785.37.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
IMPORTANT 1987 DATES ** MARK CALENDARS NOW!!
FORSYTHE LECTURES:
Bob Tarjan
Wed., 28 January, 7:30 p.m. ->
Thursday, 29 Jan. 12:30 - 3:00 p.m. (possible reception following)
COMPUTER FORUM 19TH ANNUAL MEETING:
Tuesday, 3 Feb., 4:15 (CS500); Buffet supper at Faculty Club
Wednesday, 4 Feb. 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Thursday, 5 Feb., 8 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
CSD REUNION:
Thursday, 26 March, 6:00 to 8:00 reception at Faculty Club
Friday, 27 March, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Bishop Auditorium
Banquet at Faculty Club
Sat. 28 March, demos and picnic
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1022 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Where to buy your tickets for STOC
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 10:22:04 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 17:39:27-PST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 17:39:30-PST
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 11/03/86
at 19:00:36 CST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 12:31:57-EST
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: Where to buy your tickets for STOC
Resent-date: 3 Nov 1986 19:54:53-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Announcement about Travel Service for 1987 STOC:
All attendees for 1987 STOC being held in New York City, May 24-27,
1987 are urged to use our official service:
Direct Trave Inc. (1-800-858-8228). For every 40 American air tickets
booked through this agency, we will be able to give a graduate student
free transportation. This travel service also will be able to fill
your Amtrak needs. Major credit cards are the preferred payment
method.
Dana May Latch
Conference Chair, 1987 STOC
This agency will give a 5% discount on prices you can get from other
agents.
∂04-Nov-86 1029 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU,@Score.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Second Computational Geometry Day
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 10:29:44 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 20:26:25-PST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Nov 86 20:20:39-PST
Received: from (THEORYNT)YKTVMX.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 11/03/86
at 15:39:11 CST
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 86 14:09:40 est
From: sharir@nyu-acf8.arpa (Micha Sharir)
Subject: Second Computational Geometry Day
Resent-date: 3 Nov 1986 16:32:52-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
THE SECOND COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY DAY
at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
New York University
will be held on Friday, November 14, 1986
Room 109, Warren Weaver Hall
251 Mercer Street, New York, NY 10012
10:00 Meeting at the 13th floor lounge,
10:30-11:15 Leo Guibas, Stanford University and DEC/SRC,
Geometry in the Two-sided Plane
11:30-12:15 Herbert Edelsbrunner, University of Illinois at Urbana,
Probing Convex Polygons with X-rays
2:00-3:00 Open Problems Session
3:00-3:45 David Avis, McGill University,
Stabbing and Separation
For more information contact Micha Sharir, Courant Institute,
251 Mercer st., NY NY 10012
(Arpanet: sharir@nyu-acf8.arpa) (Tel: (212) 460-7463)
∂04-Nov-86 1033 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU new time for BATS@BERKELEY
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 10:33:18 PST
Date: Mon 3 Nov 86 22:18:15-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: new time for BATS@BERKELEY
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252155129.35.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
BATS will be held at Berkeley on Monday, November 17 in Sibley Auditorium
in the Bechtel Engineering Center.
The schedule is still as follows:
10:00 Larry Stockmeyer (IBM): Flipping Persuasively in Constant Time
11:00 Martin Abadi (Stanford): How much do you really have to trust your
oracle?
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Amos Fiat (Berkeley): Fibonacci Lattices: Theory and Application
2:00 Moshe Vardi (IBM): An automata-theoretic approach to automatic
program verification
You should have already received the abstracts.
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1136 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee Meeting
Received: from [36.36.0.195] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 11:36:32 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 11:35:08-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MS Program Committee Meeting
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12252300199.28.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Day: Friday, November 14, 1986
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: MJH 301
The MS Program Committee needs to meet in order to discuss several
individualized MS programs submitted by students for the Committee's
approval. It is also necessary to address the issue of how students
admitted before this Autumn may combine "old" and "new" MS requirements.
Please let me know ASAP whether or not you will be able to attend this
meeting.
--Jutta McCormick
------
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1150 ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU GO
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 11:49:37 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 11:42:21-PST
From: Adrian Cussins <ADRIAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: GO
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Does anyone play Go? (at any level?) I'd be very interested to hear from
someone who would like to play occasionally.
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1151 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 11:50:59 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 4 Nov 86 11:15:38 PST
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 86 11:15:38 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"Alpha: an extension ofrelational algrebra to express a class of
recursive queries" RAkesh Agrawal, Bell Labs, Murray Hill.
The "alpha operator" takes transitive closures, but also
produces a record of the path taken.
Works wonderfully when your graph is a straight line.
"A study of transitive closure as a recursion mechanism"
H. V. Jagadish and R. Agrawal.
Another discovery of Linda Ness's observation that if you don't
care how large the set of nodes is, you can express any
linear recursion as a transitive closure.
"On Bounded Linear Recursion"
R. Agrawal and H. V. Jagadish.
Observes that since the classes on which Ioannidis' algorithm
and Naughton's algorithm work are incommensurate, you can
get a larger class by taking the union.
---jeff
∂04-Nov-86 1546 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU student resumes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 15:46:20 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 15:43:34-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: student resumes
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, sec@Score.Stanford.EDU,
csl-staff@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252345424.38.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It is important that the Computer Forum Resume Book have as many
of our CSD/CSL students included as possible. We need your
assistance in encouraging the students to participate.
Please give this priority.
Carolyn Tajnai
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1701 JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Thanks from Torben Thrane
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 17:01:23 PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 16:51:09-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Thanks from Torben Thrane
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Turing was down the day Torben left, so he asked that I send his
thanks to everyone who helped make his visit so enjoyable. He also
wanted me to let everyone know how to reach him. His address is
Torben Thrane
Center for the Computational Study of the Humanities
University of Copenhagen
Njalsgade 80
DK-2300 Copenhagen S.
Denmark
phone: 011-45-1-542211
-------
∂04-Nov-86 1722 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Students to speak at forum
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Nov 86 17:22:05 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 4 Nov 86 17:19:33-PST
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 17:18:31-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Students to speak at forum
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I do not yet have any responses from the following faculty. If nothing
is heard this week I will assume they have no students who are appropriate
to speak at the forum meeting in Feburary:
Floyd
Guibas
Knuth
Mayr
Papadimitriou
Buchanan (shares one with Shortliffe)
Feigenbaum
McCarthy (shares Weening with Gabriel)
Rosenbloom
Dantzig
Golub
Oliger
Horowitz
Lantz
Luckham
Lundstrom
Pratt
Tobagi
--t
-------
∂05-Nov-86 0152 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #65
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 01:52:06 PST
Date: Tuesday, November 4, 1986 7:50PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #65
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 5 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 65
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part J
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 4 NOV 86 17:07:30 MDT
From: Lauren Smith <ls%f@LANL.ARPA>
Subject: Part J
JAFF84a
Jaffar J. & Lassez J.-L. & Maher M.J.
A Theory of Complete Logic Programs With Equality
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 3, pp 211-224
October 1984
JAFF86a
Jaffar J. & Lassez J.-L. & Maher M.J.
A Logic Programming Language Scheme
in DEGR86a, pp 441-468
1986
JARO86a
Jarosz J. & Jawarowski J.R.
Computer Tree - The Power of Parallel Computations
Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 2, pp 103-108
April 1986
JAYA80a
Jayaraman B. & Keller R.M.
Resource Control in a Demand-Driven Data-Flow Model
In Proc. International Conf. on Parallel Processing,
IEEE pp 118-127
August 1980
JAYA82a
Jayaraman B. & Keller R.M.
Resource Expressions For Applicative Languages
International Conf. on Parallel Processing, IEEE
pp 160-167 (ed Batcher et al)
August 1982
JEFF85a
Jeffrey T.
The "mu"PD7281 Processor
Byte Magazine, Vol 10, no 12,
November 1985
JESS86a
Jesshope C.
VLSI and Beyond
in BCS86a
1986
JESS86b
Jesshope C.
The Transputer - Microprocessor or Systems Building Block
in BCS86a
1986
JOHN77a
Johnson S.D.
An Interpretive Model For A Language Based On Suspended
Construction M.S. Thesis, Indiana Univ, Bloomington, In.
1977
JOHN81a
Johnsson T.
Detecting When Call By Value can be Used Instead of Call
By Need LPM Memo 14, Chalmers Inst., Sweden
October 1981
JOHN83a
Johnsson T.
The G-Machine. An Abstract Machine for Graph Reduction
Declarative Programming Workshop , University College
London pp 1-20
11-13th April 1983
JOHN86a
Johnsson T.
Attribute Grammars and Functional Programming
86-02-20
JONE82a
Jones N.D. & Muchnick S.S.
A Fixed-Program Machine for Combinator Expression
Evaluation Proc. of ACM LISP Conf 1982 p11-20
JONE83a
Jones S.B.
Abstract Machine Support For Purely Functional
Operating Systems
Technical Monograph PRG-34, Programming Research Group,
Oxford Univ.
August 1983
JONE83b
Jones N.D. & Mycroft A.
Stepwise Development Of Operational And Denotational
Semantics For Prolog Draft Version
27 April 1983
JONE84a
Jones S.B.
Abstract Machine Support For Purely Functional Operating
Systems
Project Report
TR.15
Department of Computing Science, University of Stirling
September 1984
JONE84a
Jones S.B.
A Range of Operating Systems Written In A Purely
Functional Style
Project Report
TR.16
Department of Computing Science, University of Stirling
September 1984
JONK81a
Jonkers H.B.M.
Abstract Storage Structures
Mathematisch Centrum iw 158/81
1981
JOUA85a
ed. Jouannaud J.-P.
Functional Programming Languages and Computer Architecture
Proceedings
Nancy, France, September 1985
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 201
Springer Verlag
1985
JULI82a
Julien S.
Graphics in Micro-Prolog
Research Report 82/17
Department of Computing, Imperial College
September 1982
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂05-Nov-86 0723 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU x3j13 second mailing
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 07:23:18 PST
Date: 5 Nov 1986 07:14-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: x3j13 second mailing
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Mathis@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Nov-86 07:14:06.MATHIS>
I just sent out in US mail the second x3j13 mailing. In it I
said you should also have seen it on this electronic address.
Due to a computer problem (which you don't want to hearabout) I
am unable to send you the total information electronically; I am
however still able to communicate somewhat on the net.
If you have anything you want sent out before the next meeting I
should have it by November 14. In this case hardcopy that I
could photocopy would be helpful.
Remember to send in your hotel reservations for the Dallas
meeting.
-- Bob
∂05-Nov-86 0903 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu GI is alive and well
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 09:03:05 PST
Received: from lindy.stanford.edu (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 5 Nov 86 08:58:57-PST
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Wed, 5 Nov 86 08:58:11 PST
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 86 08:59:24 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: AFLB.ALL@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: GI is alive and well
Date: Tue 4 Nov 86 10:51:00-EST
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: GI is alive and well
Resent-date: 5 Nov 1986 11:57:36-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
A message from Max Garzon,
The purported proof of the result that Graph Isomorphism is in co-NP
turned out to be fallacious. The status of the Graph Isomorphism
problem is as open as ever.
An addendum by me: Sorry Max. I don't know why everybody bothered you.
Nobody bothered Swart who still claims he can prove P=NP (from which
GI is even in P).
∂05-Nov-86 0918 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu PODC87 Call for papers (correction)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 09:18:45 PST
Received: from lindy.stanford.edu (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 5 Nov 86 09:00:17-PST
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Wed, 5 Nov 86 08:59:30 PST
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 86 09:00:50 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: AFLB.ALL@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: PODC87 Call for papers (correction)
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 86 17:07:15 pst
From: Tiko Kameda <tiko@lccr.sfu.cdn>
Subject: PODC87 Call for papers (correction)
Resent-date: 5 Nov 1986 11:56:08-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
Sixth ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
(PODC87)
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
August 10-12, 1987
Original research contributions are sought that address fundamental
issues in the theory and practice of distributed and concurrent
systems. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the
following aspects of concurrent and distributed systems:
* Principles of distributed computation derived from practical
experience with working systems
* Algorithms and complexity
* Specification, semantics, and verification
* Programming languages and programming language constructs
* Fault tolerance
Important Dates:
Jan. 30, 1987:Abstracts due.
Apr. 10, 1987:Authors informed of acceptance or rejection.
May 15, 1987: A final copy of each accepted paper due, typed on
special forms for inclusion in the conference
proceedings.
Please send eleven copies of a detailed abstract (not the complete
paper), with the address, telephone number, and your net address
(if available) of a contact author on the cover page, to the Pro-
gram Chair:
Fred B. Schneider
Department of Computer Science
Upson Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
The abstract should be no more than 10 double-spaced typewritten
pages. It must include a clear description of the problem being
discussed, comparisons with extant work, and a section on major
original contributions. There should be enough detail provided for
the program committee to make a decision.
Submissions that arrive late or are too long are likely to be re-
jected without consideration of their merits.
Conference Chair: David Kirkpatrick, University of British Colum-
bia (kirk@ubc.csnet)
Publicity Chair: Tiko Kameda, Simon Fraser University
(tiko%lccr.sfu.cdn@ubc.csnet)
The Program Committee:
Andrew Birrell, DEC Leslie Lamport, DEC
Danny Dolev, Hebrew University Barbara Liskov, MIT
Nissim Francez, Technion Michael Merritt, AT&T Bell Labs
Eli Gafni, UCLA Fred Schneider, Cornell
Vassos Hadzilacos, Toronto Eli Upfal, IBM Almaden
∂05-Nov-86 1152 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next Talks
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 11:52:23 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 11:48:29-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next Talks
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252564772.33.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the next two talks follow. I am looking for some volunteers
to speak late this quarter and early next quarter. November 20 is still open!
Also of interest to AFLB: Anna Karlin's orals will be Friday 7
November at 2:30 PM in Bldg 200 (History corner) Rm. 203 (second
floor). The title of her talk is Sharing Memory in Distributed Systems --
Methods and Applications
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Programs are random walks are programs
Robert W Floyd
6 November, MJH 352, 12:30PM
To determine moments and other expected values of variables resulting
from random walks or from programs with pseudorandom components, a
certain systematic method seems effective:
* Introduce explicit variables to track all parameters of interest.
* By operator strength reduction (e.g., finite difference) methods,
semilinearize the computational steps.
* Introduce explicit deterministic variables that track expected values
of the random ones by linear recurrence. A well known theorem about
conditional expected values is useful.
* Find invariants of the resulting program and solve for final values.
Typically, this entails finding eigenvectors of a triangular linear
system.
The method has determined several means and variances in coalesced
hashing, and high moments of certain random walks. It uses no higher
mathematical notions than those mentioned above, and tends to provide
a firm sense of direction to the analysis.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Fun with Circuits
Steven Rudich
Computer Science Division, UC Berkeley
13 November, MJH352, 12:30PM
I will prove:
1) parity requires exactly 4n-4 fan-in 2 and, or, and not
gates to compute.
2) the minimal circuit to compute any graph theoretic property
(connectivity, 3-colorability, ... ) has no input that fans out to
more than 34n gates (n is the number of inputs into the circuit).
3) other fun stuff as time permits.
-------
∂05-Nov-86 1507 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 15:07:48 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 15:05:57-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252600721.24.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a faculty meeting of full professors on Tuesday, Nov. 18
at 2:30 in MJH 352 to consider the possible appointment of Janos Komlos.
I will be sending you a copy of his curriculum vitae and copies of reference
letters will be in my office for your perusal.
-Anne
-------
∂05-Nov-86 1643 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 16:43:17 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 16:37:55-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday meeting
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12252617462.23.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The new date for the Gray Tuesday meeting will be Tuesday, December
16, from 2:30-5 pm. This was the day that the majority of you could make
it. I will let you know where it will take place in a few days.
I will also be sending you soon the current record of each of
your advisees to verify the accuracy of same.
Victoria
-------
∂05-Nov-86 1759 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Need to Set Forum Date for 1988!!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 17:59:12 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 17:56:20-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Need to Set Forum Date for 1988!!
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252631738.13.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We want to schedule our 20th Annual Meeting for 1988.
Normally, we would have it the first week of February
which is February 2 through 4.
Ed Feigenbaum and Gio Wiederhold have a conflict for the
first week in February, and I would like to schedule
it for the second week. February 9-11.
Since it is the 20th Annual Meeting, we want it to be very
special, and we are already making preliminary plans.
So please let me know if Feb. 9-11 works in well with your schedule.
Carolyn
-------
∂05-Nov-86 1835 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 6, No. 6
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Nov 86 18:35:32 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 17:13:08-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, November 6, No. 6
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
November 6, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 6
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, November 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Concepts of Language" by Noam Chomsky
Conference Room Discussion led by Thomas Wasow
(Wasow@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall The Construction of Thought
Room G-19 Adrian Cussins (Adrian@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, November 13, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Information and Circumstance"
Conference Room by Jon Barwise
Discussion led by Curtis Abbott
(Abbott.pa@xerox.com)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall "Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns,
Room G-19 and Anaphora"
Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron
(Peters@csli.stanford.edu, Gawron@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "Information and Circumstance"
by Jon Barwise
Discussion led by Curtis Abbott
November 13, 1986
This paper is partly a reply to a paper of Fodor's and partly an
exploration of situated inference. The first aspect is relevant to
the embedding circumstance of this TINLunch, since Barwise will be
leading a discussion of Fodor's reply to the reply next week, but I
hope to focus our discussion this week on situated inference.
Situated inference occurs among speakers of situated languages,
languages in which the content of utterance, and therefore the
validity of inferences, may depend on embedding circumstances.
Barwise locates some of the mismatches between formal and everyday
reasoning in the ability to exploit shifting circumstances that is
available in situated inference. He describes cross-cutting
distinctions between what is articulated in an utterance and what is a
constituent of its content and, building on this, suggests several
mechanisms for situated inference. Barwise clearly views situated
language and inference as generalizations of their formal
counterparts. Questions we might want to explore include whether a
more elaborate taxonomy of mechanisms for situated inference is a
priority, and how we ought to understand the proper role of formal
language and inference in this generalized setting.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
"Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns, and Anaphora"
Mark Gawron and Stanley Peters
November 13, 1986
A variety of interactions have been noted between scope ambiguities of
quantified noun phrases, the possibility of interpreting pronouns as
anaphoric, and the interpretation of elliptical verb phrases.
Consider, for example, the following contrast, first noted in Ivan
Sag's 1976 dissertation.
(1) John read every book before Mary did.
(2) John read every book before Mary read it.
The second sentence is interpretable either to mean each book was
read by John before Mary, or instead that every book was read by John
before Mary read any. The first sentence has only the former
interpretation.
The seminar will describe developments in situation theory
pertinent to the semantics of various quantifier phrases in English,
as well as of `referring' noun phrases including pronouns, and of
anaphoric uses of pronouns and elliptical verb phrases. We aim to
show how the theory of situations and situation semantics sheds light
on a variety of complex interactions such as those illustrated above.
--------------
MORPHOLOGY/SYNTAX/DISCOURSE INTERACTIONS
Long-Distance Reflexivization and Focus in Marathi
Mary Dalrymple
12:30, Monday, November 10
Ventura Trailers
Marathi, an Indo-Aryan language, has two reflexives: long-distance
`aapaN' and short-distance `swataah'. The long-distance reflexive may
appear in subordinate clauses when its antecedent is the subject of a
higher clause; it may appear only in certain positions in simple
clauses. The short-distance reflexive may appear in simple clauses
and in subject position in tensed subordinate clauses.
I will discuss the basic properties of the two reflexives and give
an LFG-style feature analysis that accounts for their distribution. I
will also discuss some examples which show that the distribution of
the long-distance reflexive changes when focusing is involved.
-------
∂06-Nov-86 0143 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #66
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 01:43:12 PST
Date: Wednesday, November 5, 1986 10:36AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #66
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 6 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 66
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part N
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 10:35:22-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part N
NAGAI84a
Nagai Y. & Chikira H. & Kobayashi M. & Furukawa K.
Problems in Developing an Experimental System Able
to Reuse Existing Programs
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0059
April 1984
NAGAS85a *
Nagasawa I.
A Method of Representing Processes in a Constraint
Solver
in WADA86a, pp 266-275
1985
NAKA?? *
Nakazaki R. & Konagaya A. & Habata S. & Shimazu H.
& Uemura M. & Yamamoto M. & Yokota M. & Chikayama M.
Design of a High-Speed Prolog Machine (HPM)
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0105
NAIS83a *
Naish L.
Automatic Control For Logic Programs
Technical Report 83/6
(Revised and title changed September 1984)
Department of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
1983
NAIS84a *
Naish L.
Heterogenous SLD Resolution
Technical Report 84/1
Department of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
(Also in Journal of Logic Programming)
revised June 1984
NAIS84b *
Naish L.
All Solutions Predicates In Prolog
Technical Report 84/4
Deaprtment of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
1984
NAIS84c *
Naish L.
Heterogenous SLD Resolution
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 4, pp 297-303
December 1984
NAKAG84a *
Nakagawa H.
And Parallel PROLOG with Divided Assertion Set
1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming
pp 22-28
6 February 1984
NAKAM84a *
Makamura K.
Associative Concurrent Evaluation of Logic Programs
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 4, pp 285-295
Decemeber 1984
NAKAM85a
Nakamura K.
Book Review
"Introduction to Logic Programming" by C.J. Hogger,
Academic Press, 290 pages, 1984
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 487
1985
NAKAM85b *
Nakamura K.
Heuristic Prolog : Logic Program Execution by Heuristic
Search
in WADA86a, pp 148-155
1985
NAKAS85a
Nakashima H. & DeGroot D.
Conference Report
A Report on 1985 International Symposium on Logic
Programming
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 488-489
1985
NARA86a *
Narayanan A.
Slip Into LISP: How To Choose A LISP Interpreter
Artificial Intelligence Review, Vol 1, No 1, pp 53-68
1986
NATA86a*
Natarajan N.
A Distributed Synchronisation Scheme for Communicating
Processes
Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 2, pp 109-117
April 1986
NGUY80a *
Nguyen V.L. & Lassez J-L.
Transfinite Computational Induction and a Dual Problem
to Least Fixed Points
Technical Report 80/5
Department of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
1980
NICH86a *
Nichols W.
OBJ As A Meta-Language For Denotational Semantics
presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The
Specification Language OBJ And Applications,
Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
NIEL82a *
Nielson F.
A Denotational Framework for Data Flow Analysis
Acta Informatica 18, pp 265-287
Springer-Verlag
1982
NIEL84a *
Nielson F.
Abstract Interpretation Using Domain Theory
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Phd Thesis, CST-31-84
October 1984
NIEL85a *
Nielson F.
Program Transformation in a Denotational Setting
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems
Vol 7, no 3, pp 359-379
July 1985
NIEL86a *
Nielson F.
Abstract Interpretation of Denotational Definitions
( A Survey )
Proc. from STACS 86, LNCS vol 210, pp 1-20
Springer-Verlag
1986
NIEL?? *
Nielson F.
A Bibliography On Abstract Interpretation
NIEL?? *
Nielson F.
Tensor Products Generalize the Relational Data Flow
Analysis Method
Proc. Fourth Hung. Computer Sci. Conf.
( eds. Arato M. & Katai I. & Varga L. )
pp 211-225
NIEL?? *
Nielson F.
Expected Forms of Data Flow Analyses
NILS83a *
Nilsson J.F.
On The Compilation Of A Domain-Based Prolog
Information Processing 83, pp 293-298
1983
NILS86a *
Nilsson U.
An Alternative Implementation of DCGs
Examensarbete, LITH-IDA-EX-8607
Department of Computer and Information Science,
Linkoping University, Sweden
24 March 1986
NIPK85a *
Nipkow T.
Non-Deterministic Data Types: Models and Implementations
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester, Technical Report
UMCS-85-10-1
October 1985
NISH83a
Nishikawa H. & Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Taki K. & Uchida S.
The Personal Inference Machine (PSI) : Its design Philosophy
and Machine Architecture
( Also in "Proceedings of Logic Programming Workshop, '83",
Portugal 1983 )
ICOT Research center, Technical report TR-013
June 1983
NITT85a *
Nitta K. & Nagao J.
KRIP : A Knowledge Representation System for Laws Relating to
Industrial Property
in WADA86a, pp 276-286
1985
NIVA82a
Nivat M.
Behaviours of Processes and Synchronised Systems of Processes
in BROY82a, pp 473-550
1982
NODA85a *
Noda Y. & Kinoshita T. & Okumura A. & Hirano T. & Hiruta T.
A Parallel Logic Simulator Based on Concurrent Prolog
in WADA86a, pp 256-265
1985
NORD83a *
Nordstrom B. & Smith J.
Why Type Theory For Programming ? A Short Introduction
Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London
pp 21-45
11-13th April 1983
NORD83b *
Nordstrom B. & Petersson K.
Types and Specifications
Information Processing 1983, pp 915-920
1983
NORM80a
Norman A. et al
SKIM- The S,K,I Reduction Machine
Proc. LISP Conf.
1980
NORT85a *
North N.D.
A Draft Prolog Glossary
NPL, Teddington
21 August 1985
PS/65
October 1985
NOSH85a *
Noshita K. & Hikita T.
The BC-Chain Method for Representing Combinators
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 2, pp 131-144
1985
NOVA85a *
Novak G.S. Jr.
Lisp Programming Lecture Notes
AI-TR-85-06
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Computer
Sciences,
University of Texas, Austin
1985
NUMA85a *
Numao N. & Maruyama H.
PROEDIT - A Screen Oriented Prolog Programming Environment
in WADA86a, pp 100-107
1985
NUTE85a *
Nute D.
A Programming Solution To Certain Problems With Loops
In Prolog
ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Vol 20, No 8, pp 32-37
August 1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Nov-86 0910 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling for Final Exams
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 09:09:29 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 09:04:51-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Scheduling for Final Exams
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU,
TAS@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252797127.19.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Registrar's Room Scheduling Office has requested the following information
for each class being taught this quarter. The more responses I receive, the
more easily they can schedule our final examination times and location:
1) Are there any class time or location changes which haven't previously been
reported to the CS Dept. office?
2) Are there any instructors who do not plan to give a final exam this quarter?
3) What courses will need additional space in order to provide alternate
seating during the final exam?
4) Are there any instructors who are giving an alternate exam in addition to
their regularly scheduled exam?
5) Are there any group examinations being given which will require an
additional room?
Please try to get your responses to me by Wednesay, November 12. My email
address is stager@score. Thanks very much for your assistance!
Claire
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1045 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU A little more on final exams
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 10:45:52 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 10:40:46-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: A little more on final exams
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU,
TAS@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252814589.19.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Another piece of information that might be useful to you when planning
for your final exams:
Any class with a regularly scheduled starting time between hours will be
considered as meeting on the earlier hour when it comes to Finals Week. Thus,
a 9:30 class will be treated like a 9:00 class, a 12:50 class will be
treated like a 12:00 class, a 2:45 class will be treated like a 2:00 class,
and so on. There's been some confusion about this in the past, so I hope
this'll help.
Claire
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1214 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Big outage for this weekend
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 12:14:33 PST
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Thu 6 Nov 86 12:12:54-PST
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-Aim>
To: ksl-explorer@Sumex-Aim
Cc: Outgoing-Mail@KSL-EXP-1
Subject: Big outage for this weekend
Date: 6-Nov-86 11:43:57
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2740679036@KSL-EXP-1>
Michael and I are planning on moving the Explorers in the machine
room around this weekend in order to facilitate future servicing and to
better protect them from accidental disturbance. This will entail
having some machines down from around 10am Saturday for a couple of
hours. We'll be around in the machine room during that time, so you can
let us know if you need a machine badly, and we can try to accomodate
you. As always, let us know if this is a bad time for some reason.
Machines affected are X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, X8, X10, X12, X13, X15,
X16, X17, and X18.
-- Rich
∂06-Nov-86 1245 SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU consultants in the linguistics Department
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 12:45:30 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 12:34:49-PST
From: Sol Lederman <SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: consultants in the linguistics Department
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: action@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, bboard@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Experimentally, there will be CSLI consultants in the linguistics department
office in the quad on Mondays and Thursdays from 3:00-5:00. The consultants
will be able to help you with questions about Turing, Russell, our printers
and other CSLI computer use questions.
Please note: since the consultants are students the schedule from one quarter
to the next may vary.
Sol Lederman (CSLI consultant)
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1604 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter textbooks
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 16:04:48 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 16:01:06-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Winter textbooks
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252872905.44.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hello-
It's coming up on the deadline for ordering textbooks for Winter Quarter.
If any of you haven't sent in your textbook requests yet, please do so as
soon as possible. In order for the books to arrive on time, I'll need your
responses by next Wednesday, November 12. Please include:
Titles
Authors
Publishers
Required/Optional
Thanks.
Claire
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1614 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Three more talks of AFLB interest
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 16:14:27 PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 13:26:54-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Three more talks of AFLB interest
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252582688.33.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
On Tuesday 11 November Jeff Naughton will have his orals in Bldg. 160
Rm. 163B at 2:15PM. The title is "Optimization of Recursion in Logic-based
Languages".
On Tuesday 11 November Amos Fiat, visiting UCBerkeley, will give the
department colloquium on "How to Prove Yourself: Practical Solutions to
Identification and Signature Problems". The talk is at 4:15PM in
Terman Auditorium preceded by refreshments in the MJH lounge at 3:45PM
Note that this talk is unrelated to the talk that Dr. Fiat will give
on 17 November at BATS.
On Wednesday 12 November, James Renegar of Stanford University will give
the Operations Research Colloquium at 4:30PM in Bldg. 550 Room 550A. The
title is "A Polynomial-Time Algorithm, Based on Newton's Method for
Linear Programming". I extracted this information from the calendar in
this week's Campus Report, so I cannot guarantee its accuracy.
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1625 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar announcement
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 16:25:01 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 5 Nov 86 16:40:21-PST
Date: Wed 5 Nov 86 16:36:18-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: seminar announcement
To: paco@Navajo.Stanford.EDU, aflb.su@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252617168.16.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Friday, Nov. 7, at 1:15pm in MJH252:
A Tighter Upper Bound on the Worst Case
Behavior of Conway's Parallel Sorting Algorithm
Alejandro A. Schaffer
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
(This work was done at IBM Almaden Research Center)
ABSTRACT
We analyze the worst case behavior of an extremely primitive parallel
sorting algorithm, attributed to Conway, that uses a linear array of
n-1 finite state machines to sort n keys. Warshauer [J. Algorithms
7(1986), pp. 270-276] shows that the algorithm requires at most
2n-3 iterations of the outer loop to sort all keys, and he exhibits
a class of inputs for which 4n/3 - 1 iterations are required. We
improve the upper bound to 4n/3 + O(1) for all inputs and any n
matching Warshauer's lower bound to within an additive constant.
-------
∂06-Nov-86 1800 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU lunches
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 18:00:28 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 17:56:24-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: lunches
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252893893.33.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
At the last faculty lunch several people thought it would be a good idea
if occasionally a lunch was devoted to hearing about a technical topic
that one of our faculty is working on. I'll schedule such every now and
then if people will volunteer to talk. It looks like the next few
Tuesdays are pretty well scheduled already. Topics include PhD
admission discussion, Nov 11; Possible collaboration between CS and
Civil Engineering with Haresh Shah, Nov 25; the University Budget
Process with Ray Bachetti, Dec. 2; Overhead Rate with Bill Reynolds,
Dec. 9. But we have all of Winter and Spring Quarters! Volunteers?
-Nils
-------
∂06-Nov-86 2053 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU rides to BATS in Berkeley
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 20:53:35 PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 20:51:19-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: rides to BATS in Berkeley
To: aflb.su@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12252925737.21.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I'm willing to act as the ride coordinator for people who need rides
and for people who are willing to give them.
Any individual who is willing to give people rides should send me a
note saying how many seats they have available. Any individual who
neads a ride should send me a note saying how many seats they need.
If you also indicate preferences about what talks you definately want
to get to, and which ones you'd rather skip I might be able to perform
some near-optimal assignment -- is this NP-complete, hmmmmm. (And
I'll keep this info reasonably confidential.)
-------
∂06-Nov-86 2322 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:DAVIES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA seminar on syntax of English idioms
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Nov 86 23:22:46 PST
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 6 Nov 86 23:17:19-PST
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 23:19:40-PST
From: Todd Davies <DAVIES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: seminar on syntax of English idioms
To: bboard@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Cc: researchers@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(122)+PONY(0) 6-Nov-86 23:19:40.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Tim Reagan of the Psychology Department at Stanford is giving the
dept. seminar this week on "The Syntax of English Idioms", room 100
of the Psychology Department, at 3:15 this afternoon, Friday, Nov. 7.
Todd
-------
∂07-Nov-86 0119 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #67
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Nov 86 01:19:32 PST
Date: Thursday, November 6, 1986 11:19AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #67
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 7 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 67
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Theorem Prover,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part O
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 86 19:05:00 GMT
From: David Plaisted <ulysses!unc!plaisted@ucbvax.Berkeley>
Subject: Prolog theorem prover
I have recently programmed a theorem prover in C Prolog
that Prolog programmers may find useful. This prover may
be viewed as an extension of Prolog to full first order
logic, that is, non-Horn clauses. Negation is treated as
in first-order logic, not as in negation by failure. The
input syntax is much the same asthe syntax of Prolog.
The prover uses Prolog style depth-first search with a
gradually increasing depth bound (this is therefore
depth-first iterative deepening). Also, solutions to
subgoals are "cached" so that if a subgoal is seen more
than once, work is not repeated. The prover has a
convenient interface to Prolog source code for predicates
whose solutions may be found more efficiently in Prolog
itself than by the theorem prover. This also permits
interaction with the user to obtain the values of variables,
for example. The prover is capable of general term rewriting
to replace subexpressions by equivalent ones. This prover
has been run on a wide variety of problems and generally
obtains simple proofs in 10 or 20 seconds in C Prolog on a
VAX 780. The listing is about 15 pages long. This makes
the prover relatively easy to understand, so it may be
possible to adapt it to various applications by direct
modification of the source code. The prover has been designed
for use with as little user guidance as possible, for users
who know nothing about theorem proving. It is based on a
modification of the theorem proving strategy described
in Plaisted, D., A simplified problem reduction format,
ArtificialIntelligence 18 (1982) 227-261, and has been
distributed to several sites.
The source code contains information about how to use the
prover. This prover is similar to Stickel's Prolog
technology theorem prover, but does not use contrapositives
of clauses as his does. Also, it is much slower than his,
but does not require the axioms to be compiled. Of course,
using a compiled Prolog would speed up my prover by a large
factor. Don Loveland of Duke has recently developed an
extension of Prolog which is intended for "near-Horn"uses
and which may also be of interest to readers of this
newsgroup.
-- David Plaisted
[ I will plan to post the source for the prover and the
example file in forthcoming issues of the Digest -ed ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu 6 Nov 86 11:19:04-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part O
OHSU85a Ohsuga S. & Yamauchi H. Multi-Layer Logic - A Predicate Logic
Including Data Structure as Knowledge Representation Language New
Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 403-439 1985
ONAI84a Onai R. & Aso M. & Takeuchi A. An Approach to a Parallel
Inference Machine Based on Control-Driven andData-Driven Mechanisms
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-042 January 1984
ONAI85a * Onai R. & Aso M. & Shimizu H. & Masuda K. & Matsumoto A.
Architecture of a Reduction-Based Parallel Inference Machine : PIM-R
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 2, pp 197-228 1985
ONAI85b * Onai R. & Shimizu H. & Masuda K. & Matsumoto A. & Aso M.
Architecture and Evalaution of a Reduction-Based Parallel Inference
Machine : PIM-R in WADA86a, pp 1-12 1985
OOPS86a * OOPS ! Newsletter of the Object Oriented Programming
Society Issue 2 Spring 1986
OSH84 ed. O'Shea T. & Eisenstadt M. Artificial Intelligence Tools,
Techniques and Applications Harper & Row, Publishers, New York 1984
OVER75a * Overbeek R.A. An Implementation of Hyper-Resolution Comp.
and Maths. with Appls., Vol 1, pp 201-214 1975
OVER76a * Overbeek R. & McCharen J. & Wos L. Complexity and Related
Enhancements for Automated Theorem-Proving Programs Computers and
Mathematics With Applications, pp 1-16 1976
OZKA85a * Ozkarahan E.A. Evolution and Implementation of the RAP
Database Machine New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 3, pp 237-271
1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂07-Nov-86 1149 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Research mentors - clarification and request
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Nov 86 11:49:21 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Nov 86 11:32:01-PST
Date: Fri 7 Nov 86 11:32:46-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Research mentors - clarification and request
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: phdcom@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
As there seems to be some confusion about the role of a research mentor,
I thought it might be helpful to give some clarification as to what it
means (and doesn't mean). The purpose of instituting the mentoring
system was to ensure that all entering students get acquainted with some
kind of research, in collaboration with a research group. It is
intended to be a one-year initial period for finding out what research
in our department is like. The mentors are not expected to be advisors
in the sense that they would provide general guidance (e.g., information
about courses, the Comp.) for the student. The 1st year advisor (this
year, Nils) is responsible for providing that information. However, the
mentor will be the primary advocate for the student in the system,
(e.g., during the yearly progress evaluation meetings, the mentor
will be responsible for knowing how a student is doing).
On the student side, the mentor may suggest research work that would be
useful and educational for the student, but there is no commitment to do
the work (unless, of course the student is being supported as an RA on
the project). We anticipate that many first year students (especially
in the first two quarters) will spend most of their time preparing for
the comprehensive, but even a relatively tangential connection with a
research group will be helpful in getting oriented to the department.
About half of the new students have signed up with research mentors.
We'd like everyone to be assigned by Thanksgiving. The new students
have been notified of this and I'd like to encourage all of you to be
available to meet with them and discuss your research.
Research people from industry may serve as mentors if the environment
satisfies the appropriate criteria. They will be required to submit to
the committee the same information regarding their research, group
structure, etc., as Stanford faculty and research associates. They will
be approved on a case-by-case basis by the PhD committee.
-------
∂07-Nov-86 1201 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Clarifications of programming project
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Nov 86 12:01:48 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Nov 86 11:57:22-PST
Date: Fri 7 Nov 86 11:56:00-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Clarifications of programming project
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, new-phd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: phdcom@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Since a PhD student no longer has to pass the programming project before
applying for candidacy, there is the danger of having this requirement
remaining unfulfilled when the student is substantially done with the
dissertation and eager to leave. This could lead to undue pressure on
the advisor and/or Phd committee to waive or finesse the requirement.
Since we allow for the possibility that the dissertation research could
satisfy the programming requirement, it cannot be required before the
dissertation work begins. Therefore the committee has adopted the
policy that all students must have their projects submitted and approved
before they can schedule orals. Programming for the dissertation work
should normally be done by then, as well as a susbstantial writeup.
Previously there was a committee to evaluate programming projects. The
new policy adopted at the last faculty meeting is that only the faculty
sponsor responsible for the project need certify that it is complete and
adequate. The final approved and signed writeup is to be filed with the
program office (currently Victoria).
There was some concern that individual faculty members would not be
sensitive to the overall objectives of the requirement, and would be
subject to individual pressure from students wanting their work accepted
(often in cases where it is in the advisor's self-interest to have the
student doing other things). In order to see whether these worries are
justified, the Ph.D. Program committee will monitor the projects that
are approved by faculty (getting independent grading on some number of
them), and if quality control seems to be a problem we will propose a
revised policy.
Listed below are the general criteria for what constitutes an
acceptable project:
A programming project must have sufficient complexity and quality
to demonstrate competence in computer programming. The project must
exhibit the use of sophisticated algorithms and data structures and
be well documented. Programs will be judged on the basis of
correctness, efficiency, clarity, and style. The project must
involve both design of algoritms and data structures, and actual
programming. It should be such that the design aspect is significant.
A program that is very long, but consists only of a large number of
trivial algorithms and data structures, is not adequate. Also,
implementation of a program from someone else's design is not
adequate.
Projects will be judged on quality of both code and documentation.
The judgement of code will be based on correctness, clarity, style
and efficiency. A program should be easily readable by an experienced
programmer conversant with the language used. The importance of good
documentation cannot be emphasized too strongly. Both internal and
external documentation are essential. Between them, they should
clearly and concisely state at least the following:
a. The purpose of the project: the problem it solves or the service
it provides.
b. The architecture of the solution: program structure, major data
structures, and the relationships between them.
c. Design decisions taken, alternatives considered and the rationale
behind the choices made. Reasons for choosing particular algorithms
and data structures should be given. Clarity/efficiency, space/time
and other tradeoffs should be documented and justified.
d. The implementation: how data structures are implemented and details
of algorithms used.
e. Details of test runs performed and the results produced. Testing
should be sufficient to demonstrate that the project achieves its
stated purpose.
f. Citations and acknowledgments of all literary material used and all
advice received from others.
A student can satisfy the requirement in several ways:
1. By successfully completing a project supervised and endorsed by a
member of the Computer Science Department faculty. The project may be
the result of CS393 work, although it need not be. The project should
represent at least three units of work.
2. By successfully completing a project associated with a course, where the
course instructor has had the project approved by the Ph.D. committee as
adequate for the requirement. To be adequate, it must satisfy the normal
standards for the project, as outlined above.
3. By presenting adequate documentation of a program done elsewhere
(possibly before attending Stanford) that meets the requirements for
originality, scope, and quality. The student must demonstrate that
he/she has had a significant role in the specification, design,
implementation and testing of the program, not in just one aspect. A
project is not acceptable unless the full documentation (including
source code) can be submitted to the Department and hence be in the
public domain. Proprietary or classified work will not be acceptable
unless arrangements are made by the student for open publication.
4. By submitting a petition to the Ph.D. committee to accept some other
demonstration, as suited to special cases. The committee expects this
kind of waiver to be rare and will not grant it lightly.
-------
∂10-Nov-86 0053 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #68
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Nov 86 00:53:00 PST
Date: Friday, November 7, 1986 6:52PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #68
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 10 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 68
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part P
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 7 Nov 86 18:51:19-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography - Part P
PAPAD86a * Papadopoulos G. PARLOG84 -> DACTL0 University of East
Anglia Personal Communication 13 May 1986
PAPAK86a * Papakonstantinou G. & Kontos J. Knowledge representation
With Attribute Grammars Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 3, pp 241-245
1986
PARK76a * Park D. The Y-Combinator In Scott's Lambda-Calculus Nodels
(Revised Version) Theory of Computation Report No 13 Dept of Computer
Science, University of Warwick June 1976
PARK76b * Park D. Finiteness is Mu-Ineffable Theoretical Computer
Science, 3, pp 173-181 1976
PART86a * Partridge D. Engineering Artificial Intelligence Software
Artificial Intelligence Review, 1, pp 27-41 1986
PASI74a * Pasini A. Some Fixed Point Theorems of the Mappings of
Partially Ordered Sets Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova, Vol 51, pp
167-177 1974
PATT81a * Patterson D.A. & Sequin C.H. RISC 1 : A Reduced Instruction
Set VLSI Computer Proc 8th International Symposium on Computer
Architecture SIGARCH News vol 9, no 3 pp 443-457 1981
PATT82a Patterson D.A. & Sequin C.H. A VLSI RISC Computer Vol 15 No
9, pp 8-21, Sept 1982
PATT84a Patterson D.A. VLSI Systems Building: A Berkeley Perspective
Proc. Conf. on Advanced Research in VLSI, MIT January 1984
PATT85 Patterson D.A. Reduced Instruction Set Computers CACM Vol 28,
No 1 January 1985
PAUL83a * Paulson L. A Higher-Order Implementation of Rewriting
Science of Computer Programming 3, pp 119-149 1983
PAUL84a * Paulson L.C. Constructing Recursion Operators in
Intuitionistic Type Theory Computing Laboratory, University of
Cambridge Technical Report no 57 October 1984
PAUL85a * Paulson L.C. Lessons Learned From LCF: A Survey of Natural
Deduction Proofs Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 5, pp 474-479 1985
PAUL85b * Paulson L.C. Natural Deduction Proof as Higher-Order
Resolution ( Revised Version ) Computing Laboratory, University of
Cambridge Technical Report no 82 December 1985
PERE79a * Pereira L.M. & Porto A. Intelligent Backtracking and
Sidetracking in Horn Clause Programs - The Theory Universidade Nova de
Lisboa, Report no 2/79 1979
PERE79b * Pereira L.M. Backtracking Intelligently in AND/OR Trees
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, report no 1/79 1979
PERE83a * Pereira F.C.N. Can Drawing Be Liberated From The Von
Neumann Style ? SRI International Technical Note 282 June 1983
PETE83a * Peterson K. An Introduction To The Programming System For
Type Theory Declarative Programming Workshop, University College
London pp 46-65 11-13th April 1983
PEYT82a Peyton Jones S.L. An Investigation of the Relative
Efficiencies of Combinators and Lambda Expressions Proc. of ACM LISP
Conf 1982 p150-158 1982
PEYT84a * Peyton Jones S.L. Directions in Functional Programming
Research in DUCE84 1984
PEYT85a * Peyton Jones S.L. GRIP-a parallel graph reduction machine
Dept. of Computer Science, Internal Note 1665, grm.design v1.0, Jan
1985
PEYT85b * Peyton Jones S.L. Functional Programming Languages as a
Software Engineering Tool 2nd December 1985
PEYT86a * Peyton Jones S.L. Parsing Distfix Operators CACM, Vol 29,
no 2, pp 118-122 February 1986
PEYT86b * Peyton Jones S.L. Using Futurebus in a Fifth-Generation
Computer Microprocessors and Microsystems, vol 10, No 2 pp 69-76 March
1986
PEYT86c * Peyton Jones S.L. The Implementation of Functional
Programming Languages Pre-Publication Copy to be published by
Prentice-Hall 9th May 1986
PEIR83a Pier K.A. A Retrospective on the Dorado, A High Performance
Personal Computer ISL-83-1, Xerox PARC, 1983
PELE84a * Peleg D. Communication in Concurrent Dynamic Logic CS84-15
Dept of Applied Mathematics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel
July 1984
PELE84b * Peleg D. Concurrent Dynamic Logic CS84-14 Dept of Applied
Mathematics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel July 1984
PING84a Pingali K. & Arvind Efficient Demand-Driven Evaluation (I)
Lab. For Computer Science Technical Memo 242 September 1984
PING84b Pingali K. & Arvind Efficient Demand-Driven Evaluation (II)
Lab For Computer Science Technical Memo 243 November 1984
PITT85a * Pittomvils E. & Bruynooghe M. & Willems Y.D. Towards a Real
Time Garbage Collector for Prolog IEEE 1985 Symposium on Logic
Programming Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A. pp 185-198 July 15-18 1985
PLAI85a * Plaisted D.A. The Undecidability of Self-Embedding For Term
Rewritng Systems Information Processing Letters 20, pp 61-64 15
February 1985
PLAI85b * Plaisted D.A. An Architecture for Functional Programming
and Term Rewriting IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Architecture, UMIST, Manchester July 15-18 1985
PLES85a * Pless E. Die Ubersetzung von LISP in die reduktionsprache
BRL GMD 142 March 1985
PLOT76 Plotkin G.D. A Powerdomain Construction SIAM J. Comput. 5 3 pp
452-487 September 1976
PLOT82 Plotkin G.D. A Power Domain For Countable Non-Determinism
(Extended Abstract) Proc 9th Int. Colloq. on Automata, Languages and
Programming Springer Verlag LNCS no 140, pp 418-428 (ed. Nielson M. &
Schmidt E.M.) 1982
PNUE81a * Pnueli A. The Temporal Semanticss of Concurrent Programs
Theoretical Computer Science, Vol 13, pp 45-60 1981
POLL81a * Pollard G.H. Parallel Execution Of Horn Clause Programs PhD
Thesis Department of Computing, Imperial College 1981
POOL85b * Poole D.L. Making "Clausal" Theorem Provers "Non-Clausal"
Research Report CS-85-52 Logic Programming and Artificial Intelligence
Group Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo December
1985
POOL85c * Poole D. & Goebel R. On Eliminating Loops in Prolog ACM
SIGPLAN Notices, Vol 20, No 8, pp 38-40 August 1985
POOL86a * Poole D. & Goebel R. & Aleliunas R. Theorist: A Logical
Reasoning System For Defaults And Diagnosis Research Report CS-86-06
Logic Programming and Artificial Intelligence Group Department of
Computer Science, University of Waterloo February 1986
POOL86b * Poole D.L. Default Reasoning And Diagnosis As Theory
Formation Technical Report CS-86-08 Logic Programming and Artificial
Intelligence Group Department of Computer Science, University of
Waterloo March 1986
POON85 Poon E.K. & Peyton Jones S.L. Cache Memories in a Functional
Programming Environment Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. College
London, Internal Note 1680, Jan 1985
POPP86a * Popplestone R. & Smithers T. & Corney J. & Koutsou A. &
Millington K. & Sahar G. Engineering Design Support Systems
Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh IKBS/MS
7/86 3.1, distributed with Alvey IKBS mailshot July 1986
POUN86a * Pountain D. Intuitive Solution Byte, Vol 11, No 5, pp
363-374 May 1986
PPRG9a Persistent Programming Research Group Procedures as Persistent
Data Objects Persistent Programming Research Report 9
PPRG11 Persistent Programming Research Group PS-Algol Abstract Machine
Manual Persistent Programming Research Report 11
PPRG12 Persistent Programming Research Group PS-Algol Reference Manual
Second Edition Persistent Programming Research Report 12
PRAM85a * Pramanik S. & King C-T Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 3, pp
264-269 1985
PRAT80a * Pratt V.R. A Near-Optimal Method for Reasoning about Action
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 20, pp 231-254 1980
PRO84a Prolog: A Tutorial/Review Microsystems, January 1984, page 104
1984
PRO86a * Prolog Digest Volume 4 : Issue 14 Tuesday 20 May 1986
PRO86b * Prolog Digest Volume 4 : Issue 14 Friday 23 May 1986
PULL84a Pull H. A HOPE in HOPE Interpreter BSc. Undergraduate Thesis,
Department of Computing, Imperial College 1984
PYKA85a * Pyka C. Syntactic Analysis Forschungstelle fur
Informationswissenschaft und Intelligenz, Universitat Hanburg LOKI
Report NLI - 4.1 November 1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂10-Nov-86 0842 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Nov 86 08:42:25 PST
Date: Mon 10 Nov 86 08:39:40-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12253841121.14.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch Tuesday, Nov. 11 in MJH 146 at 12:15 - "Criteria and Procedures for
Ph.D. Admission" with Genesereth.
-------
∂10-Nov-86 1051 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Nov 86 10:51:11 PST
Date: Mon 10 Nov 86 10:49:32-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12253864760.14.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a faculty meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 2 at 2:30 in MJH 146.
Research Associate Matthew Ginsberg is being recommended for promotion to
Senior Research Associate and this recommendation will be considered at
this meeting. Copies of his curriculum vitae will be distributed prior
to the meeting.
Matthew Ginsberg is working with Michael Genesereth in his Logic Group and
Michael will be sending a paragraph out via net mail explaining the case
for promotion.
-------
∂10-Nov-86 1315 @Score.Stanford.EDU:RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Nov 86 13:15:21 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Nov 86 13:12:38-PST
Date: 10 Nov 86 1313 PST
From: Rutie Adler <RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
To: FACULTY@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
SEMINAR
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10
4:15
050 JORDAN HALL
Andrei P. Ershov
Computing Center
Novosibirsk 630090
A current view of Computer Science in the USSR
Abstract
----------
Computer Literacy courses and use of computers as a tool in high school
education make Computer Science a component of the general culture.
One of the facets of this global process is the problem of identification
of Computer Science as a science as well as a human activity.
There is a specific necessity not only to reflect or speculate on this theme
but also to speak of it in plain words and tractable notions.
In the talk a bird's eye view of the current state of Computer Science in the
USSR will be given with the emphasis on its teaching in universities and,
especially, in secondary schools.
The sequence of major events in high school computarization is outlined.
∂10-Nov-86 1727 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Going BATS??
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Nov 86 17:27:44 PST
Date: Mon 10 Nov 86 17:19:44-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Going BATS??
To: aflb.su@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12253935795.18.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The Berkeley BATS organizer wants to know approximately how many
people are going (in order to order lunch) and exactly how many cars
are going (in order to get parking permits).
If you have not already told me that you are going:
Send me a note by Wednesday noon saying so and whose car you're
going in (or that you need a ride if that's the case).
If you have already told me that you are going:
Hang in there. I'll tell you about the car assignments at
<Wednesday noon> + epsilon.
-------
∂11-Nov-86 0938 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 09:38:43 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 11 Nov 86 09:27:51 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 86 09:27:51 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"Intelligent Query Answering in Rule-Based SYStems"
Tomasz Imielinski, Rutgers, Univ.
This paper attempts to formalize the AI-er's intuition that
one ought to be able to answer queries in generalities,
e.g., Gio Wiederhold's favorite example:
"What ships are over 800 feet long?" Ans: The supertankers.
---jeff
∂11-Nov-86 1059 @Score.Stanford.EDU:RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Information about telephone answering machine
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 10:59:29 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Nov 86 10:56:33-PST
Date: 11 Nov 86 1055 PST
From: Rutie Adler <RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Information about telephone answering machine
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, staff@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
We are considering purchasing a telephone answering machine and are wondering
whether you have any information, such as: things to look for,
things to avoid, brand names to avoid, recommendations etc.
Thanks for your help,
Rutie
-----
∂11-Nov-86 1105 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Military Funding of Mathematics
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 11:04:51 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 11 Nov 86 11:00:05-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 11 Nov 86 10:58:04 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 86 10:59:33 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: AFLB.ALL@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Military Funding of Mathematics
Date: Tues, 11 Nov 1986, 02:27:12 EST
From: Michael Shub <shub@ibm.com>
Subject: Military Funding of Mathematics
Resent-date: 11 Nov 1986 13:55:32-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
November 4,1986
This fall, a group of mathematicians met to discuss our concern with
military funding in mathematics. This group includes Lipman Bers, Lucy
Garnett, Linda Keen, Irwin Kra, Lee Mosher, Barbara Simons, Mike Shub,
Jean Taylor and Bill Thurston. We are in touch with many more. As a result
of these meetings we have written two resolutions and plan to introduce
them at the AMS Council and Business Meeting in San Antonio in January.
To generate discussion and thought we hope to have them published in the
January issue of the Notices. One of us, Bill Thurston, has written a
position paper on the subject which has been submitted for publication in
the same journal.
Enclosed are copies of the two resolutions along with brief
supporting comments written by Moe Hirsch. In order to generate support
for these motions, we need as many cosponsors as possible. We ask that
you cosponsor those motions which feel that you can, even though you may
have different reasons for supporting them than the reasons given in
Hirsch's paper. In addition, we ask you to circulate the motions among
your colleagues and return the signatures to:
Lucy Garnett, 180 Park Row Apt. 24B , New York, N.Y. 10038
or by electronic mail usingbitnet address
DPSBB@CUNYVM.
Also, please send copies of the motions to other possible signators.
For a copy of Thurston's position paper entitled "Military funding in
mathematics" write to him directly :
Bill Thurston, Mathematics Department, Washington Road, Princeton,
N.J. 08544.
MOTION1
Many scientists consider SDI (commonly referred to as Star Wars)
incapable of achieving its stated goals and dangerously destabilizing.
Participation by universities and professional organizations lends a
spurious scientific legitimacy to it. Therefore the AMS will lend no
support to the Star Wars program. In particular, no one acting as a
representative of the AMS shall participate in efforts to obtain
funding for Star Wars research or to mediate between agencies
granting Star Wars research and those seeking to apply for it.
MOTION 2
The AMS is concerned about the increasing militarization of support for
mathematics research. There is a tendency to distribute this support
through narrowly focussed (mission oriented) programs which circumvent
normal peer review procedures. This tendency, unless checked, may skew
and ultimately injure mathematics in the United States. Therefore those
representing the AMS are requested to direct their efforts towards
increasing the fraction of non-military funding for mathematics research,
as well as towards increasing total research support.
Comments from Moe Hirsch
Thanks to the efforts of many individuals and organizations, the
need for increased governmental funding of mathematical research has been
widely recognized, and such funding has recently grown significantly.
Recently, the proportion of funding coming from military agencies has
been increasing. While recognizing that much valuable research has been
supported by military branches of the government, we think there are
larger issues involved than just the amount of support. We deplore the
increasing imbalance between civilian and military support for
mathematics for the following reasons:
1. As military agencies become a major source of support the direction of
mathematical research will inevitably be deformed to suit military rather
than scientific needs.
Military agencies are increasingly mission oriented in their research
programs. Mathematicians and their graduate students will unavoidably
feel pressure -- both internally, and from their departments-- to design
their research projects so as to increase the likelihood of grants.
Unorthodox lines of research will be neglected in favor of whatever fad
has current popularity.
2. Increased dependence on military funding will have a chilling effect on
free public discussion of issues related to research.
Already some government officials have openly proclaimed that critics of
their missions need not apply. More insidious is the natural tendency not
to bite the hand that feeds us. What grant applicant would not consider
carefully, before criticising the agency's mission, whether this might not
endanger the grant?
3. Participation by universities, individuals and professional
organizations in such dubious military projects as SDI (Star Wars) lends a
spurious legitimacy to these projects.
We are often advised, in effect, to "take the Star Wars money even if you
are opposed to it -- especially if you are opposed." Whatever the morality
of such an attitude may be, it dangerously misleads the public into
believing that the scientific community supports enterprises such as SDI,
when in fact the overwhelming number of experts believe it to be deeply
flawed on scientific grounds, and very dangerous politically.
4. Military funding of mathematics is increasingly departing from
the vital traditions of peer review, open access to conferences, and no
restraint on publication.
DARPA has a publicly announced its reliance on its own consultants rather
than peer review of grant applications. It is true and commendable that
most military support of mathematical research has followed traditional
practices. But we see ominous signs that some agencies are sharply
departing from a tradition that, however vital, has no force of law.
When cosponsoring these motions, please be clear as to which ones you are
cosponsoring, also please indicate if you are a member of the AMS. Once
again the addresses are DPSBB@CUNY on the bitnet to reach Lucy Garnett
by electronic mail and Lucy Garnett, 180 Park Row, Apt.24b, New York,NY
10038 for ordinary mail. Please send this message on to several other
people who might be interested. Our mailing lists and capabilities are
rather limited.
∂11-Nov-86 1118 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Sixth Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 11:18:18 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 11 Nov 86 11:07:39-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 11 Nov 86 11:05:44 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 86 11:07:01 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: AFLB.ALL@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Sixth Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical
Date: Fri 7 Nov 86 13:20:11-EST
From: Debra A. Jenkins <JENKINS@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: Sixth Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical
Resent-date: 11 Nov 1986 14:00:37-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Sixth Conference On Foundations of
Software Technology and Theoretical
Computer Science
India International Center, New Delhi, India
December 18-20, 1986
Thursday 18 December
0800-0900 Registration
0900-0915 Inauguration
0915-1015 Keynote Address
Software Development Graphs
A Unifying Concept for Software Development?
Dines Bjorner (Technical Univ. of Denmark).
1015-1045 COFFEE
1045-1245 SESSION 1 Software Technology
Concurrent Run-Time Checking of Annotated Ada Programs
D.S. Rosenblum, S. Sankar, D.C. Luckham (Stanford Univ.)
Recovery of Noncurrent Variables in Source-Level
Debugging of Optimized Code
A. Srivastava (Texas Instruments, Dallas)
Automatic Retargetable Code Generation: A New Technique
Sanjeev Kumar (TRDDC, Pune)
V.M. Malhotra (IIT Kanpur)
An Implementation of OBJ2: An Object-Oriented Language
for Abstract Program Specification
S. Sridhar (Tektronix, Oregon)
1245-1345 LUNCH
1345-1500 SESSION 2 Logic Programming and Functional Programming
Explicit Representation of Terms Defined by Counter
Examples
J.L. Lassez, K. Marriott (IBM T.J. Watson Research
Center, Yorktown Heights)
A Framework for intelligent Backtracking in Logic Problems
Vipin Kumar, Yow-Jian Lin (University of Texas, Austin)
A Generalization of Backus'FP
Y.V. Srinivas, R. Sangal (IIT Kanpur)
1500-1530 COFFEE
1530-1630 Invited Talk
Shortest-Path Motion
C.H. Papadimitriou (Stanford University)
1630-1730 SESSION 3 Algorithms
Via Assignment in Single Routing
J. Bhaskar, S. Sahni (University of Minnesota)
Average-Case Analysis of Modified Harmonic Algorithm
P. Ramanan, K. Tsuga (University of California,
Santa Barbara)
Friday 19 December
0900-1000 Invited Talk
Covering Minima and Lattice Point Free Convex Bodies
Ravi Kannan (Carnegie-Mellon University)
Lazlo Lovasz (Eotvos Lorand Univ., Budapest)
1000-1030 COFFEE
1030-1230 SESSION 4 Theory
Binary Decompositions and Acyclic Schemes
V.S. Lakshamanan, C.E. Veni Madhavan (IISc Bangalore)
Thin Homogeneous Sets of Factors
D. Beauquier (University of Paris)
Irreducible Polynomials Over Finite Fields
J. von zur Gatherff (University of Toronto)
Basic Reduction and Evidence for Transcendence of
Certain Numbers
Ravi Kannan, L.A. McGeoch (Carnegie-Mellon University)
1230-1330 LUNCH
1330-1545 SESSION 5 Distributed Computing
A Characterization of Asynchronous Message-Passing
S.R. Goregaonkar (IIT Bombay)
S. Arun Kumar (TIFR Bombay)
Modular Synthesis of Deadlock-Free Control Structures
A.K. Dutta (Arizona State University, Temple)
S. Ghosh (Jadavpur University, Calcutta)
Distributed Resource sharing in Computer Networks
I.S. Gopel, P. Kermani (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
Yorktown Heights)
On Proving communication Closedness of Distributed Layers
R. Gerth (Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands)
L. Shrira (MIT Cambridge and Technion, Israel)
A Distributed Algorithm for Edge-Disjoint Path Problem
H. Mohanty (ECIL, Hyderabad)
G.P. Bhattacharjee (ITT Kharagpur)
1545-1615 COFFEE
1615-1715 SESSION 6 Scheduling
Scheduling of Hard Real-Time Systems
A. Moitra (Cornell University)
A Polynomial Approximation Scheme for Machine Scheduling
on Uniform Processors: Using the Dual Approximation
approach
D.S. Hochbaum (University of California, Berkeley)
D.B. Shmoys (MIT Cambridge)
Saturday 20 December
0900-1000 Invited Talk
Connectivity Algorithms Using Rubber-Bands
Laszlo Lovasz (Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest)
1000-1115 SESSION 7 Complexity
On Simple and Creative Sets in NP
S. Homer (Boston University)
Complexity of Sufficient-Completeness
D. Kapur, P. Narendran (General Electric Company,
Schenectady , NY)
H. Zhang (Rensselear Polytechnic Institute)
Sampling a Population with a Semi-Random Source
U.V. Vazirani (Harvard Univ.)
V.V. Vazirani (AT&T Bell Labs)
1115-1145 COFFEE
1145-1345 SESSION 8 Parallel Algorithms
An Optimal Parallel Algorithm for Dynamic Expression
Evaluation and its Applications
A. Gibbons (University of Warwick)
W. Rytter (University of Warwick and Warsaw University)
Extension of the Parallel Nested Dissection Algorithm
to the Path Algebra Problems
V. Pan (SUNY, Albany)
J. Reif (Harvard Univ.)
On Synthesizing Systolic Arrays from Recurrence
Equations with Linear Dependencies
S.V. Rajopadhye (Univ. of Oregon)
S. Purushothaman (Penn. State Univ.)
R.M. Fujimoto (Univ. of Utah)
An Efficient Parallel Algorithm for Term Matching
R.M. Verma, T. Krishnaprasad, I.V. Ramakrishnan
(SUNY, Stony Brook)
1345-1445 LUNCH
INFORMATION ABOUT NEW DELHI
Weather Maximum 15-20C
Minimum 6-8C
-Strong possibility of rains
Transport Taxi can be shared by four to five passengers,
Rs. 4/- per km, US$ 0.53 per mile
Autorickshaw (three wheeler) can be shared by
two or three passengers, Rs. 2/-per km
Bus available, but crowded.
Hotels Around $75.00 a day:
Hyatt Regency, Maurya Palace Sheration,
Ashoka, Taj Palace, Oberoi, Siddharta
Around $35.00 a day:
Ambassador, Lodhi Hotel, Sartaj, Claridges
Tourism Many tourist agencies have organized tours of
Delhi and its surroundings.
REGISTRATION INFORMATION
Charge Rs. 350 per person up to 30 Nov., R.S. 450 per person
after Nov. 30: includes a copy of the Conference Proceedings
refreshments, lunch and the Conference Dinner.
Rs. 100 for full-time students (includes refreshments and lunch)
Payment By check, bank draft or money order in favor of "Foundations
of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science 6",
enclosed with registration form. Or in cash.
Indian
Participants Limited travel grants are available to full time
students, teachers, research workers in educational
institutions. Those seeking travel support must send their
registration forms by November 15, and write a covering
letter indicating their need.
Foreign
Participants Should inform their intention to register in advance. Due
to bank charges, and delays in international transactions
all foreign participants are advised to pay their charges
at the conference. Allow plenty of time for visa
formalities. Please make your travel arrangements early
as the flights to India are packed at that time of the
year.
Hotel
Accommodations Accommodation can be booked in hotels near the conference
venue. For more information, write to the address
below.
Advance Registration is recommended. Completed registration forms should be
sent to reach the address given below before 30 November.
Address for all correspondence
Dr. Anshul Kumar
FST & TCS 6
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
New Delhi 110 016 INDIA
Telegram: TECHNOLOGY NEW DELHI 110 016 INDIA
REGISTRATION FORM
Deadline for Advance Registration: November 30, 1986
Name: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Affiliation:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City←←←←←←←←←← State ←←←←←←←←←←←← PIN/Zip:←←←←←←←←←←
Country:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
∂11-Nov-86 1133 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu STACS87
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 11:33:45 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 11 Nov 86 11:16:08-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 11 Nov 86 11:14:01 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 86 11:14:54 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: AFLB.ALL@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: STACS87
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 86 11:21:34 -0100
From: Ruediger Schuster <unido!unipas!schuster@SEISMO.CSS.GOV>
Subject: STACS87
Resent-date: 11 Nov 1986 13:58:12-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
STACS 87
4th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science
PROGRAM
February, 19-21, 1987
University of Passau
Passau, FRG
Opening
R. Book (Santa Barbara): Invited lecture:
Relativization of complexity classes
T. Lengauer (Paderborn), K. Wagner (Augsburg):
The correlation between the complexities of the non- hierarchical and
hierarchical versions of graph problems
U. Schoening (Koblenz):
Graph isomorphism is in the low hierarchy
V. Keraenen (Oulu):
On the k-freeness of morphisms on free monoids
U. Schmidt (Paris):
Avoidable patterns on 2 letters
J.G. Geske (Ames), D.T. Huynh (Dallas), A.L. Selman (Boston):
A hierarchy theorem for almost everywhere complex sets with application
to polynomial complexity degrees
J.L. Balcazar (Barcelona):
Self-reducibility
J. Cai (Ithaca):
Probability one separation of the Boolean hierarchy
F. Aurenhammer (Graz), H. Imai (Hakozaki):
Geometric relations among voronoi diagrams
J.D. Brock (Chapel Hill):
Finding the largest empty rectangle on a grated surface
K. Doshi, P. Varman (Houston):
Efficient graph algorithms using limited communication on a fixed-size
array of processors
B. Ravikumar (Minneapolis), K. Ganesan (Boston), K.B. Lakshmanan (Madras):
On selecting the largest element in spite of erroneous information
S. Kaplan (Orsay), A. Pnueli (Rehovot):
Specification and implementation of concurrently accessed data
structures: An abstract data type approach
C. Beierle, A. Voss (Kaiserslautern):
On implementation of loose abstract data type specifications and their
vertical composition
T. Nipkow (Manchester):
Are homomorphisms sufficient for behavioural implementations of
determininstic and nondeterministic data types?
L. Priese, R. Rehrmann, U. Willecke-Klemme (Paderborn):
Some results on fairness: The regular case
H. Carstensen (Hamburg):
Decidability questions for fairness in Petri nets
M. Arfi (Paris):
Operations polynomiales sur les langages rationnels
A. Habel (Berlin), H.-J. Kreowski (Bremen):
Some structural aspects of hypergraph languages generated by hyperedge
replacement
Guided tour to the St. Stephan+s Cathedral and its church organ
Reception by the University
G.Kahn (Sophia Antipolis): Invited lecture:
Natural Semantics
V. Arvind, S. Biswas (Kanpur):
Expressibility of first order logic with a nondeterministic inductive
operator
R.J. van Glabbeek (Amsterdam):
Bounded nondeterminism and the approximation induction principle in
process algebra
D. Taubner, W. Vogler (Muenchen):
The step failure semantics
R.R. Howell (Austin), D.T. Huynh (Ames), L.E. Rosier (Austin), Hsu-Chun Yen
(Austin):
On the complexity of containment, equivalence, and reachability for finite
and 2-dimensional vector addition systems with states
E. Pelz (Paris):
Closure properties of deterministic Petri nets
M. Kunde (Muenchen):
Optimal sorting on multi-dimensionally mesh-connected computers
P. Molitor (Saarbruecken):
On the contact-minimization problem
R. Bar-Yehuda, S. Kutten, Y. Wolfstahl, S. Zaks (Haifa):
Making distributed algorithms fault-resilient
J. Hromkovic (Bratislava):
Reversal complexity of multicounter and multihead machines
A. Bertoni, M. Goldwurm, N. Sabadini (Milano):
Computing the counting function of context-free languages
G. Schmidt, R. Berghammer, H. Zierer (Muenchen):
Describing semantic domains with sprouts
E. Astesiano, G. Reggio (Genova):
Comparing direct and continuation semantics styles for concurrent
languages - Revisiting an old problem from a new viewpoint
K. Mehlhorn (Saarbruecken): Invited lecture:
Routing and edge-disjoint paths in planar graphs
G. Tel (Utrecht), R.B. Tan (Chickasha), J. van Leeuwen (Utrecht):
The derivation of on-the-fly garbage collection algorithms from
distributed termination detection protocols
N. Santoro, J. B. Sidney (Ottawa), S. J. Sidney (Stout):
On the expected complexity of distributed selection
V. Diekert (Muenchen) :
Some remarks on presentations by finite Church-Rosser Thue systems
H. Ganzinger (Dortmund):
Ground term confluence in parametric conditional equational
specifications
Systems Demonstrations at STACS 87:
D. Bert (Grenoble):
LPG - a generic, logic and functional programming language
M. Bidoit (Orsay):
Asspegique - an environment for algebraic specifications
L. Fribourg (Orsay):
SLOG - a logic interpreter for equational clauses
H. Ganzinger (Dortmund):
Knuth-Bendix completion for conditional specifications
N. Girard (Paris):
ECOLE - a computer algebra system for l-calculus and combinatory logic
M. Goldsmith (Oxford):
An algebraic transformation system for OCCAM programs
H. Hussmann (Passau):
RAP - rapid prototyping for algebraic specifications
M. Lemoine, R. Jacquart, G. Zanon (Toulouse):
SPRAC - a software engineering environment
P. Lescanne (Nancy):
Reve - a rewriting system environment
J. L. Remy, W. Bousdira (Nancy):
Reveur 4 - a system for conditional term rewriting
Registration fee
Members of GI, AFCET and associate organizations DM 160,-
Nonmembers DM 190,-
Students DM 25,-
Late registration add DM 20,-
Accomodation: per night
single DM 40,-
double DM 75,-
Make check (in DM) payable to STACS 87 or transfer the amount to
STACS 87, account 701 at Volksbank Passau, and send your registration
form and check or copy of deposit slip to:
Franz J. Brandenburg
Lehrstuhl fuer Informatik
Universitaet Passau
Innstr. 27
D 8390 Passau
Tel.: 0 851 509 343
uucp net: unido!unipas!brandenb
∂11-Nov-86 1550 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU 1987 LINGUISTIC INSTITUTE
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Nov 86 15:50:47 PST
Date: Tue 11 Nov 86 15:33:14-PST
From: Ivan Sag <SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: 1987 LINGUISTIC INSTITUTE
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: henniss@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
All,
As many of you already know, Stanford University, in conjunction with
The Linguistic Society of America, The Association for Computational
Linguistics, and The American Association for Artificial Intelligence,
is sponsoring the 54th Linguistic Institute from June 29 to August 7,
1987. We have just received from the printer, copies of our 87-page
brochure which we will send to interested parties free of charge.
If you would like to receive one, or know of people who would like
to receive one, please provide the relevant information to:
institute@csli.stanford.edu
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO ME!!
-Ivan Sag
Director
-------
∂12-Nov-86 0153 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #70
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 01:53:30 PST
Date: Tuesday, November 11, 1986 8:57PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #70
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 12 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 70
Today's Topics:
Implementation - CProlog 1.5 bug,
LP Library - Examples for Prover,
& Declarative Language Bibliography, Part Q
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 9 Nov 86 00:23:18 GMT
From: Wayne Citrin <citrin@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Interesting Cprolog 1.5 bug
Here's an interesting bug in C-Prolog 1.5 that I
stumbled upon.
Take the following program:
main :- foo(←), replace←foo, fail.
foo(1).
replace←foo :- retract(foo(←)), assert(foo(2)), !.
(The cut is needed to remove the choice point set up by
the retract, but that's another bug.)
Run this program by issuing the query ?- main.
The program terminates and fails. The call to foo/1 in
main does not set up a choice point because there is only
one clause in foo at the time the call is made. This is
the behavior one would expect.
Now, put the interpreter in debug mode and issue the same
query. The program loops and never terminates. The call
to foo in main now has a choice point, and there is always
a new choice due to the asserted clause.
This actually happened to me yesterday. What use is a
debugger that introduces new bugs?
-- Wayne Citrin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 86 17:27:39 est
From: David Plaisted <unc!plaisted%unc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: Example files for Prover
% Here are examples for the simplified problem reduction
% format prover. Each one should be in a separate file
% when the prover is used.
% Dave Plaisted
% UNC Chapel Hill
% July 21, 1986
% *******************************************************
% Chang and Lee Example 1
p(g(X,Y),X,Y).
p(X,h(X,Y),Y).
false :- p(k(X),X,k(X)).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 2
p(e,X,X).
p(X,e,X).
p(X,X,e).
p(a,b,c).
false :- p(b,a,c).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 3
false :- p(a,e,a).
p(e,X,X).
p(i(X),X,e).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 4
p(e,X,X).
p(i(X),X,e).
false :- p(a,X,e).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 5
s(a).
p(e,X,X).
p(X,e,X).
p(X,i(X),e).
p(i(X),X,e).
false :- s(e).
s(Z) :- p(X,i(Y),Z),s(X),s(Y).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 6
s(b).
p(e,X,X).
p(X,e,X).
p(i(X),X,e).
p(X,i(X),e).
false :- s(i(b)).
s(Z) :- p(X,i(Y),Z),s(X),s(Y).
p(U,Z,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(X,V,W).
p(X,V,W) :- p(X,Y,U), p(Y,Z,V), p(U,Z,W).
% Chang and Lee Example 7
p(a).
m(a,s(c),s(b)).
m(X,X,s(X)).
false :- d(a,b).
m(Y,X,Z) :- m(X,Y,Z).
d(X,Z) :- m(X,Y,Z).
d(X,Y) :- p(X),not(d(X,Z)),m(Y,Z,U),d(X,U).
% Chang and Lee Example 8
l(1,a).
d(X,X).
false :- d(X,a),p(X).
d(X,Z) :- d(Y,Z),d(X,Y).
p(f(X)) :- l(1,X),l(X,a).
d(f(X),X) :- l(1,X),l(X,a).
d(g(X),X) :- not(p(X)).
l(1,g(X)) :- not(p(X)).
l(g(X),X) :- not(p(X)).
% Chang and Lee Example 9
% For this one the way the last three rules was
% expressed, was important for efficiency
l(X,f(X)).
false :- l(X,X).
false :- l(X,Y),l(Y,X).
l(Y,X) :- d(X,f(Y)).
l(f(a),X) :- l(a,X),p(X).
d(h(X),X) :- not(p(X)).
p(h(X)) :- not(p(X)).
l(h(X),X) :- not(p(X)).
% A verification condition for Hoare's FIND program
lt(j,i).
le(m,p).
le(p,q).
le(q,n).
false :- le(b(p),b(q)).
le(X,Y) :- not(lt(Y,X)).
le(b(X),b(Y)) :- le(m,X),le(Y,j),le(X,Y).
le(b(X),b(Y)) :- le(i,X),le(Y,n),le(X,Y).
le(b(X),b(Y)) :- le(m,X),lt(X,i),lt(j,Y),le(Y,n).
% A conditional planning problem in situation calculus
% representation (I composed this one)
at(f,s0).
cold(S) :- not(warm(T)).
at(b,walk(b,S)) :- at(a,S).
at(b,drive(b,S)) :- at(a,S).
at(a,walk(a,S)) :- at(b,S).
at(a,drive(a,S)) :- at(b,S).
at(c,skate(c,S)) :- cold(S),at(b,S).
at(b,skate(b,S)) :- cold(S),at(c,S).
at(d,climb(d,S)) :- warm(S),at(b,S).
at(b,climb(b,S)) :- warm(S),at(d,S).
at(d,go(d,S)) :- at(c,S).
at(c,go(c,S)) :- at(d,S).
at(e,go(e,S)) :- at(c,S).
at(c,go(c,S)) :- at(e,S).
at(f,go(f,S)) :- at(d,S).
at(d,go(d,S)) :- at(f,S).
false :- at(a,S).
% Commutativity of join (set intersection); el is set
% membership
not(el(X,p(Y))) :- not(sub(X,Y)).
el(X,p(Y)) :- sub(X,Y).
not(el(X,join(Y,Z))) :- not(el(X,Y)).
el(X,join(Y,Z)) :- el(X,Y),el(X,Z).
el(X,join(Y,Z)) :- el(X,Z),el(X,Y).
false :- eq(join(a,b),join(b,a)).
% rewrites and replacements. The prover does a kind of
% outermost rewriting; the notsub rule is designed to
% insure that the sub(X,Y) replacement before it is only
% done in a montone context, that is, no enclosing
% negations
rewrite(eq(X,Y),and(sub(X,Y),sub(Y,X))).
rewrite(sub(X,Y),or(not(el(g(X,Y),X)),el(g(X,Y),Y))).
rewrite(not(sub(X,Y)),notsub(X,Y)).
replace(notsub(X,Y),and(el(Z,X),not(el(Z,Y)))).
rewrite(el(X,p(Y)),sub(X,Y)).
rewrite(el(X,join(Y,Z)),and(el(X,Y),el(X,Z))).
rewrite(not(eq(X,Y)),or(not(sub(X,Y)),not(sub(Y,X)))).
rewrite(not(el(X,p(Y))),not(sub(X,Y))).
rewrite(not(el(X,join(Y,Z))),or(not(el(X,Y)),not(el(X,Z)))).
rewrite(not(or(X,Y)),and(not(X),not(Y))).
rewrite(not(and(X,Y)),or(not(X),not(Y))).
rewrite(not(not(X)),X).
rewrite(or(X,and(Y,Z)),and(or(X,Y),or(X,Z))).
rewrite(or(and(X,Y),Z),and(or(X,Z),or(Y,Z))).
or(X,Y) :-- prolog(tautology(or(X,Y))).
or(X,Y) :-- X.
or(X,Y) :-- Y.
and(X,Y) :-- X,Y.
% solved July 16 1986 8.4 cpu seconds 8 inferences size 5
% Prolog source code for the tautology checker used in the
% commutativity of set intersection example; needs to be
% directly loaded into C Prolog
tautology(X) :- or←memb(not(Y),X),
or←member(Y,X).
% don't instantiate variables very much
or←memb(not(X),Y) :- var(Y), !, Y=not(X).
or←memb(X,X).
or←memb(Z, or(X,Y)) :-
(or←memb(Z,X) ; or←memb(Z,Y)).
or←member(X,Y) :- var(Y), !, unify(X,Y).
or←member(X,Y) :- unify(X,Y).
or←member(Z, or(X,Y)) :-
(or←member(Z,X) ; or←member(Z,Y)).
% the power set problem; p(X) is the power set of X
not(el(X,p(Y))) :- not(sub(X,Y)).
el(X,p(Y)) :- sub(X,Y).
not(el(X,join(Y,Z))) :- not(el(X,Y)).
el(X,join(Y,Z)) :- el(X,Y),el(X,Z).
el(X,join(Y,Z)) :- el(X,Z),el(X,Y).
replace(false,eq(p(join(a,b)),join(p(a),p(b)))).
rewrite(eq(X,Y),and(sub(X,Y),sub(Y,X))).
rewrite(sub(X,Y),or(not(el(g(X,Y),X)),el(g(X,Y),Y))).
rewrite(not(sub(X,Y)),notsub(X,Y)).
replace(notsub(X,Y),and(el(Z,X),not(el(Z,Y)))).
rewrite(el(X,p(Y)),sub(X,Y)).
rewrite(el(X,join(Y,Z)),and(el(X,Y),el(X,Z))).
rewrite(not(eq(X,Y)),or(not(sub(X,Y)),not(sub(Y,X)))).
rewrite(not(el(X,p(Y))),not(sub(X,Y))).
rewrite(not(el(X,join(Y,Z))),or(not(el(X,Y)),not(el(X,Z)))).
rewrite(not(or(X,Y)),and(not(X),not(Y))).
rewrite(not(and(X,Y)),or(not(X),not(Y))).
rewrite(not(not(X)),X).
rewrite(or(X,and(Y,Z)),and(or(X,Y),or(X,Z))).
rewrite(or(and(X,Y),Z),and(or(X,Z),or(Y,Z))).
or(X,Y) :-- prolog(tautology(or(X,Y))).
or(X,Y) :-- X.
or(X,Y) :-- Y.
and(X,Y) :-- X,Y.
% solved July 16 1986 204 cpu seconds 53 inferences size 14
% solved July 20 1986 with and-or restrictions on splitting,
% false replacement
% no split bound for small proofs, 146.9 seconds, 47
% inferences, size 5, did not seem to use tautology test
% a simple example to illustrate splitting
false :- p,q.
p :- not(r).
p :- r.
q :- not(s).
q :- s.
% schubert's steamroller, almost in the form he gave
w(w).
b(b).
s(s).
f(f).
c(c).
g(g).
a(X) :-- w(X).
a(X) :-- b(X).
a(X) :-- s(X).
a(X) :-- c(X).
a(X) :-- f(X).
p(X) :-- g(X).
m(X,Y) :-- c(X),b(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- b(X),f(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- s(X),b(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- f(X),w(Y).
false :- f(X),w(Y),e(Y,X).
false :- w(Y),g(X),e(Y,X).
false :- b(X),s(Y),e(X,Y).
e(X,Y) :-- b(X),c(Y).
p(h(X)) :-- c(X).
p(i(X)) :-- s(X).
e(X,h(X)) :-- c(X).
e(X,i(X)) :-- s(X).
g(j(X,Y)) :-- a(X),a(Y).
false :- a(Y),e(X,Y),a(X),e(Y,j(X,Y)).
e(X,Y) :- split2(X),p(Y).
split2(X) :-- m(Z,X),a(X),a(Z),split(Z),not(e(X,Z)).
split(Z) :-- e(Z,W),p(W).
% proved July 7-8 1986 2160.7 cpu seconds 6976 inferences
% size bound 42
% on vax 785w(w).
% schubert's steamroller, modified to delay instantiation of
% arguments to j
b(b).
s(s).
f(f).
c(c).
g(g).
a(X) :-- w(X).
a(X) :-- b(X).
a(X) :-- s(X).
a(X) :-- c(X).
a(X) :-- f(X).
p(X) :-- g(X).
m(X,Y) :-- c(X),b(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- b(X),f(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- s(X),b(Y).
m(X,Y) :-- f(X),w(Y).
false :- f(X),w(Y),e(Y,X).
false :- w(Y),g(X),e(Y,X).
false :- b(X),s(Y),e(X,Y).
e(X,Y) :-- b(X),c(Y).
p(h(X)) :-- c(X).
p(i(X)) :-- s(X).
e(X,h(X)) :-- c(X).
e(X,i(X)) :-- s(X).
g(j(X,Y)) :-- not(na(X)),not(na(Y)).
false :- not(na(Y)),not(na(X)),e(X,Y),e(Y,j(X,Y)).
e(X,Y) :- split2(X),p(Y).
split2(X) :- m(Z,X),a(X),a(Z),split(Z),not(e(X,Z)).
split(Z) :- e(Z,W),p(W).
false :-- na(X),a(X).
% proved July 8 1986 572.2 cpu seconds 1340 inferences
% size 42 on vax 785
% proved July 10 1986 447 cpu seconds 897 inferences
% size 56 with splitting ground subgoals near root
% proved July 13-14 415 seconds 692 inferences size 42
% with splitting all ground subgoals, better merge filter
% proved July 16 351 seconds 575 inferences size 42 not
% sure why better, maybe unit simplification
eq(X,X).
eq(Y,X) :- eq(X,Y).
eq(Z,U) :- lat(X,Y,Z), lat(X,Y,U).
eq(Y,U) :- lat(X,Y,Z), lat(X,U,Z).
eq(X,U) :- lat(X,Y,Z), lat(U,Y,Z).
eq(Z,U) :- gre(X,Y,Z), gre(X,Y,U).
eq(Y,U) :- gre(X,Y,Z), gre(X,U,Z).
eq(X,U) :- gre(X,Y,Z), gre(U,Y,Z).
lat(X,Y,a) :- not(lat(X,Y,b)).
lat(X,a,Y) :- not(lat(X,b,Y)).
lat(a,X,Y) :- not(lat(b,X,Y)).
gre(X,Y,a) :- not(gre(X,Y,b)).
gre(X,a,Y) :- not(gre(X,b,Y)).
gre(a,X,Y) :- not(gre(b,X,Y)).
eq(X,V) :- lat(X,Y,Z), gre(X,Y,U), lat(V,W,Z),
not(eq(Y,W)), gre(V,W,U).
false :- eq(a,b).
% proved August 7 1987 size 14 8313 cpu seconds 2371
% inferences about 140 solutions found 4 seconds per
% inference!
------------------------------
Date: Tue 11 Nov 86 20:56:45-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith Bibliography, Part Q
QUI60a
Quine W.V.O.
Word and Object
MIT Press, Cambridge, 1960
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂12-Nov-86 1011 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 10:11:12 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 10:09:39-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MS Program Committee Meeting
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12254381790.35.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Reminder--MS Program Committee Meeting, Friday, November 14, 10:00 a.m.,
MJH 301.
-----
-------
∂12-Nov-86 1012 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Mailing list purge
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 10:12:44 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 10:07:11-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Mailing list purge
To: aflb.tn@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254381341.25.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The puprose of this message is to help me clean up the aflb mailing lists.
1) If you get this message with unnecessary forwarding, for example if
you get it from score and you are at sushi, let me know.
2) I have now created a new list aflb.tn which is in between aflb.su
and aflb.local. The purpose of aflb.tn is to forward messages from
theorynet headquarters. Over the last few days there have been many
theory net messages. If you got multiple copies, this means you are
already getting them from somewhere else, and I should move you
from aflb.tn to aflb.local so that we send you only messages
of Stanford origin. Let me know if you got multiple copies
of theory net messages.
Alex Schaffer (schaffer@sushi.stanford.edu)
-------
∂12-Nov-86 1142 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB talks
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 11:42:48 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 10:30:28-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB talks
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254385579.25.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Circuit Complexity Stuff
Steven Rudich
Computer Science Division, UC Berkeley
13 November, MJH352, 12:30PM
I will prove:
1) parity requires exactly 4n-4 fan-in 2 and, or, and not
gates to compute.
2) the minimal circuit to compute any graph theoretic property
(connectivity, 3-colorability, ... ) has no input that fans out to
more than 34n gates (n is the number of inputs into the circuit).
3) other fun stuff as time permits.
Extracting Unpredictable Bits from Inputs of One-Way Functions
Leonid Levin
Boston University, visiting UCBerkeley
20 November 1986
12:30 PM, MJH352
(I don't have an abstract because the necessary Berkeley computer has
been down.)
-------
∂12-Nov-86 1447 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU directions to Berkeley BATS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 14:47:19 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 14:41:58-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: directions to Berkeley BATS
To: aflb.su@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254431362.47.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
It would be appreciated if anyone going to the BATS (who hasn't
already told me) would let me know so that we can ensure enough
parking slots & lunches. If you don't tell me, you can still go, but
it is possible that you might have trouble with parking.
DRIVING INSTRUCTIONS TO BATS (from floyd@ernie.berkeley.edu):
BATS is on Monday, November 17. All talks are in Sibley Auditorium,
located in the Bechtel building just north of Evans Hall on the
Berkeley campus. Lunch is served in 120AB Bechtel one floor below
Sibley.
To get to the university from Highway 80, take the University Avenue
exit, and continue until the road ends. Turn left onto Oxford,
continue north to the next light, and turn right on Hearst. Continue
on Hearst (which forms the northern border of campus) until you can
make a right turn on Gayley (eastern border of campus). The first
possible right off Gayley leads into campus at the Mining Circle, near
Evans Hall. There is a kiosk at the entrance at which you can pick up
your parking stickers (mention BATS), and get directions on where to
park. My understanding is that with a parking sticker you have a high
probability of finding a place to park on campus.
To get to the university from Highway 13, Highway 13 from the south
turns naturally into Ashby heading west. Take College Avenue north (I
think it's the second light) to Dwight Way; go east on Dwight to
Piedmont Avenue (where Dwight becomes two-way), and go north on
Piedmont. Piedmont will become Gayley, and you will see the left turn
for the East Gate opposite the Greek Theatre.
To take BART, get off at the Berkeley BART station. Across from the BART
station on the northeast corner of Center and Shattuck you can take the
free Humphrey Go-BART shuttle to the front of Evans Hall, the computer science
building. The Bechtel building is the building just north of Evans.
The walk from the BART station to Bechtel takes 10-15 minutes, gently uphill.
-------
∂12-Nov-86 1507 PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU Komlos
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 15:07:25 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 15:05:33-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Komlos
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254435656.31.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
As you know, we are meeting next Tuesday (November 18) to consider the possible
appointment of Janos Komlos jointly in our Department and in Mathematics.
Komlos is an outstanding combinatoricist and probabilitist with a consistent
interest in Computer Science problems. You should have his resume; his file
(with letters of recommendation) is available for inspection in Nils's office.
According to Andy Yao, three of his papers rank among the twenty five most
important papers in Theory in the last fifteen years. The appointment is
unanimously recommended by the ``foundations'' search committee. Mathematics
has already had a discussion of this appointment, and they are in the process
of a formal vote.
---Christos H. Papadimitriou
-------
∂12-Nov-86 1647 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 13, No. 7
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Nov 86 16:47:03 PST
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 16:15:54-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, November 13, No. 7
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
November 13, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 7
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, November 13, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "Information and Circumstance"
Conference Room by Jon Barwise
Discussion led by Curtis Abbott
(Abbott.pa@xerox.com)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall "Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns,
Room G-19 and Anaphora, Part I"
Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron
(Peters@csli.stanford.edu, Gawron@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, November 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "The Situated Grandmother"
Conference Room by Jerry Fodor
Discussion led by Jon Barwise
(Barwise@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall "Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns,
Room G-19 and Anaphora, Part II"
Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron
(Peters@csli.stanford.edu, Gawron@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
There will be no Calendar and no activities on Thursday, November 27
because of Thanksgiving.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "The Situated Grandmother"
by Jerry Fodor
Discussion led by Jon Barwise
November 20, 1986
This is a reply by Fodor to my paper "Information and Circumstance"
which was discussed at last week's TINLunch. In my paper (itself a
reply to his commentary "Information and Association") I argued that
natural inference was situated, not formal. In this paper, Fodor
argues that natural inference, though situated, is nevertheless also
formal. In making this argument, Fodor introduces a new "explicitness
condition" on what it means for something to be explicitly, as opposed
to implicitly, represented.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns Anaphora
Mark Gawron and Stanley Peters
November 13 and 20, 1986
A variety of interactions have been noted between scope ambiguities
of quantified noun phrases, the possibility of interpreting pronouns
as anaphoric, and the interpretation of elliptical verb phrases.
Consider, for example, the following contrast, first noted in Ivan
Sag's 1976 dissertation.
(1) John read every book before Mary did.
(2) John read every book before Mary read it. The second sentence
is interpretable either to mean each book was read by John before
Mary, or instead that every book was read by John before Mary read
any. The first sentence has only the former interpretation.
The seminar will describe developments in situation theory
pertinent to the semantics of various quantifier phrases in English,
as well as of `referring' noun phrases including pronouns, and of
anaphoric uses of pronouns and elliptical verb phrases. We aim to
show how the theory of situations and situation semantics sheds light
on a variety of complex interactions such as those illustrated above.
(This seminar is a continuation of the seminar held on November 13.)
-------
∂13-Nov-86 0102 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #71
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Nov 86 01:02:37 PST
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 1986 6:48PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #71
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 13 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 71
Today's Topics:
Implementation - CProlog 1.5 bug,
LP Library - Theorem Prover,
& Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part R
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 10:38:41-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: C-Prolog 1.5 bug
The different behaviors of C-Prolog in debug or
nodebug mode when new clauses are added to an
active procedure are there by design. When not
debugging, the interpreter recognizes it has got
to the last clause of a predicate and throws away
the corresponding choice point. Thus any clauses
appended to the predicate will not be seen.
However, when debugging, the choice point has to
be kept so that appropriate information is printed
on a fail port. Newly appended clauses are then
visible as a result.
Earlier versions of C-Prolog always removed the
choice point, but I got many complaints about the
incomplete debugging information, so I implemented
the current compromise. Now this has the unfortunate
consequence that appended clauses will be seen by
active procedures when in debug mode but not otherwise.
However, I think this is a relatively small cost to
pay for better efficiency when not debugging and full
information when debugging. What happens to active
procedures is not part of any accepted Prolog
specification, anyway, and different Prolog systems do
it differently, so relying on any particular behavior
is bad programming practice.
Now I believe that the correct behavior should be that
changes to a predicate are NEVER visible to active
invocations of the predicate, whatever the change
(assert, retract, etc.). This is not easy to achieve
(I know of only one Prolog system that does it correctly)
and it would require a major rewrite of C-Prolog. Given
this, I saw no reason to waste time nibbling at the edges
of the problem.
Finally, retract has always been nondeterminate. This is
not a bug in C-Prolog, but just compliance with the
Edinburgh ``standard''.
-- Fernando Pereira
(retired) C-Prolog implementer
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 86 10:53:42 est
From: David Plaisted <plaisted%unc.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Subject: Prover
I just made some changes to allow specifying that certain
subgoals will not be cached. This can save a lot of time.
You might mention to people that we may be updating the
code from time to time
[ David's prover and examples file are in the Library under
SCORE:<Prolog>Plaisted.prover and Plaisted.examples -ed ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 12:30:19-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part R
RADE84a *
Radecki T.
Foundations of Fuzzy Information Retrieval
Technical Report No 84-019
Department of Computer Science, Louisianna State
University
1984
RAE85a *
Rae R.
BSI Prolog Standardisation
Sub-Commitee on Modules, Libraries, and Related
Subjects
Minutes of Second Meeting, Edinburgh, Thursday 31
October 1985
PS/86, 2 pages
November 1985
RAMA81a *
Ramamritham K. & Keller R.M.
Specifying And Proving Properties Of Sentinel
Processes
Proceedings of 5th International Conference on
Software Engineering
pp 374-382
March 1981
RAMS86a *
Ramsey A.
Distributed Versus Parallel Computing
Artificial Intelligence Review, 1, pp 11-25
1986
RAUL79a *
Raulefs P. & Siekmann J. & Szabo P. & Univericht E.
A Short Survey on the State of the Art in Matching
and Unification Problems
ACM SIGSAM Bulletin, Vol 13, No 2, pp 14-20
March 1979
REDD84a *
Reddy U.S.
Transformation of Logic Programs into Functional
Programs
Proc. 1984 Int'l Symp. on Logic Programming
pp 187-196
February 1984
REDD85a *
Reddy U.S.
Narrowing As The Operational Semantics Of Functional
Languages
IEEE 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming
pp 138-151
July 1985
REDD86a *
Reddy U.S.
On The Relationship between Logic and Functional
Languages
In DEGR86a, pp 3-36
1986
REED?? *
Reed G.M. & Roscoe A.W.
A Timed Model for Communicating Sequential Processes
(DRAFT)
Programming Research Group, Oxford University
REEV81a
Reeve M.
The ALICE Compiler Target Language
Document, Dept of Computing, Imperial College,
May 1981
REEV81b
Reeve M.
An Introduction to the ALICE Compiler Target
Language
Research Report, Dept of Computing, Imperial College,
July 1981
REEV84a *
Reeve M.
Towards Identifying The "Standard Interface" For
Declarative Systems
Architecture Research
Draft
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
13th April 1984
REEV85a *
Reeve M.
A BNF Description Of The Alice Compiler Target
Language
1985
REVE84a *
Revesz G.
An Extension Of Lambda-Calculus For Functional
Programming
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 3, pp 241-252
October 1984
REYN72a
Reynolds J.C.
Definitional Interpreters For Higher Order
Programming Languages
Proc 25th ACM National Conf, pp 717-740
1972
REYN83a *
Reynolds J.C.
Types, Abstraction And Parametric Polymorphism
Invited Paper
Information Processing 1983, pp 513-523
1983
RICHA86a *
Richards M.
BSPL : A Language For Describing The Behaviour Of
Synchronous Hardware
Technical Report No. 84
University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory
April 1986
RICHM82a *
Richmond G.
A Dataflow Implementation of SASL
Msc Thesis, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester,
October 1982.
RING86a *
Ringwood G.A.
The Dining Logicians
PARLOG Group, Dept of Computing, Imperial College
1986
ROBI65a
Robinson J.A.
A Machine Oriented Logic Based on The Resolution
Principle
J. Ass. Comput. Mach. 12, pp 23-41
1965
ROBI77a
Robinson J.A.
Logic: Form and Function
Edinburgh University Press
1979
ROBI83a *
Robinson J.A.
Logic Programming - Past, Present and Future
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 2, 1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical report TR-015
June 1983
ROSE85a
Rosenschein S.J.
Formal Theories of Knowledge in AI and Robotics
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 345-357
1985
ROSS86a *
Ross M.L. Ramamohanarao K.
Paging Strategy For Prolog Based On Dynamic Virtual
Memory
Technical Report 86/8
Department of Computer Science, University of
Melbourne
1986
RUBI86a *
Rubinstein M.
Built-In Predicates - Database - PS/115
May 1986
RUSS10a,RUSS25a
Russell B. & Whitehead A.N.
Principia Mathematica
Cambridge University Press, 1910 & 1925
RYDE81a *
Rydeheard D.E.
Applications of Category Theory to Programming and
Program Specification
Department of Computer Science, University of
Edinburgh
Phd Thesis, CST-14-81
December 1981
RYDE85a *
Rydeheard D.E. & Burstall R.M.
The Unification of Terms: A Category-Theoretic
Algorithm
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester, Technical
Report UMCS-85-8-1
August 1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂13-Nov-86 1022 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Bell Fellowship Call for Nominations
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Nov 86 10:14:47 PST
Date: Thu 13 Nov 86 10:11:16-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Bell Fellowship Call for Nominations
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254644227.16.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Bell Fellowship call has the following guidelines:
CSD students; preferably first year PHD
The Bell Fellowship is a 4 year fellowship therefore first year PHD
students are preferred, however, a second year student could
be considered.
US citizens and permanent residents of US are eligible
We will nominate 3 students.
Deadline for nominations to me: Monday, Dec. 1
Carolyn
-------
∂13-Nov-86 1132 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU security caution
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Nov 86 11:32:41 PST
Date: Thu 13 Nov 86 11:23:44-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: security caution
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, bboard@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Recently, in the evenings, someone has been propping open the side door
to Ventura (on the side of the building facing the hills). If this is
done after the guard leaves, or if the guard doesn't notice it before
locking up, it would leave the building open until the next morning.
Given the amount of valuable equipment and personal papers in Ventura,
this is something we should not be risking. So, please, DO NOT PROP
THE SIDE DOOR OPEN IN THE EVENINGS. Thank you.
Tom
-------
∂13-Nov-86 2255 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Sixth ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Nov 86 22:55:38 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 13 Nov 86 22:37:35 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 86 22:37:35 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Sixth ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
THE SIXTH ACM SYMPOSIUM ON PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE SYSTEMS
Call for Exhibits
The Sixth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems will
take place between March 23 and March 25, 1987, at the Bahia
Resort Hotel in San Diego. The symposium will cover new develop-
ments in both theoretical and practical aspects of database and
knowledge-based systems. Previous symposia have been attended by
researchers from both industry and academia. For the first time,
this year the symposium will include exhibits of state-of-the-art
products from industry. If you have a product you would like to
exhibit, please send a brief description by December 15, 1986,
to:
Victor Vianu
Local Arrangements Chairman, PODS '87
EECS Department, MC-014
Univ. of California at San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(619) 534-6227
vianu@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Since space is limited, exhibits will be selected based on the
proposals received. Your contribution would be greatly appreciat-
ed.
∂14-Nov-86 0149 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #72
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 01:49:49 PST
Date: Thursday, November 13, 1986 4:18AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #72
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 14 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 72
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part S
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 12 Nov 86 19:05:29-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part S
SAIN84a *
Saint-James E.
Recursion is More Efficient than Iteration
Proceedings of 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional
Programming
Austin, Texas
pp 228-234
1984
SAKA83a *
Sakai K. & Miyachi T.
Incorporating Native Negation into PROLOG
( Also in "Proceedings of RIMS Symposia on Software
Science and Engineering",
1984, Springer-Verlag )
( Also in "Proceedings of Logic and Conference", Monash
Univ., 1984 )
ICOT Research center, Technical Report TR-028
October 1983
SAKA84a
Sakai K.
An Ordering for Term Rewriting System
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-062
April 1984
SAKA84b
Sakai H. & Iwata K. & Kamiya S. & Abe K. & Tanaka T. &
Shibayama S & Murukami K.
Design and Implementation of the Relational Database
Engine
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-063
April 1984
SAKA85a
Sakai T.
Intelligent Sensor
Preface for New Generation Computing Vol 3 No 4, 1985,
pp 339-340
1985
SAME84a
Samet H.
The Quadtree and Related Hierarchial Data Structures
ACM Comp. Surveys Vol16, No 2, June 1984,p187-260
SAMM83a *
Sammut R.A. & Sammut C.A.
Prolog : A Tutorial Introduction
The Australian Computer Journal, Vol 15, No 2, pp 42-51
May 1983
SANN84a *
Sannella D. & Tarlecki A.
On Observational Equivalence and Algebraic Specification
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Internal Report CSR-172-84
December 1984
SANN85a *
Sannella D. & Tarlecki A.
Specifications in an Arbitrary Institution
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Internal Report CSR-184-85
March 1985
SARA85a
Saraswat V.J.
Partial Correctness Semantics for CP[↑,|,&]
Fifth FSTTCS Conference, New Delhi, December 1985
pp 347-368
Springer Verlag LNCS Vol 206
1985
SARA85b *
Saraswat V.A.
Concurrent Logic Programming Languages
Thesis Proposal
1 November 1985
SARA86a *
Saraswat V.A.
Problems With Concurrent Prolog
CMU-CS-86-100
Department of Computer Science, Carnegie - Mellon
University
May 1985
Revised January 1986
SARG82a
Sargeant J.
Implementation of Structured LUCID on a Data Flow
Computer
MSc Thesis, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester,
October 1982
SATO83a *
Sato M. & Sakurai T.
Qute: A Prolog/Lisp Type Language for Logic
Programming ( Also in "Proceedings of 8th IJCAI",
Karlsluhe, 1983 ) ICOT Research center, Technical
Report TR-016
August 1983
SATO84a
Sato M. & Sakurai T.
Qute Users Manual
Dept. of Information Science, Faculty of Science,
University of Tokyo
SATO84b *
Sato T. & Tamaki H.
Enumeration of Success Patterns In Logic Programs
Theoretical Computer Science, pp 227-240
1984
SATO85a *
Satoh K.
An Implementation Of Abstract Sequential PARLOG
Machine
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Fujitsu
Laboratories
3rd September 1985
SATO86a *
Sato M. & Sakurai T.
QUTE : A Functional Language Based on Unification
in DEGR86a, pp 131-156
1986
SCHL84a *
Schlag M.
Extracting Geometry From FP For VLSI Layout
Department of Computer Science, UCLA
Report No CSD-840043
October 1984
SCHM78a
Schmitz L.
An Exercise in Program Synthesis: Algorithms For
Computing The Transitive Closure of A Relation
Internal Report, Hochschule der Bundeswehr, Munich
1978
SCHM85a *
Scmittgen C. & Gerdts A. & Haumann & Kluge W. &
Woitass
A System-Supported Workload Balancing Scheme for
Cooperating Reduction Machines
GMD Tech Rep
June 1985
SCHM85b *
Schmittgen C.
A Data Type Architecture for Reduction Machines
GMD 152
May 1985
SCHM85c *
Schmidt D.A.
Detecting Global Variables in Denotational
Specifications
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems,
Vol 7, no 2
pp 299-310
April 1985
SCHN82a *
eds. Schnolze J.G. & Brachman R.J.
Proceedings of the 1981 KL-ONE Workshop
Fairchild Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence
Research
Fairchild Technical Report No. 618
FLAIR Technical Report No. 4
May 1982
SCHWA76a *
Scwartz J.
Event Based Reasoning - A System For Proving Correct
Termination of Prorgams
Proceedings 3rd International Colloquium on Automata
Languages and Programming
pp 131-146
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
SCHWA77a *
Schwartz J.
Using Annotations To Make Recursion Equations Behave
Report No 43, Dept of A.I., Univ of Edinburgh
September 1977
SCHWE84a
Schweppe H.
Some Comments on Sequential Disk Cache Management
for Knowledge Base Systems
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-040
January 1984
SCOT70a
Scott D.S.
Outline of Mathematical Theory of Computation
Oxford University Programming Research Group
Tech Monograph no 2
1970
SCOT71a
Scott D. & Strachey C.
Towards a Mathematical Semantics for Computer
Languages
1971 Symposium on Computers and Automata
Microwave Research Institute Proceedings, Vol 21
Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn
1972
SCOT76a
Scott D.S.
Data Types as Lattices
SIAM J.L. Computing 5, pp 522-587
1976
SCOT81a *
Scott D.
Lectures on a Mathematical Theory of Computation
Technical Monograph PRG-19
Oxford University, Computing Laboratory, Programming
Research Group
May 1981
SCOT82a
Scott D.
Domains for Denotational Semantics
Automata, Languages and Programming, Proc 10th Int.
Colloq.
(ed. Nielsen M. & Schmidt E.M.)
Springer Verlag LNCS no 140, pp 577-613
1982
SCOT82b
Scott D.S.
Lectures on a Mathematical Theory of Computation
in BROY82a, pp 145-292
1982
SCOW85a *
Scowen R.S. & O'Keefe R.A.
A Comparison of Prolog Implementations
BSI Prolog Standardization PS/36
May 1985
SCOW85b *
Scowen R.S.
A Syntax for Describing Prolog Standard Predicates
NPL
PS/54, 2 pages
July 1985
SCOW85c *
Scowen R.S.
Draft Minutes of Prolog Standardisation Meeting
6 June 1985
PS/69
1985
SCOW85d *
Scowen R.S.
Address List for BSI Prolog Panel OIS/5/-/14
NPL, 20 January 1986
PS/79
9th December 1985
SCOW85e *
Scowen R.S.
Draft Minutes of Prolog Standardization Meeting,
5 December 1985
PS/83
1985
SCOW86a *
Scowen R.S.
Document Register and References
PS/66
16 January 1986
SCOW86b *
Scowen R.S.
Draft Minutes of BSI Prolog Standardization Meeting,
5th June 1986
PS/118
1986
SCOW86c *
Scowen R.S.
Document Register and References
15 pages
4 July 1986
SEIT85a
Seitz C.L.
The Cosmic Cube
CACM Vol 28, no 1, January 1985
SERG82a
Sergot M.
A Query-the-User Facility for Logic Programming
Research Report 82/18
Department of Computing, Imperial College
October 1982
SERG82b
Sergot M.
A Query-the-User Facility for Logic Programming
Proc. ECICS, Stresa, Italy, (eds. P. Degano & E.
Sandwall)
pp 27-41, 1982
North Holland
SERG86a
Sergot M. & Vasey P.
Qualified Answers, Open Worlds and Negation
submitted to Third International Symposium on Logic
Programming
Salt Lake City, USA
1986
SERG86b *
Sergot M.J. & Sadri F. & Kowalski R.A. & Kriwaczek F.
& Hammond P. & Cory H.T.
The British Nationality Act As A logic Program
CACM, Vol 29, No 5, pp 370 - 386
May 1986
SHAN85a *
Shanahan M.
An Alternative Implementation Model For Logic Languages
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
May 1985
SHAN85b *
Shanahan M.
The Execution of Logic Programs Considered as the
Reduction of Set Expressions
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
October 1985
SHAR85a
Sharp J.A.
Data Flow Computing
Ellis Horwood, March 1985
SHAP83a *
Shapiro E.Y.
A Subset Concurrent Prolog and its Interpreter, 2nd
Version
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-003
January 1983
SHAP83b *
Shapiro E.Y. & Takeuchi A.
Object Oriented Programming in Concurrent Prolog
( Also in New Generation Computing, Springer Verlag,
Vol 1, No 1, 1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-004
April 1983
SHAP83c *
Systems Progamming in Concurrent Prolog
( Also in "Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM
Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages" )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-034
November 1983
SHAP83d *
Shapiro E.
Lecture Notes on the Bagel: A Systolic Concurrent
Prolog Machine
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0031
November 1983
SHAP83e *
Shapiro E.Y.
Logic Programs with Uncertainties: A Tool for
Implementing Rule-Based Systems
Proceedings of the International Joint Conference
on Artificial Intelligence, (IJCAI 83), Karlsruhe,
Germany pp 529-532
1983
SHAP84a *
Shapiro E. & Mierowsky C.
Fair, Biased, and Self-Balancing Merge Operators :
Their Specification and Implementation in Concurrent
Prolog
CS84-07
Dept of Applied Mathematics, Weizmann Institute of
Science, Israel
1984
SHAP84b *
Shapiro E.Y.
Alternation and the Computational Complexity of Logic
Programs
CS84-06
Dept of Applied Mathematics, Weizmann Institute of
Science, Israel
January 1984
SHAP84c *
Shapiro E. & Mierowsky C.
Fair, Biased, and Slef-Balancing Merge Operators :
Their Specification and Implementing in Concurrent
Prolog New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp
221-240 1984
SHAP86a *
ed. Shapiro E.
Proceedings of Third International Conference on
Logic Programming
Imperial College, London, July 1986
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 225
Springer Verlag
1986
SHAP86b *
Shapiro E.
Concurrent Prolog : A Progress Report
IEEE Computer, Vol 19, No 8, pp 44-58
August 1986
SHAW85a *
Shaw D.E. & Sabety T.M.
The Multiple-Processor PPS Chip of the NON-VON 3
Supercomputer Integration, the VLSI Journal, 3,
pp 161-174
1985
SHEI83a *
Sheil B.
Family of Personal Lisp Machines Speeds AI Program
Development
Electronics, November 3, 1983, pp 153-156
1983
SHIB82a
Shibayama S. & Kakuta T. & Miyazaki N. & Yokota H.
& Murukami K.
A Relational Database Machine "Delta"
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0002
November 1982
SHIB84a
Shibayama S. & Kakuta T. & Miyazaki N. & Yokota H.
& Murakami K.
A Relational Database Machine with Large Semiconductor
Disk and Hardware
Relational Algebra Processor
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 2, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-053
March 1984
SHIB84b
Shibayama S. & Kakuta T. & Miyazaki N. & Yokota H.
& Murukami K.
Query Processing Flow on RDBM Delta's Functionally
- Distributed Architecture
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-064
April 1984
SHIB85a *
Shibayama S. & Iwata K. & Sakai H.
A Knowledge Base Architecture and its Experimental
Hardware
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
SHIEB84a *
Shieber S.M. & Karttunen L. & Pereira F.C.N.
Notes From The Unfication Underground: A Compilation
Of papers On Unfication-Based Grammar Formalisms
SRI Technical Note 327
June 1984
SHIEL85a *
Shields M.W.
Concurrent Machines
Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 5, pp 449-465
1985
SHIM83a
Shimizu H.
GP-PRO Graphic Display Control Library Written in
Prolog
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0025
August 1985
SHIP81a
Shipman D.W.
The functional data model and the data language DAPLEX
ACM TODS 6(1) p140-173 1981
SHMU85a *
Shmueli O. & Tsur S. & Zfira H. & Ever-Hadani R.
Dynamic Rule Support in Prolog
(Extended Abstract)
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
SHOH85a
Shoham Y.
Ten Requirements for a Theory of Change
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 467-477
1985
SICK82a
Sickel S.
Specification and Derivation of Programs
in BROY82a, pp 103-132
1982
SILV86a *
Silverman W. & Hirsch M. & Houri A. & Shapiro E.
The Logix System User Manual Version 1.21
Draft
Last Revision July 6, 1986
to appear as technical report CS-21
Department of Computer Science,
The Weizmann Insitute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
1986
SIVI85a *
Sivilotti M. & Emerling M. & Mead C.
A Novel Associative Memory Implemented Using Collective
Computation
1985 Chapel Hill Conference on VLSI, pp 329-342
1985
SLEE80a
Sleep M.R.
Applicative Languages, Dataflow and Pure Combinatory
Code
Proc IEEE Compcon 80, pp 112-115
February 1980
SLEE82a *
Sleep M.R. & Holmstrom S.
A Short Concerning Lazy Reduction Rules of Append
Document, Computer Studies Centre, University of
East Anglia,May 1982
SLEE83a *
Sleep M.R.
Novel Architectures
Distributed Computing- A Review for Industry, SERC,
Manchester 1983
SLEE84
Sleep M.R. and Kennaway J.R.
The Zero Assignment Parallel Processor (ZAPP)
Project
in DUCE84
1984
SLEE86a *
Sleep M.R.
Directions in Parallel Architecture
in BCS86a
1986
SLOM82a
Sloman M.S.
The CONIC Communication System For Distributed
Process Control
Research Report 82/8
Department of Computing, Imperial College
October 1982
SLOM82b
Sloman M.S. & Magee J. & Kramer J. & Twiddle K.
Network Management Facilities in CONIC
Research Report 82/14
Department of Computing, Imperial College
September 1982
SLOM83a *
Sloman A. & Hardy S.
Poplog : A Multi-Purpose Multi-Language Program
Development Environment
AISB Quarterly, vol 47, pp 26-34
1983
SMIT85a *
Smithers T.
The Alvey Large Scale Demonstrator Project "Design
To Product"
DTOP/EXT/EDAI/05/1
Department of Artificial Intelligence, University
of Edinburgh
IKBS/MS 7/86 3.2, distributed with Alvey IKBS mailshot
July 1986
1985
SMOL86a *
Smolka G.
FRESH : A Higher-Order Language Based on Unfication
in DEGR86a, pp 469-524
1986
SMYT?? *
Smyth M.B.
Effectively Given Domains
(Revised Version)
Theory of Computation Report No 9
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
SMYT76a *
Smyth M.B.
Powerdomains
Theory of Computation Report No 12
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
May 1976
SMYT76a *
Smyth M.B.
Category-Theoretic Solution Of Recursive Domain
Equations
Theory of Computation Report No 14
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
July 1976
SMYT78a *
Smyth M.B.
Power Domains
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, Vol 16,
pp 23-36
1978
SMYT82a *
Smyth M.B.
The Category-Theoretic Solution Of Recursive Domain
Equations
SIAM Journal Of Computing, Vol 11, No 4
pp 761-783
November 1982
SNYD79
Snyder A.
A Machine Architecture to Support an Object-Oriented
Language
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT/LCS/TR-209,
March 1979
SOHM85a *
Sohma Y. & Satoh K. & Kumon K. & Masuzawa H. & Itashiki A.
A New Parallel Inference Mechanism Based on Sequential
Processing IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth
Generation Computer Architecture
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
SOLE85a
Soley M.S.
Generic Software for Emulating Multiprocessor
Architectures
Draft of MSc Thesis to be submitted May 1985
SOUT85a *
Souter J.
The Organisation of BSI Prolog Panel, and a
Classification of Relevant Documents
PS/87, 1 page
5th December 1985
SPEC82a *
Spector D.
Minimal Overhead Garbage Collection Of Complex List
Structure
ACM Sigplan Notices, Vol 17, No 3, pp 80-82
1982
SPIV84a
Spivey Mike
University of York Portable Prolog System Users Guide
University of York 1984
SPIV84a *
Spivey M. Towards a Formal Semantics For The Z
Notation
Technical Monograph PRG-41
Programming Research Group
Oxford University Computer Laboratory
October 1984
SRID84a *
Sridharan N.S.
A Semi-Applicative Language for Artificial Intelligence
Programming
Artificial Intelligence Department, BBN Labs, U.S.A.
Rough Draft
21 November 1984
SRIN86a *
Srini V.P.
An Architectural Comparison of Dataflow Systems
IEEE Computer, March 1986, pp 68-88
1986
STAL85a *
Stallard R.P.
Occam - A Brief Introduction
Occam - The Loughborough Implmentation
Computer Studies Laboratory Report
Dept of Computer Studies, Loughborough University of
Technology.
November 1985
STAM85a*
Stammers R.A.
Report to the Alvey Directorate on a Short Survey of The
Industrial Applications of Logic and Functional Programming
in the United Kingdom and United States
27 August 1985
STAP77a *
Staples J.
A Class of Replacement Systems With Simple Optimality
Theory
Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., Vol 17, pp335-350
1977
STAP80a
Staples J.
Computation on Graph-Like Expressions
Th. Comp. Sci., Vol 10, pp 171-185
1980
STAP80b
Staples J.
Optimal Evaluations Of Graph-Like Expressions
Th. Comp. Sci., Vol 10, pp 297-316
1980
STAR84a *
Stark W.R.
A Glimpse Into The Paradise of Combinatory Algebra
International Journal of Computer and Information
Sciences
Vol 13, No 3, pp 219-236
1984
STAV86a *
Stavridou V.
Introduction To OBJ
presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on
The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
STEE76
Steele G.L.Jr. & Sussman G.J.
LAMBDA: The Ultimate Imperative
AI Memo no 353
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT
1976
STEE77a
Steele G.L.Jr.
Compiler Optimization Based on Viewing LAMBDA as
Rename Plus Goto
S.M. Thesis, MIT EE&CS, Cambridge.
Published as RABBIT: A Compiler for SCHEME (A Study
in Compiler Optimization),
AI TR 474, MIT Lab, Cambridge
STEE77b
Steele G.L.Jr.
Debunking The 'Expensive Procedure Call' Myth
Proc. ACM National Conference, pp 153-162, 1962
Also revised as AI Memo 443, MIT Lab, Cambridge
STEE78
Steele G.L.Jr. & Sussman G.J.
The Art Of The Interpreter; or, The Modularity Complex
(parts zero,one and two)
AI Memo 453, MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, 1978
STEE79a
Steele G.L.Jr. & Sussman G.J.
Design of LISP-Based Processors; or, SCHEME: A
Dielectric LISP; or, Finite Memories Considered Harmful;
of, LAMBDA The Ultimate Opcode
AI Memo 514, MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, 1979
Summarized in CACM 23 no 11, pp 629-645
STEE79b
Steele G.L.Jr. & Sussman G.J.
The Dream Of A Lifetime: A Lazy Scoping Mechanism
AI Memo 527, MIT Lab, Cambridge, 1979
STEE81a
Steel B.D.
EXPERT - The Implementation of a Data-Independent
Expert System With Quasi-Natural Language Information
Input
Department of Computing, Imperial College, M.Sc Thesis
81/23
August 1981
STEPA84a *
Stepankova O. & Stepanek P.
Transformations of Logic Programs
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 4, pp 305-318
December 1984
STEPH86a *
Stephenson B.K.
Computer Architectures for Image Processing
in BCS86a
1986
STER84a *
Sterling L.
Logical Levels Of Problem Solving
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 2, pp 151-164
August 1984
STIC82a *
Stickel M.E.
A Nonclausal Connection-Graph Resolution Theorem-Proving
Program
SRI International technical Note 268
October 1982
STIR85a
Stirling C.
Modal Logics for Communicating Systems
Internal report, CSR-193-85
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
October 1985
STIR86a *
A Compositional Reformulation of Owicki-Gries's Partial
Correctness Logic For A Concurrent While Language
To appear in ICALP 1986
1986
STOL85a *
Stolfo S.J. & Miranker D.M. & Mills R.C.
A Simple Preprocessing Scheme to Extract and Balance
Implicit Parallelism in the Concurrent Match of Production
Rules
Columbia University, New York, U.S.A.
April 16, 1985
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer
Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1986
STOY77a
Stoy J.E.
Denotational Semantics: The Scott-Strachey Approach to
Programming Language
Theory
MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts
1977
STOY82a
Stoy J.
Some Mathematical Aspects Of Functional Programming
in DARL82a
1982
STOY82b
Stoy J.E.
Semantic Models
in BROY82a, pp 293-324
1982
STOY83a *
Stoye W.
The SKIM Microprogrammer's Guide
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Technical Report no 40
October 1983
STOYE84a *
Stoye W.
A New Scheme for Writing Functional Operating Systems
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Technical Report no 56
1984
STOYE84b *
Stoye W.R. & Clarke T.J.W. & Norman A.C.
Some Practical Methods for Rapid Combinator Reduction
Proceedings of 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional
Programming
Austin, Texas
pp 159-166
1984
SUBR?? *
Subrahmanyam P.A. & You J-H.
Pattern Driven Lazy Reduction : A Unifying Evaluation
Mechanism for Functional and Logic Programs
11th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages
SUBR86a *
Subrahmanyam P.A. & You J.-H.
FUNLOG : A Computational Model Integrating Logic
Programming and Functional Programming
in DEGR86a, pp 157-200
1986
SUGIE85a *
Sugie M. & Yoneyama M. & Sakabe T. & Iwasaki M. &
Yoshizumi S. & Aso M. & Onai R.
Hardware Simulator of Reduction-Based Parallel Inference
Machine : PIM-R
in WADA86a, pp 13-24
1985
SUGIY83a
Sugiyama K. & Kameda M. & Akiyama K. & Makinouchi A.
A Knowledge Representation System in Prolog
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-024
August 1983
SUGIY84a
Sugimoto M. & Kato H. & Yoshida H.
Design Concept for a Software Development Consultation
System
( Also in Second Japanese Swedish Workshop on Logic
Programming and Functional Programming, Uppsala, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-071
August 1984
SUGIY85a *
Sugiyai I. & Ishikawa K.
Knowledge Realization and Transformation in KRISP
in WADA86a, pp 299-311
1985
SUNA85a *
Sunahara H. & Tokoro M.
On The Working Set Concept for Data-Flow Machines :
Policies and Their Evaluations
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
SUSS75a
Sussman G.J. & Steele G.L.Jr.
SCHEME: An Interpreter for Extended Lambda Calculus
AI Memo 349, MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, 1975
SUSS82a
Sussman G.J.
LISP, Programming and Implementation
in DARL82a
1982
SUZU82a
Suzuki N. & Kurihara K. & Tanaka H. & Moto-oka T.
Procedure Level Data Flow Processing on Dynamic
Structure Multimicroprocessors
Journal of Information Processing Vol 5, No. 1
p11-16 March, 1982
SUZU82b
Suzuki N.
Experience with Specification and Verification of
Hardware using PROLOG Document,
Presented at Working Conference on VLSI Engineering,
Oct 1982
SUZU84a
Suzuki H.
MAID: A Man-Machine Interface for Domestic Affairs
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0058
April 1984
SUZU85a *
Suzuki H. & Kiyono M. & Kougo S. & Takahashi M.
& Motoike S. & Niki T.
A Travel Consulatation System : Towards a Smooth
Conversation
in Japanese
in WADA86a, pp 226-235
1985
SVAN84a *
Svanaes D. & Aas E.J.
Test Generation Through Logic Programming
Integration, The VLSI Journal, 2, pp 49-67
1984
SYRE77a
Syre J.C. et al
Pipelining, Parallelism and Asynchronism in The LAU
System
Proc. 1977 Int. Conf. on Parallel Processing, pp 87-92
August 1977
SZER81a *
Szeredi P.
Mixed Language Programming - A Method For Producing
Efficient PROLOG Programs
Presented at Workshop "Logic Programming for Intelligent
Systems",
Los Angeles, California, U.S.A., 18-21 August 1981
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1984
1981
SZER82a *
Szeredi P. & Santane-Toth E.
Prolog Applications in Hungary
In "The Fifth Generation : Dawn of the Second Computer
Age", International Conference, London, 7-9 July 1982
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1984
1982
SZER82b *
Szeredi P.
Module Concepts For Prolog
DRAFT
Presented at Workshop on "Prolog Programming Environments",
Linkoping, Sweden, 24-26 March 1982
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
November 1984
1982
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂14-Nov-86 0939 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Advisory Panel Visit
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 09:38:59 PST
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 09:33:45-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Advisory Panel Visit
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The CSLI Advisory Panel will be visiting next Friday, November 21.
They will be meeting in the Ventura seminar room with the
PIs and other members of the team planning the April review.
This is the group who has advised CSLI since its inception,
and we are counting on their help now in preparing for
April.
Betsy
-------
∂14-Nov-86 1136 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET December Meeting
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 11:36:26 PST
Received: from ti-csl by csnet-relay.csnet id ae01601; 13 Nov 86 8:08 EST
Received: from Puff (puff.ARPA) by tilde id AA03964; Wed, 12 Nov 86 15:49:14 cst
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: waldrum%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: December Meeting
Date: 12-Nov-86 15:43:45
From: ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <ELLEN.2741204624@Puff>
If you are not able to mail your form in time to meet the
November 17 deadline and wish to make a reservation, you
should call Beverly Johnson at 214-997-2108 and give her
the pertinent information. If you do call Beverly, please
send the form anyway as verification.
The Delta airlines reference number is still not available.
All of the paperwork is done but Delta has not provided this
bit of pertinent information yet. It will be posted as soon
as we get it and Beverly will be calling those of you who have
already inquired.
-- Ellen
∂14-Nov-86 1137 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Delta reference number
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 11:36:55 PST
Received: from ti-csl by csnet-relay.csnet id af01601; 13 Nov 86 8:10 EST
Received: from Puff (puff.ARPA) by tilde id AA04521; Wed, 12 Nov 86 16:05:10 cst
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: waldrum%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Delta reference number
Date: 12-Nov-86 15:59:39
From: ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <ELLEN.2741205578@Puff>
I had just sent the previous message when my phone rang.
Of course it was Beverly calling with the number I had
just told you was not available yet. To take advantage
of the Delta Airlines discount, you must make your
reservations through the Delta convention desk. The
phone number is 800-241-6760 and the reference file
number is B0238. We are listed with them as the
Computer Science Show. This discount is only good for
reservations made at least seven days in advance and
there are no penalties for cancellation. If you have
any questions or problems, please call Beverly or me
or send mail (Waldrum%ti-csl@csnet-relay).
-- Ellen
∂14-Nov-86 1151 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Curriculum Vitae
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 11:50:55 PST
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 11:48:46-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Curriculum Vitae
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12254924121.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
For those of you who have not already done so, could you please send me
a current curriculum vitae as we have need of them from time to time.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂14-Nov-86 1315 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Advisory Panel Visit, Continued
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 13:14:47 PST
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 13:09:01-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Advisory Panel Visit, Continued
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Barbara Grosz and Mitch Marcus have agreed to serve as additional
members to the Advisory Panel, so look for them as well
as the old members: Jerry Fodor, George Miller, Nils Nilsson,
and Bob Ritchie. Barbara Partee and Rod Burstall are also
members, but they will not be able to attend Friday's
meeting.
Betsy
-------
∂14-Nov-86 1519 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Shun Tsuchiya
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 15:19:04 PST
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 15:15:02-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Shun Tsuchiya
To: visitors-patrol@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
(415) 723-9007
Professor Shun Tsuchiya, a philosopher from Chiba University, Japan, will
arrive at CSLI Monday, November 17. He will be staying here until
mid-September, 1987. Starting next Monday, netmail can be sent
to his account, Tsuchiya@csli.
-------
∂14-Nov-86 1547 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice PLANLUNCH on MONDAY November 17 -- Jiro Tanaka
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 15:46:51 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 14 Nov 86 15:40:50-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA08278; Fri,
14 Nov 86 15:42:00 PST
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 15:41:54-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: PLANLUNCH on MONDAY November 17 -- Jiro Tanaka
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 14-Nov-86 15:41:54.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GUARDED HORN CLAUSES
AND
EXPERIENCES WITH PARALLEL LOGIC PROGRAMMING
Jiro Tanaka
ICOT, Japan
11:00 AM, MONDAY, November 17
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
In this talk I will overview various activities at ICOT related to
Guarded Horn Clauses (GHC). I will describe a new parallel logic
language GHC, first proposed by Ueda. The main features of this
language are its simplicity and ease of implementation. The
implementation of GHC and programming efforts in the language will
be described. A summary will also be given on the current status
of Kernel Language Version 1 (KL1). KL1 is the language system for
the PIM hardware. The overall structure of KL1 and work on its
distributed implementation will be discussed.
-------
∂14-Nov-86 1756 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM smop
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Nov 86 17:56:18 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 14 Nov 86 17:49:54-PST
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 14 NOV 86 16:57:51 PST
Date: 14 Nov 86 16:56 PST
From: Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: smop
To: folks@csli.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <861114-165751-2746@Xerox>
I need a few gadgets for the vax; are there any UNIX hackers that have
some time (and need some pocket money)? I don't think it is a big job
but it needs to be done quickly
Annie
∂16-Nov-86 0917 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talk of AFLB interest
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Nov 86 09:17:33 PST
Date: Sun 16 Nov 86 09:14:06-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Talk of AFLB interest
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255420251.10.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
According to the computerized events listings Dr. M. Hellman will
speak on ``New Directions in Cryptography'' on Thursday 20 November at
4:15PM in Skilling 191. The announcement says to contact B. McKee
if you have questions; the public key for this purpose is 723-4628.
-------
∂17-Nov-86 0115 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #73
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 01:14:58 PST
Date: Sunday, November 16, 1986 5:54AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #73
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 17 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 73
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Fourth Symposium on Logic Programming,
LP Library - Lauren Smith's Declarative Language Bibliography, Part T
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 86 17:14:53 N (Tue)
From: enea!sicsten!seif@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Fourth Symposium on Logic Programming
'87 SLP
Call for Papers
Fourth Symposium on Logic Programming
Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society
August 31 - September 4, 1987
San Fransisco, CA
The Conference solicits papers in all areas of logic
programming, including, but not confined to:
Parallel and Concurrent Logic Programming Languages
Implementations on Multiprocessors
Computer Architectures for Logic Programming
Logic Databases
Logic Programming and Other Programming Paradigms
Logical Extensions of Logic Programming Languages
Performance Evaluation
Expert Systems Based on Logic Programming
Semantics, Program Transformations, and Theory
Applications of Logic Programming
Please submit full papers, indicating accomplishments of
substance and novelty, and including appropriate citations of
related work. The suggested page limit is 25 double-spaced
pages. Send eight copies of your manuscript no later than
February 21, 1987 to:
Seif Haridi
SLP'87 Program Chairperson
Swedish Institute of Computer Science
Box 1263
S-163 13 Spanga
SWEDEN
Electronic Mail: enea!sics!seif@mcvax.uucp
Acceptance will be mailed by April 15, 1987. Camera-ready copy
will be due by June 7, 1987.
Conference Chairperson: David Scott Warren, Quintus Computer
Systems Inc
Program Committee Members
Ken Bowen, Syracuse University
Andrzej Ciepielewski, SICS
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich
Steve Gregory, Imperial College
Lynette Hirschman, SDC
Peter Kogge, IBM, Owego
William Kornfeld, Quintus Computer Systems Inc
Jean-Louis Lassez, IBM Yorktown
George Luger, University of New Mexico
Roger Nasr, MCC/DEC
Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Kotagiri Ramamohanarao, Melbourne University
Leon Sterling, Case Western Reserve Univ.
Mark Stickel, SRI International
Sten-Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
Shunichi Uchida, ICOT
David Scott Warren, Quintus Computer Systems Inc
------------------------------
Date: Fri 14 Nov 86 05:44:35-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part T
TAGU84a
Taguchi A. & Miyazaki N. & Yamamoto A. & Kitakami H.
& Kaneko K. & Murakami K.
INI: Internal Network in Programming Laboratory ICOT
and Its Future
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0044
February 1984
TAGU84b
Taguchi A.
Writing in a Foreign Language and Programming Warnier's
Methodology - A Study of Processes
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0057
April 1984
TAGU84c
Taguchi A.
A Personal Perspective on Some Aspects of the FGCS
- PreliminaryConsiderations for Fifth Generation
Computer Networks
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0077
September 1984
TAKAG84a
Takagi S. & Chikayama T. & Hattori T. & Tsuji J.
& Yokoi T. & Uchida S. & Kurokawa T. & Sakai K.
Overall Design of SIMPOS
( Also in "Proceedings of 2nd Int'l Conference of Logic
Programming", Uppsala,1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-057
April 1984
TAKAH85a *
Takahashi H. & Maruyama H.
PRESET - A Debugging Environment for Prolog
in WADA86a, pp 90-99
1985
TAKEI84a
Takei K.
Progress in the Initial Stage of the FGCS Project
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0074
September 1984
TAKEI84b *
Takei K. & Chikayama T. & Takagi S.
ESP - An Object Oriented Logic Programming Language
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0075
September 1984
TAKEU82a
Takeuchi A. & Shapiro E.Y.
Object Oriented Programming in Relational Language
ICOT Document
TAKEU82b
Takeuchi A.
Let's Talk Concurrent Prolog
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0003
December 1982
TAKEU83a *
Takeuchi A. & Furukawa K.
Interprocess Communication in Concurrent Prolog
( Also in "Proceedings of Logic Programming Workshop
'83", Portugal )
ICOT Research Center, technical Report TR-006
May 1983
TAKEU85a *
Takeuchi A. & Furukawa K.
Bounded Buffer Communication in Concurrent Prolog
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 2, pp 145-155
1985
TAKI84a
Taki K. & Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Nishikawa H.
& Uchida S. & Nakazima H. & Mitsuishi A.
Hardware Design and Implementation of the Personal
Sequential Inference Machine (PSI)
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-075
August 1984
TAMA83a *
Tamaki M.
A Transformation System for Logic Programs Which
Preserves Equivalence
ICOT research Center, Technical report TR-018
August 1983
TAMA85a *
Tamaki H.
A Distributed Unification Scheme For Systolic Logic
Programming
Proceedings of 1985 IEEE International Conference on
Parallel Processing
pp 552-559
1985
TANA82a *
Tanaka J. & Keller R.M.
Code Optimisation in a Functional Language
In Workshop on Functional Programming, Japan Inf.
Processing Soc.
(ed Ida T.)
December 1982
TANA84a *
Tanaka Y.
A Multiport Page-memory Architecture and a Multiport
Disk-Cache System
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp 241-260
1984
TANA85a *
Tanaka J. & Yokomori T. & Kishishita M.
AND-OR Queueing in Extended Concurrent Prolog
in WADA86a, pp 156-167
1985
TANI81a *
Tanimoto S.L.
Towards Hierarchical Cellular Logic: Design Considerations
for Pyramid Machines
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Washington, Technical Report
#81-02-01
February 1981
TARJ72
Tarjan R.
Depth-First Search & Linear Graph Algorithms
SIAM Journal of Computing Vol 1 Part 2 p146-60 1972
TARL84a *
Tarlecki A.
Quasi-Varieties in Abstract Algebraic Institutions
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Internal Report CSR-173-84
November 1984
TARN77a *
Tarnlund S.-A.
Horn Clause Computability
BIT 17, 1977, pp 215-226
1977
THAT82a *
Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Data Type Specification : Parameterization and the Power
of Specification Techniques
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems,
Vol 4, No 4
pp 711-732
October 1982
THOM85a *
Thompson S.J.
Laws in Miranda
University of Kent Computing Laboratory Report No 35
December 1985
THOM86a *
Thompson S.J.
Proving Properties of Functions Defined on Lawful Types
University of Kent Computing Laboratory Report No 37
May 1986
THOR84a *
Thorelli L.-E.
Proposal for a Lowlevel Object Oriented Architecture
The Royal Institute of Technology, Dept. of
Telecommunication Systems - Computer Systems, Stockholm,
Sweden
TRITA-CS-8402
1984
TIB84a *
ed. Tiberghien J.
New Computer Architectures
International Series in Computer Science
Academic Press
1984
TICK83a *
Tick E.
An Overlapped Prolog Processor
Technical Note 308
SRI International
October 1983
TICK84a
Tick E. & Warren D.H.D.
Towards a Pipelined Prolog Processor
Proc. 1984 Int. Symp. on Logic Programming
pp 29-40
1984
TICK84b *
Tick E. & Warren D.H.D.
Towards A Pipelined Prolog Processor
New Generation Computing 2, pp 323-345
1984
TICK?? *
Tick E. & Warren D.H.D.
Towards A Pipelined Prolog Processor
Artficial Intelligence Center, SRI International, U.S.A.
TILL85a *
Tillotson M.
Introduction to the Functional Programming Language
"Ponder" Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge,
Tech Rep no 65
1985
TODA84a *
Toda I.
Communication and Knowledge Engineering
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp 205-206
1984
TODA85a *
Toda K. & Yamaguchi Y. & Uchibori Y. & Yuba T.
Preliminary Measurements of the ETL LISP-Based Data-Driven
Machine
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer
Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
TOGG86a *
Toaggi M. & Watanabe H.
An Inference Engine For Real-Time Fuzzy Control: VLSI Design
and Implementation
To appear in Proc. of Japan-USA Symp. on flexible Automation,
July 14-15, 1986,
Osaka, Japan
1986
TOMU85a *
Tomura S.
TDProlog : An Extended Prolog with Term Description
in WADA86a, pp 180-191
1985
TRAN86a *
Handout for IEE Computing and Control Division Colloquium
on "The Transputer :
Applications and Case Studies"
Organised by Professional Group C2 ( Hardware and Systems
Engineering )
Digest No : 1986/91
IEE, Savoy Place, London
Friday 23rd May 1986
TREL78
Treleaven P.C.
Principle Components of Data Flow Computer
Proc. 1978 Euromicro Symp. , pp 366-374
October 1978
TREL80a
Treleaven P.C. & Mole G.F.
A Multi-Processor Reduction Machine For User-Defined
Reduction Languages
Proc. 7th Int. Symp. on Comp. Arch., pp 121-129
April 1980
TREL80b
ed. Treleaven P.C.
VLSI: Macine Architecture and Very High Level Languages
Proc of the joint SRC/Univ of Newcastle upon Tyne
Workshop, Computing Laboratory, Univ. of Newcastle
Upon Tyne,
Tech Rep 156
December 1980
TREL81a
Treleaven P.C. & Hopkins R.P.
Decentralised Computation
Proc 8th Int Symp on Comp Arch, pp 279-290
May 1981
TREL81b
Treleaven P.C. & Hopkins R.P.
A Recursive (VLSI) Computer Architecture
Computing Laboratory, Univ of Newcastle Upon Tyne
Tech Rep 161
March 1981
TREL81
Treleaven P.C. et al
Data Driven and Demand Driven Computer Architecture
Computer Lab, Univ of Newcastle Upon Tyne
Tech Rep 168,
July 1981
TREL82a
Treleaven P.C.
Computer Architecture For Functional Programming
in DARL82a
1982
TREL82b
Treleaven P.C. Brownbridge D.R. & Hopkins R.P.
Data Driven and Demand Driven Computer Architecture
ACM Computing Surveys Vol 14 No. 1 Jan 1982
TREL83a *
Treleaven P.C.
The New Generation of Computer Architecture
Proceedings of 10th Annual International Symposium on
Computer Architecture
ACM SIGARCH, 11, 3, pp 402-409
June 13-17 1983
TREL84a *
Treleaven P.C.
General-Purpose Memory
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0047
February 1984
TSUJ84a
Tsuji J. & Kurokawa T. & Tojyo S. & Iima Y. & Nakazawa O.
& Enomoto S.
Dialog Management in the Personal Sequential Inference
Machine (PSI)
( Also in "Proceedings of ACM 84", San Francisco, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical report TR-046
March 1984
TURN76
Turner D.A.
SASL Language Manual
CS/79/3 Dept. of Computational Science, University of St.
Andrews ,1976
(CS/75/1)
TURN79a
Turner D.A.
A New Implementation Technique for Applicative Languages
Software Practice & Experience Vol 9 p31-49 ,1979
TURN79b
Another Algorithm for Bracket Abstraction
Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol 44, no. 2,
June 1979
TURN80
Turner D.A.
Programming Languages- Current and Future Developments
Infotech State of the Art Conference on Software
Development Techniques
1980
TURN81a
Turner D.A.
The Semantic Elegance of Applicative Languages
Proc. 1981 ACM Conf on Functional Programming Languages
& Computer
Architecture p85-92
TURN81b
Turner D.A.
Aspects of the Implementaion of Programming Languages
D.Phil Thesis, Oxford University
1981
TURN82a
Turner D.A.
Recursion Equations As A Programming Language
in DARL82a
1982
TURN82b
Turner D.A.
Functional Programming and Proofs of Program Correctness
In "Tools and Notions For Program Correctness"
(ed. D. Neel), pp 187-209
Cambridge University Press
1982
TURN85a
Turner D.A.
Functional Programs as Executable Specifications
in HOA85a
1985
TURN85b *
Turner R. & Lowden B.G.T.
An Introduction to the Formal Specification of Relational
Query Languages
Computer Journal, vol 28, no 2, pp 162-169
1985
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂17-Nov-86 0741 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 07:41:34 PST
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 07:39:08-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255665108.9.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch on Tuesday, Nov. 18 at 12:15 in MJH 146 -
Should CSD offer an Engineer's Degree? - Wiederhold
-------
∂17-Nov-86 1129 LES Facilities Committee Minutes of 11/4/86
To: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, Nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
BScott@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
The Facilities Committee met to discuss the following topics:
(1) proposed restructuring of cost centers and rates,
(2) using residual cash in the DARPA equipment grant, and
(3) possible acquisition of new computers.
The following committee members were present, as I recall: Dave Cheriton,
Tom Dienstbier, Andy Freeman, Bruce Hitson, Joe Pallas, Tom Rindfleisch,
and Les Earnest. Also present was student guest Dave Mellinger.
Cost Center Rates
Earnest reported that rates charged by CSD-CF for computer time and
maintenance services are to be changed in two stages. New rates effective
9/1/86 are under development and will likely be a bit lower than those in
effect at the end of the the last fiscal year, except that charges for
SUSHI maintenance will be sharply higher because of more accurate
accounting. Some of the rate reduction stems from recent economies in
maintenance.
Beginning 1/1/87, additional cost centers are planned (e.g. LaBrea, the
new Sun fileserver in Jacks Hall, and the N-Cube) and certain services
that have been free in the past will be charged for (principally ethernet
connections).
A discussion ensued on how the fees for cost center services should be
structured. A proposal to have two rates for most services (one rate for
low-to-moderate use and a lower rate for use over a certain threshold) was
discussed and rejected. However, the committee did approved the idea of
having a fixed monthly fee for each account, set at approximately the cost
of providing accounting, in addition to rates for the various resources
consumed. This will be considered for implementation in January.
Accounting for workstation use is a problem because there is no software
available to collect accounting data. In view of this, the plan is to
charge just for fileserver disk utilization and leave workstation use
and fileserver CPU time unaccounted for.
The cost of providing local ethernet services, including ethertips and
gateways, is to be offset by monthly charges for each machine connected
to the net. There will likely be three different rates, for workstations,
minicomputers, and mainframes (in order of increasing price). Connections
to local subnets will be charged at a rate corresponding to the load they
impose (typically at the mini or mainframe level).
Residual DARPA Funds
On the topic of how best to utilize the remaining $22k in DARPA equipment
funds, one proposal was to buy one or more licenses to run the Interleaf
WYSIWYG software on Sun workstations. An unconfirmed report that Interleaf
has lower their university price to $1,500 led to a decision to buy one
such license if possible, so that local users can decide whether they would
like to get more.
The balance of the DARPA funds are to be spent on personnel costs for
procuring, assembling, testing and operating the various systems purchased
with DARPA funds.
New Computer Needs
There is interest in the Committee in obtaining one or more new computers
that will provide Unix support. The principal alternatives under discussion
are:
(a) trade in several VAXen plus some cash on a DEC 8650 or 8700,
(b) buy a multiprocessor such as one of those made by Sequent, Encore,
Alliant, or Toshiba.
(c) buy more Unix workstations and fileservers.
The chairman proposed that development of this plan be approached in a
top-down fashion, beginning with written performance specifications and
proceeding to the selection of the best system meeting these specs.
Les Earnest
Facilities Chair
∂17-Nov-86 1335 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU New Receptionist
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 13:35:11 PST
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 13:31:55-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: New Receptionist
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: Sec@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255729329.15.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Please welcome Kathy Howard, a recent Stanford graduate, as our new
receptionist. Tina has moved to our Undergraduate Program at Tressider.
Thanks
LaDonna
-------
∂17-Nov-86 1413 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB CogSci Seminar, 11/25/86
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 14:13:26 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.57/1.17)
id AA26768; Mon, 17 Nov 86 13:55:23 PST
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 86 13:55:23 PST
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8611172155.AA26768@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB CogSci Seminar, 11/25/86
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237A
Tuesday, November 25, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``Analogical and Deductive Reasoning"
Stuart Russell
Computer Science
UC Berkeley
The first problem I will discuss is that of analogical reason-
ing, the inference of further similarities from known similari-
ties. Analogy has been widely advertised as a method for apply-
ing past experience in new situations, but the traditional
approach based on similarity metrics has proved difficult to
operationalize. The reason for this seems to be that it
neglects the importance of relevance between known and inferred
similarities. The need for a logical semantics for relevance
motivates the definition of determinations, first-order expres-
sions capturing the idea of relevance between generalized pro-
perties. Determinations are shown to justify analogical infer-
ences and single-instance generalizations, and to express an
apparently common form of knowledge hitherto neglected in
knowledge-based systems. Essentially, the ability to acquire
and use determinations increases the set of inferences a system
can make from given data. When specific determinations are
unavailable, a simple statistical argument can relate similar-
ity to the probability that an analogical solution is correct,
in a manner closely connected to Shepard's stimulus generaliza-
tion results. The second problem, suggested by and subsuming
the first, is to identify the ways in which existing knowledge
can be used to help a system to learn from experience. I
describe a simple method for enumerating the types of knowledge
(of which determinations are but one) that contribute to learn-
ing, so that the monolithic notion of confirmation can be
teased apart. The results find strong echoes in Goodman's work
on induction. The application of a logical, knowledge-based
approach to the problems of analogy and induction indicates the
need for a system to be able to detect as many forms of regu-
larity as possible in order to maximize its inferential capa-
bility. The possibility that important aspects of common sense
are captured by complex, abstract regularities suggests further
empirical research to identify this knowledge.
UPCOMING TALKS
Jan 27: Geoff Hinton, Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The Linguistics Lunchbag Colloquium presents Professor John J.
Ohala, Department of Linguistics, UCB, speaking on "Interac-
tions Between Nasals and Fricatives Like You Wouldn't Believe"
on Thursday, November 20, 1986, at 11:00-12:30 in Room 155 Bar-
rows Hall.
∂17-Nov-86 1636 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Holiday Party
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 16:36:08 PST
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 16:28:41-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Holiday Party
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Would you and your spouse or guest save Friday evening, 12 December,
for a CSLI Holiday Party? We have reserved the party room (with
kitchen) at Burgess Park. The party will be a potluck with CSLI
providing ham, wine, and music. It should be fun, and I'm hoping that
with this early notice, most of you will be able to come.
More later.
Betsy
-------
∂17-Nov-86 1702 CBARSALOU@Score.Stanford.EDU New Engineers degree
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 17:01:54 PST
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 16:59:00-PST
From: Caroline Barsalou <CBARSALOU@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: New Engineers degree
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: CBARSALOU@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255767028.23.CBARSALOU@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To Faculty at the Computer Science Dept.
Note for the lunch discussion, Nov.18, 1986.
Proposal for an Engineers Degree in Selected Areas of Computer Science.
Gio Wiederhold
I propose that we enable ourselves to offer an Engineers degree in CS
in the area of Databases (or more generally the Database and Knowledge
Base area), and perhaps in Software and AI.
DEFINITION :
The School of Engineering defines three components for an Engineers
degree:
1. Courses - no school requirements
(Note: the School requires for the MS 45 units, we only require 42
units.)
2. Residence (90 units beyond the B.S., at least 36 at Stanford)
3. An Engineers thesis, sponsored by a single Faculty member.
The specific requirements, taken from the Bulletin, are attached
below.
Models for such a program are approximately the current CS MS-AI
program and the MS program seen at MIT.
I propose more specifically that the course requirements are as defined
for that specialization in our MS program, i.e. 42 units with well
defined prerequisites and achievements. The same unit and GPA requirements
will apply. Every CS Engineer Graduate will
hence also obtain a MS degree in CS.
The thesis and additional residence (90-42= 48 units) will be the increment
for the Engineers degree.
Admission will be by a Committee of faculty in the areas offering the
Engineers degree. Admission to the MS program will be a prerequisite for
students not already enrolled in the CS MS program.
!
MOTIVATION :
The motivation is parallel to that which led the Stanford MS-AI program.
1. Outside need:
There is a demand for students with more experience in advanced
projects that is not satisfied by our MS program, for which a Ph.D
education is excessive.
2. Inside need:
We are undertaking experimental research where not all components are
appropriate for Ph.D. work, but exceed the capacities of the MS
students in a CS 343 course.
3. Documentation of achievement:
Those few MS students who today participate in research gain a considerably
higher level of expertise than those who do not, and the difference
should be recognized.
4. Documentation of work performed:
A thesis provides a formal reference to experimental research results,
making it easier to build on such work than the results of current
successful MS projects, whose value is typically lost.
5. Cost:
The cost to the Department should be low. I only expect a modest
number of such students, say less than five, in the database area.
Admission will in effect be limited by our ability to offer support.
The course requirements are already set by the MS program. It is up to
individual faculty members to accept the supervision of Engineers
candidates.
THE MS-AI PROGRAM.
I do hope that the MS-AI program will join in this proposal. It will
mean for them a realignment of the course and project requirements
they have now (their requirements from the Bulletin are attached).
It will also provide a simplification for us, when we now have to
explain that there are two fundamentally different MS programs at
Stanford. It should be noted that their residence requirement is now
much less (54 units in 6 quarters at 9 units).
SUMMARY :
The intent is to make this a selected, quality program. Some
departments in the School of Engineering see it as such, for instance
Civil Engineering. Some departments see it as an escape valve for the
Ph.D. program. Keeping the requirements solid and simple should permit
us to only award Engineers degrees when it is appropriate.
Attachment A: Engineers requirements per Stanford Bulletin (p.97)
Attachment B: MS-AI requirements per Stanford Bulletin (p.137).
-------
∂17-Nov-86 1757 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU talk announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Nov 86 17:57:32 PST
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 17:50:45-PST
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: talk announcement
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Stanford University
Linguistics Department Colloquium
Ferguson/Greenberg Lecture
John A. Hawkins
University of Southern California
A Performance Theory of Word Order
Date: 18 November 1986 (Tuesday)
Time: 15:15
Place: 420-050 (Jordan Hall)
Professor Hawkins is well known for his work on universals
of word order, including his 1983 book Word Order Universals.
Among other interests are the comparative syntax of English and
German, psycholinguistics, and historical linguistics. Since
1984 he has been chairman of the USC Linguistics department.
Abstract
A number of psycholinguists (e.g. Marslen-Wilson & Tyler)
have recently been arguing that the processing of language in
real time takes place (i) continuously item-by-item, (ii)
rapidly, and (iii) with optimal efficiency. This paper
considers the extent to which word order rules across languages
reflect such aspects of performance. I.e. can word order rules
be argued to have the form that they do in order to facilitate
a rapid and efficient mapping in performance between linear
strings of words and the rich constituent structures of the
syntax and semantics? In contrast to an earlier theory (Hawkins
1983,1986) in which performance considerations played only a
peripheral explanatory role, it will now be argued that such
considerations are fundamental.
Three processing principles for word order are formulated,
each of which is compatible with the general theory of
Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, and each of which is supported by
experimental and other performance data: Immediate Boundary
Recognition, whereby immediate recognition of a constituent
boundary is preferred over delayed recognition; Early Immediate
Constituents, which states that left-right orders are preferred
for processing which provide the earliest possible access to
immediate constituent structure; and Order of Computation,
whereby given two categories, A and B, A being computationally
prior, then order A before B.
These three principles in their interaction explain not
only the classic performance-motivated (re)ordering rules of
many languages, such as Heavy NP Shift or Extraposition, they
also predict and explain: all the statistical (head-ordering)
universals for basic word orders across languages; the more
fine-tuned cross-categorial universals of Hawkins (1983), many
of which are exceptionless; universals involving leftward
versus rightward reordering across languages; and numerous
highly specific word order rules and conditions on rules in the
better studied languages (English, German, French, Japanese,
Korean, etc.).
Numerous predictions are formulated and tested in this
paper. The conclusion is drawn that word order rules are
fundamentally, and perhaps uniquely, explainable in terms of
the real-time performance mechanisms by which users convert a
linear string of words on-line into their corresponding
syntactic and semantic structures, continuously, rapidly, and
efficiently.
Refreshments will be served after the talk in the Greenberg Room.
-------
∂18-Nov-86 0108 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #74
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Nov 86 01:08:28 PST
Date: Monday, November 17, 1986 10:44AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #74
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 18 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
Announcement - ACM Symp. on Database Systems,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part U & Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 86 22:40:00 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Sixth ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems
THE SIXTH ACM SYMPOSIUM ON PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE SYSTEMS
Call for Exhibits
The Sixth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems will
take place between March 23 and March 25, 1987, at the Bahia
Resort Hotel in San Diego. The symposium will cover new develop-
ments in both theoretical and practical aspects of database and
knowledge-based systems. Previous symposia have been attended by
researchers from both industry and academia. For the first time,
this year the symposium will include exhibits of state-of-the-art
products from industry. If you have a product you would like to
exhibit, please send a brief description by December 15, 1986,
to:
Victor Vianu
Local Arrangements Chairman, PODS '87
EECS Department, MC-014
Univ. of California at San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(619) 534-6227
vianu@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Since space is limited, exhibits will be selected based on the
proposals received. Your contribution would be greatly appreciat-
ed.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 10:26:31-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part U
UCHI82a
Uchida S. & Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Taki K.
& Nishikawa H. &
Chikayama T. & Hattori T.
The Personal Sequential Inference Machine, Outline
Its Architecture and Hardware System
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0001
November 1982
UCHI82b
Uchida S.
Towards A New Generation Computer Architecture
( Also in "VLSI Architecture", Prentice Hall, 1984 )
ICOT research center Technical Report TR-001
July 1982
UCHI83a
Uchida S.
Inference Machine: From Sequential to Parallel
( Also in "Proceedings of 10th International Symposium
on Computer Architecture", Sweden, 1983, IEEE Computer
Society Press )
ICOT Research Center, Technical report TR-011
may 1983
UCHI83b
Uchida S. & Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Taki K.
& Nishikawa H.
Outline of the Personal Sequential Inference
Machine:PSI
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 1,
1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0005
April 1983
UEDA84a
Ueda K. & Chikayama T.
Efficient Stream/Array Processing in Logic Programming
Language
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-065
April 1984
UEDA84b *
Ueda K. & Chikayama T.
Concurrent Prolog Compiler On Top Of Prolog
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-092
December 1984
UEDA85a
Ueda K.
Concurrent Prolog Re-examined
ICOT Research Center, Techical Report TR-102, Tokyo
1985
UEDA85b *
Ueda K.
Guarded Horn Clauses
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-103, Tokyo
June 1985
Revised September 1985
also to appear in Lecture Notes in Computer Science
221, Springer
(have copies of both)
UEDA85c *
Ueda K.
Guarded Horn Clauses
in WADA86a, pp 168-179
1985
UEHA85a *
Uehara K. & Kakiuchi T. & Mikami O. & Toyoda J.
Extended Prolog and its Applications to an Integrated
Parser for Text Understanding
in WADA86a, pp 214-225
1985
ULLM85a *
Ullmann J.R. & Haralick R.M. & Shapiro L.G.
Computer Architecture for Solving Consistent Labelling
Problems
Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 2, pp 105-111
1985
UMEY83a *
Umeyama S. & Tamura K.
A Parallel Execution Model of Logic Programs
Proceedings of 10th Annual International Symposium on
Computer Architecture
ACM SIGARCH, 11, 3, pp 349-355
June 13-17 1983
UMEY84a
Umeyama S. & Tamura K.
Parallel Execution of Logic Programs
Electrotechnical Lab., MITI Ibakaraki, Japan
UNGA82
Ungar D.M. & Patterson D.A.
Berkeley Smalltalk: Who Knows Where the Time Goes ?
In Smalltalk-80, Bits of History, Words of Advice,
Glenn Krasner
1982
UNGA84
Ungar D. & Blau R. & Foley P. & Samples D.
& Patterson D.A.
Architecture of SOAR: Smalltalk on a RISC
11th Symp. on Comp. Arch., Ann Arbor
June 1984
------------------------------
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 10:37:57-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Update
[cwr]
The latest version of Plaistaid's prover and example file
are under SCORE:<Prolog>Plaistaid.prover and Plaistaid.examples
If you have trouble fetching these, send a note to PROLOG-REQUEST.
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂18-Nov-86 0819 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Nov 86 08:19:01 PST
Date: Tue 18 Nov 86 08:16:57-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255934137.17.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting today (of full professors) in MJH 252
at 2:30 to consider the possible faculty appointment of Janos Komlos.
-------
∂18-Nov-86 1102 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Janos Komlos
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Nov 86 11:01:59 PST
Date: Tue 18 Nov 86 10:58:22-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Janos Komlos
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12255963521.17.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Post-war Hungary has produced some of the finest mathematicians in the world
in combinatorics and probability theory. Erdos and Renyi are to be credited
with creating the nucleus of a group out of which sprung the likes of Ajtai,
Beck, Bollobas, Hajnal, Lovasz, Szemeredi, Turan, and Komlos. This is quite
a contribution for a small country. In the last six to eight years the
probabilistic proof techniques and combinatorial constructions developed by
these mathematicians have found wide applicability in theoretical computer
science and have led to the solution of many long-standing open problems.
An example is the construction of a sorting network by Ajtai, Komlos, and
Szemeredi that is able to sort n numbers using n log n comparators and log n
delay.
Janos Komlos is the most prominent probabilist among the members of that
group. His current work is largely motivated by problems that arise in
the construction of efficient algorithms or circuits for various problems,
or in proving lower bound results. But even as long as ten years ago, his
methods for dealing with sums of geometrically distributed random variables
had proved useful to me and to others in the analysis of hashing algorithms.
There is every indication that the mathematical techniques in which Komlos
is one of the recognized experts will continue to play a key role in the
development of computational complexity theory.
In addition to his scientific merits, Janos is an extremely personable
individual and truly a pleasure to work with. I believe our graduate
students interested in theory will appreciate his highly interactive
style and love of collaboration.
In my opinion, he would make a very worthwhile addition to our department.
Leonidas J. Guibas
-------
∂18-Nov-86 1211 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Shun Tutiya
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Nov 86 12:11:52 PST
Date: Tue 18 Nov 86 12:03:02-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Shun Tutiya
To: researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, visitors-patrol@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
(415) 723-9007
Shun Tutiya is now here at CSLI. He has been assigned
an office in the Trailers, D-1, his telephone number
is 723-2030, and netmail can be sent to his account
TUTIYA@CSLI, not to Tsuchiya@csli as previously
announced.
Leslie
-------
∂18-Nov-86 1217 JJW Alliant visit
To: Alliant-Users@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Jack Test, an Alliant system developer, will be visiting today at
2:45 (in MJH 220, the chairman's conference room). He'd like to
talk with anyone who has questions about the Alliant, or would like
to discuss how they're using it. Jack will probably also be here
tomorrow morning.
∂18-Nov-86 2048 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(s)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Nov 86 20:48:50 PST
Date: Tue 18 Nov 86 20:44:53-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB(s)
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256070294.30.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the next two talks follow. AFLB announcement aficionados
will observe that I have reverted to the old style announcement format
used by Andrei and Oren. All slots for this quarter are full, but most
slots for next quarter are not. Please let me know if you would like to
talk at AFLB sometime next quarter.
20-November-1986: Leonid Levin (Boston University and MIT)
Extracting unpredictable bits from inputs of one-way functions
There is an abundant supply of functions believed to be
one-way, i.e easy to compute, but hard to invert (Such beliefs imply
P=NP and, thus, are not supported by proofs). But even if x cannot be
completely computed from f(x) in polynomial time, some valuable
information about x may be easy to infer. Which bits b(x) of
information about x are independent of, i.e. unpredictable, from f(x) in
polynomial time with polynomial correlation? I believe (but cannot
prove) that the boolean inner product (z*x) is independent from
(z,f(x)), no matter what one-way function f is chosen. Other methods
do work and will be described. This leads to various applications, in
particular to simpler and more efficient "perfect" pseudorandom
generators.
***** Time and place: November 20, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
4-December-1986: Russell Impagliazzo(UC Berkeley)
Direct Zero-Knowledge Protocols for NP-complete Problems
A zero-knowledge protocol is a way for one party knowing a solution to
to a problem to convince another party that the problem is solvable
without revealing any other information about the problem.
Earlier protocols for NP-complete problems seemed to rely on the
fact that solutions to these problems, such as Hamiltonian Cicuit
or Graph 3-colorability, can be verified through ``geometric
properties''; i.e., verification of the solutions does not
involve computation of any complexity.
However, the same techniques can be extended to give general protocols
that enable one party to verify that she has performed a fixed
arithmetic, Boolean or Turing machine computation correctly, without
revealing any information about either the inputs or the outputs.
This leads to direct protocols for problems such as Subset Sum and
Satisfiability, as well as a general method for converting a
polynomial-time nondetermenistic Turing Machine program into a
zero-knowledge protocol for the language it recognizes. A slight
adaptation allowing probabilistic computation gives a general method
for converting any protocol into an equivalent zero-knowledge protocol.
***** Time and place: December 4, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂19-Nov-86 0114 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #75
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 01:14:02 PST
Date: Tuesday, November 18, 1986 5:28AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #75
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 19 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 75
Today's Topics:
Implementation - CProlog 1.5.4 fix to update 1.5.5,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part V
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 86 23:37:36 PST
From: Mike Newton <newton@vlsi.caltech.edu>
Subject: CProlog 1.5.4 fix to update to 1.5.5
Hello --
All changes were produced with 'diff -c5 NewFile Oldfile' so
that in each pair, the code appearing first is the new
('corrected') code.
Corrected:
[1] Fix a bug I introduced when trying to fix #2 below.
[2] Fix the goal f(X) :- ( true, ! ; writeX), X =< 6.
[3] Conform get to skip over blanks.
*** V1.5.5/main.c Sun Nov 2 18:11:56 1986
--- V1.5.4/main.c Sun Nov 2 17:59:26 1986
***************
*** 1081,1091
}
/* nonempty continuation */
notfoot:
/* Oh boy is this line useful -- MON */
- x1 = X->gsofcf;
if (IsPrim(c)) goto efail;
if (SkelP(c)->Fn != commatag) {
pg = c; c = NULL;
goto icall;
}
--- 1081,1090 -----
}
/* nonempty continuation */
notfoot:
if (IsPrim(c)) goto efail;
if (SkelP(c)->Fn != commatag) {
pg = c; c = NULL;
goto icall;
}
***************
*** 1200,1211
HighTide(v,Vtide);
v = x+szofcf+((X->altofcf)-FlOffset)->ltofcl;
vv = X->lcpofcf;
vv1 = VV->gsofcf;
HighTide(tr,TRtide);
! if (X->trofcf != tr) { /* this fixes f:-
(true,!;g(X)),g. */
! register PTR kept, old, xentry ; PTR globound, locbound;
/* If debugging, trail entries pointing to frames not
being discarded cannot be removed, otherwise the
retry option would not work. The variables globound
and locbound contain the lowest discardable
entries for the global and local stack respectively */
--- 1199,1210 -----
HighTide(v,Vtide);
v = x+szofcf+((X->altofcf)-FlOffset)->ltofcl;
vv = X->lcpofcf;
vv1 = VV->gsofcf;
HighTide(tr,TRtide);
! if (X->trofcf == tr) goto continuation;
! { register PTR kept, old, xentry ; PTR globound,locbound;
/* If debugging, trail entries pointing to frames not being
discarded cannot be removed, otherwise the retry option
would not work. The variables globound and locbound
contain the lowest discardable
entries for the global and local stack respectively */
***************
*** 1305,1315
case ←get0: /* get0(n) b20 */
IfInput(modeflag,k = ConsInt(Get()));
goto unifyatom;
case ←get: /* get(n) b21 */
IfInput(modeflag,
! do ch = Get(); while (ch <= ' ' || ch >= 127);/* '=' -- MON */
)
k = ConsInt(ch);
goto unifyatom;
case ←skip: /* skip(n) b22 */
ch2 = intval(&(ARG1));
--- 1304,1314 -----
case ←get0: /* get0(n) b20 */
IfInput(modeflag,k = ConsInt(Get()));
goto unifyatom;
case ←get: /* get(n) b21 */
IfInput(modeflag,
! do ch = Get(); while (ch < ' ' || ch >= 127);
)
k = ConsInt(ch);
goto unifyatom;
case ←skip: /* skip(n) b22 */
ch2 = intval(&(ARG1));
*** V1.5.5/pl/init Sun Nov 2 18:13:52 1986
--- V1.5.4/pl/init Sun Nov 2 18:01:22 1986
***************
*** 93,104
(A -> B ; C) :- !, $cond(A,B,C).
$cond(A,B,C) :- $user←call(A), !, $user←call(B).
$cond(A,B,C) :- $user←call(C).
! (A;B) :- $call(A).
! (A;B) :- $call(B).
(A -> B) :- $user←call(A), !, $user←call(B).
see(F) :- 10.
seeing(F) :- 11.
seen :- 12.
--- 93,105 -----
(A -> B ; C) :- !, $cond(A,B,C).
$cond(A,B,C) :- $user←call(A), !, $user←call(B).
$cond(A,B,C) :- $user←call(C).
! % Old version crashed w/ DB: f(A) :- (true, ! ; A=0),
A =< 7. -- MON
% This seems to fix an -- MON
! (A;B) :- $hidden←call(A).
% obscure bug -- MON
! (A;B) :- $hidden←call(B).
(A -> B) :- $user←call(A), !, $user←call(B).
see(F) :- 10.
seeing(F) :- 11.
seen :- 12.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 17 Nov 86 11:05:27-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part V
VALI85
Valiant L.G.
Deductive Learning
in HOA85a
1985
VANE76a *
Van Emden M.
Verification Conditions As Programs
Proceedings 3rd International Colloquium on Automata
Languages and Programming
pp 99-119
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
VANE76b *
Van Emden M. & Kowalski R.A
The Semantics of Predicate Logic As a Programming Language
Journal of the ACM, Vol 23, No 4, pp 733-742
October 1976
VANE84a *
Van Emden M.H. & Lloyd J.W.
A Logical Reconstruction Of PrologII
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 2, pp 143-150
August 1984
VANE86a *
Van Emden M.H. & Yukawa K.
Equational Logic Programming
Technical Report CS-86-05
Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
March 1986
VARD86a *
Vardi M.Y.
Automata-Theoretic Techniques for Modal Logics of Programs
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 32, pp 183-221
1986
VASE?? *
Vasey P.
Qualified Answers And Their Application To Transformation
To Be Presented At Third International Conference On Logic
Programming,
Imperial College, July 14-18, 1986
VASS85a *
Access to Specific Declarative Knowledge by Expert Systems:
The Impact of Logic Programming
Decision Support Systems 1, pp 123-141
April 1985
VEGD84a
Vegdahl S.R.
A Survey of Proposed Architectures for the Execution of
Functional Languages
IEEE TOC C-33 No12, Dec 1984, p1050-1071
VICK86a *
Vickers S.
The Domain of P-Adic Integers
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
Overhead slides for talk presented at BTSCC '86 at Warwick
University
1986
VODA85a *
Voda P.J.
A View of Programming Languages as Symbiosis of Meaning
and Computations
New Generation Computing, 3, pp 71-100
1985
VUIL74a *
Vuillemin J.
Correct and Optimal Implementation of Recursion In A
Simple Programming Language
J. Comp. Sys., 9, no 3, pp 332-354
1974
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂19-Nov-86 0933 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Ginsberg Promotion
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 09:33:23 PST
Date: Wed 19 Nov 86 09:31:33-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Ginsberg Promotion
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256209860.43.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am forwarding the following statement from Michael Genesereth
regarding the recommended promotion of Matt Ginsberg from Research
Associate to Senior Research Associate:
"Matt Ginsberg has worked in my group as a research associate for the
past three years. During that time I have become extremely impressed
with Matt's abilities, and I strongly recommend that we promote him.
I first met met Dr. Ginsberg in 1984, while he was a Visiting Scholar in
Prof. McCarthy's formal reasoning group. At that time he was in the
midst of a career change from Theoretical Physics to Artificial
Intelligence. I was very much impressed by him; and, after a few
technical discussions, I suggested that he join our group as a full-time
research associate, and he agreed. This was one of the very best
decisions I ever made.
The first thing I noticed about Dr. Ginsberg was his powerful
intelligence and insight. Even as a neophyte in the field of AI, his
understanding of the central issues was deep and thorough. Within his
first year in the field, he wrote papers on two of the most important
topics in the field, namely uncertainty and nonmonotonic reasoning.
Soon after joining the group, he wrote an excellent paper that showed
how uncertain reasoning and nonmonotonic logic could be unified in
multivalued logic. He did the first substantial investigation of
counterfactual reasoning in AI. More recently, he has analyzed and
demonstrated the advantages of counterfactual reasoning in plan
simulation and generation. This is extremely nice work and should
have substantial impact in the coming years.
He is an excellent speaker. His frequent presentations are clear,
concise, interesting, and entertaining. In courses and conferences,
his talks have received rave reviews.
He has also been also a responsible and productive citizen of the
group. He has taken over numerous managerial responsibilities and,
frankly, done a better job than I ever did. In recognition of his
talents in this area, we recently promoted him to the role of
co-director of the Logic Group.
I realize that some of us subscribe to an informal rule of seniority
according to which we promote someone only after he has been around
for five years. Although Matt has been with us for only three
years, I think we should proceed anyway. First of all, it has been
six years since he graduated with his Ph.D. Secondly, in three years
with us, he has published more than most research associates publish
in 5 years. Thirdly, he is getting offers of faculty positions from
other schools, and I am afraid we will lose him unless we show
somehow that we appreciate his abilities and progress."
Discussion and possible action on this recommendation will take place
at our general faculty meeting scheduled for Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2:30 pm,
mjh146. (If you have other agenda items to suggest, please send them
to Anne Richardson.) -Nils
-------
∂19-Nov-86 1022 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 10:22:22 PST
Date: Wed 19 Nov 86 10:19:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SOE Meeting
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256218660.18.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a meeting on Thursday, Nov. 20 in Terman 156 for the faculty
in the School of Engineering. The meeting will begin at 4:15 and the guest
speaker will be Dean Pister of UC, Berkeley.
*The meeting will be followed by wine and cheese.
-------
∂19-Nov-86 1423 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 14:22:04 PST
Date: Wed 19 Nov 86 14:19:01-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SOE Meeting
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256262192.29.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The School of Engineering meeting for the faculty which was scheduled
for Thursday, Nov. 20 has been cancelled.
-------
∂19-Nov-86 1605 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Symbolics Genera 7.0 (Rel 7.0)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 16:05:31 PST
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Nov 86 16:02:10-PST
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-AIM.ARPA>
To: delagi@Sumex-AIM.ARPA,
nii@Sumex-AIM.ARPA,
brown@Sumex-AIM.ARPA,
engelmore@Sumex-AIM.ARPA
Cc: aap@Sumex-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Symbolics Genera 7.0 (Rel 7.0)
Date: 20-Nov-86 01:58:30
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2741853508@KSL-EXP-1>
Folks,
Release 7.0 of the Symblolics system software is now available, and
we must decide whether or not to use it. The advantages in using it
are:
1. It has better user interface technology.
2. New Flavors are somewhat easier to use.
The disadvantages are:
1. It is slower than Rel 6.1
2. All code using flavors, characters, and arrays would have to be
modified.
3. All system definitions would have to be changed.
4. It is further incompatible with Explorer software.
5. We could only update 4 of the 6 machines available to the AAP, and
since 6.1 and 7.0 have incompatible object files, there would be a
major task to keep everything working in both old and new systems.
In short, there would be a major amount of conversion work for little
or no gain at this point. The AAP programmers I've spoken to agree with
this analysis, but we could talk more if anyone would like to.
Based on this, I suggest that Rel 6.1 continue to be used on
Symbolics machines, pending either a Common Lisp OOP standard
implemented on all AAP machines, or alternate simulation engines.
-- Rich
∂19-Nov-86 1750 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, November 20, No. 8
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 17:50:18 PST
Date: Wed 19 Nov 86 17:04:12-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, November 20, No. 8
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
November 20, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 8
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, November 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: "The Situated Grandmother"
Conference Room by Jerry Fodor
Discussion led by Jon Barwise
(Barwise@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall "Quantified and Referring Noun Phrases, Pronouns,
Room G-19 and Anaphora, Part II"
Stanley Peters and Mark Gawron
(Peters@csli.stanford.edu, Gawron@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in last week's Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: to be announced
Conference Room Discussion led by Annie Zaenen
(Zaenen.pa@xerox.com)
Abstract in the next Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Rational Agency
Room G-19 David Israel
(Israel@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in the next Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Talk
Redwood Hall Rationality and Politeness
Room G-19 Prof. Asa Kasher
University of Tel Aviv, Dept. of Philosophy
Abstract in the next Calendar
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
There will be no Calendar and no activities on Thursday, November 27
because of Thanksgiving.
--------------
MORPHOLOGY/SYNTAX/DISCOURSE INTERACTIONS GROUP
Binding in Russian
Masayo Iida
12:30, Monday November 24
Ventura Conference Room
The reciprocal `drug druga' and the reflexive `sebja' in Russian are
anaphors, in the sense that they must have an syntactic antecedent. In
GB an anaphor is represented as [+a, -p], which predicts that they
show the same binding properties. However Russian reciprocal and
reflexive pronouns behave differently.
I will discuss binding in Russian in the LFG framework. The
binding theory of LFG is characterized as a feature specification,
represented by three basic features, [subject], [nuclear] and
[logophoric]. Contrary to the GB system of partitioning the class of
anaphors into a certain fixed type, LFG permits anaphors to be
specified with different binding features from one another. Moreover,
the theory employs independent features to encode antecedent selection
and binding domain, which may be used to account for different binding
properties between the reciprocal and the reflexive.
-------
∂19-Nov-86 2215 @Score.Stanford.EDU:JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU industry lecturers and visiting faculty for 1987-88
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Nov 86 22:15:39 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by Score.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 19 Nov 86 22:13:21-PST
Date: 19 Nov 86 2120 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: industry lecturers and visiting faculty for 1987-88
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
It is time for the names of candidates for these positions.
∂20-Nov-86 1113 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU "Determination Rules for Generalization & Reasoning by Analogy"
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Nov 86 11:11:17 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.57/1.17)
id AA24460; Thu, 20 Nov 86 10:48:35 PST
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 86 10:48:35 PST
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8611201848.AA24460@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: "Determination Rules for Generalization & Reasoning by Analogy"
Our next speaker, Stuart Russell, asked us to announce that the person
with whom he worked jointly on analogy, Todd Davies of SRI and Stanford
Psychology Dept., is speaking this Friday, 3:15, in the Stanford
Psychology Dept.'s Friday Seminar Series, on "Determination Rules for
Generalization and Reasoning by Analogy", a topic related to Stuart's
upcoming presentation.
∂20-Nov-86 1601 BRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Jury duty over (for the moment)
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Nov 86 16:00:57 PST
Date: Thu 20 Nov 86 15:44:49-PST
From: Brad Horak <Brad@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Jury duty over (for the moment)
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The trial that I have been involved with all week has now finished, and I'm
back at work. There is still a possibility of my getting called again before
the end of the year, but at least not for a couple of weeks.
I have disabled my interrupt lines and will not be servicing any new
interrupts, problems, or complaints until at least Monday in an effort
to clear up some of the backlog on my desk.
--Brad
-------
∂20-Nov-86 1621 COLEMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU cup
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Nov 86 16:21:42 PST
Date: Thu 20 Nov 86 16:09:40-PST
From: Carolyn Coleman <COLEMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: cup
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Could whoever removed a coffee mug bearing the words "little bit" from the
kitchen sink in Ventura Hall please return it?
-------
∂20-Nov-86 1724 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Undergrad projects?
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Nov 86 17:23:55 PST
Date: Thu 20 Nov 86 17:21:09-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Undergrad projects?
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12256557493.11.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The undergrads I have talked to are anxious to participate in research and are
willing to accept almost any terms you might offer. For example, if you have a
PhD student who needs some programming support, I think these undergrads would
be more than willing to give you that support and to receive only units in
return. Jeff Ullman has set up a new umbrella course, CS191, Senior Project, to
allow you to award units for such projects (although CS191 is not appropriate
for an individual project where a student isn't part of a team).
If you would like to have some undergrads work on your project, please let me
know. I can post ads, screen applicants, and advise you about what kind of
credit to grant.
-------
∂21-Nov-86 0141 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #77
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Nov 86 01:41:07 PST
Date: Thursday, November 20, 1986 1:10PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #77
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 21 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 77
Today's Topics:
Query - CProlog 1.5.4,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part W
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 86 16:05:44 EST
From: Robert Goldman <rpg%brown.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Subject: C-Prolog 1.5.4 (?)
I wonder if anyone could take a moment to explain the
version system of C-Prolog to a neophyte. I've just
taken on the task of installing and maintaining C-Prolog
(1.5) here at Brown, but I don't know what the second
significant digit of our distribution is (ie., what is
x in C-Prolog 1.5.x). How does one tell? The only clue
I can offer is that our manual is dated April '86.
By the way, has anyone on the list ported 1.5 to the
new HP AI workstations?
I appreciate your help and patience,
-- Robert Goldman
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 86 22:22:42 PST
From: Mike Newton <newton@vlsi.caltech.edu>
Subject: C-Prolog
When I made a large number of changes to C-Prolog, updating
our internal copies, I was unsure how to number them. Our
base release (from Edinburgh) was 1.5, and I did not want to
use 1.6 (and therby conflict with their numberings), so I
decided to indicate that my 'release' was based on 1.5
and had my changes ('n' for newton) and then a sub-version
(1,2,3,4, now 5).
Keywords: t
I only send tapes to people who have an Edinburgh license.
All changes that I have made so far have been done as 'free'
-- I send a tape for $25, but am happy for people to pass
them on to anyone that also has an Edinburgh license. In
addition, I sent a 1.5n4 tape to Edinburgh (but have never
heard a reply from them). The lastest patches were *very*
important, but I have not sent Edinburgh a copy (unless they
read this Digest).
It would be extremely nice if the two versions someday
converged.
Finally, if by 'HP AI workstations' you mean the 'Bobcat'
series, yes, my version does port to them. Speed is not as
great as a Sun-3 because of the 16 bit bus, but I have heard
that there will soon be a version with a 32 bit bus. Other
machines/OS's include sun-2, sun-3, IBM-370/AmdahlXXX
running UTS, sequents, encores, vaxen (4.2, 4.1, VMS) and one
or two others that I cannot remember.
Sincerely,
-- mike
------------------------------
Date: Thu 20 Nov 86 13:07:06-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part Y
YAGH83a *
Yaghi A.A.G.
The Compilation Of A Functional Language Into Intensional
Logic Theory of Computation Report No 56
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
December 1983
YAMA85a *
Yamamoto A. & Mitsui M. & Yoshida H. & Yokota M.
& Nakajima K.
The Program Characteristics in Logic Programming
Language ESP
in WADA86a, pp 204-213
1985
YAO82
Yao S.B. Waddle V.E. & Housel B.C.
View Modeling and Integration Using the Functional Data
Model
IEEE TOSE Vol SE-8 No.6 p544-553 ,Nov 1982
YASU83a *
Yasukawa H.
LFG in Prolog - Toward A Formal System for Representing
Grammatical Relations
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-019
August 1983
YASU83b *
Yasuura H.
On The Parallel Computational Complexity of Unification
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-027
October 1983
YASU84a *
Yasuhara H. & Nitadori K.
ORBIT: A Parallel Computing Model of Prolog
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp 277-288
1984
YAZD86a *
Yazdani M.
Intelligent Tutoring Systems Survey
Artificial Intelligence Review, 1, pp 43-52
1986
YOKOI83a
Yokoi T.
A Perspective of the Japanese FGCS Project
( Presented to IJCAI, F.R.G., 1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0026
September 1983
YOKOM84a *
Yokomori T.
A Note on the Set Abstraction in Logic Programming
Language
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-060
April 1984
YOKOT83a
Yokota H. & Kunifuji S. & Kakuta T. & Miyazaki N.
& Shibayama S. & Murakami K.
An Enhanced Inference Mechanism for Generating Relational
Algebra Queries
( Also in "Proceedings of Third ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symp. on
Principles of Database Systems", Waterloo, Canada, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-026
October 1983
YOKOT84a
Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Taki K. & Nishikawa H.
& Uchida S.
The Design and Implementation of a Personal Sequential
Inference Machine: PSI
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 2, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-045
February 1984
YOSH85a *
Yoshida H. & Kato H. & Sugimoto M.
Retrieval of Software Module Functions Using First-Order
Predicate
Logical Formulae
in WADA86a, pp 117-127
1985
YOUN86a *
Young S.J. & Proctor C.
UFL : An Experimental Frame Language Based on Abstract
Data Types
The Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 4, pp 340-347
1986
YU84a *
Yu Y-H.
Translating Horn Clauses From English
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory AI-TR-84-3
Computer Science Department TR-84-29
University of Texas at Austin
August 1984
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂21-Nov-86 0918 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty/Staff Directories
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Nov 86 09:18:08 PST
Date: Fri 21 Nov 86 09:15:25-PST
From: Katherine Howard <KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty/Staff Directories
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, MJH-staff@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256731213.15.KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The latest Faculty/Staff Directories have arrived, and are available at the
reception desk.
--Kathy
-------
∂21-Nov-86 1539 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MSCS committee meetings
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Nov 86 15:39:14 PST
Date: Fri 21 Nov 86 15:37:23-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MSCS committee meetings
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12256800747.13.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
At the last committee meeting, the dates and times were set for the next
two committee meetings:
Friday, 12/5/86, 10 a.m. - 12 noon - Winter Quarter Admissions
Monday, 1/5/87, 11 a.m. - Autumn Quarter degree approval
Unless there is other business, the second meeting will be a very short one.
There is also the possibility of having both meetings on the afternoons
of the same days, i.e., Friday, 12/5/86, 1:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m., and
Monday, 1/5/87, 1:30 p.m.
Please let me know your preference ASAP.
-Jutta McCormick
-------
∂21-Nov-86 1612 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU OPEN HOUSE
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Nov 86 16:07:17 PST
Date: Fri 21 Nov 86 15:45:43-PST
From: Gerda de Werk <DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: OPEN HOUSE
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, staff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
students@Score.Stanford.EDU, tas@Score.Stanford.EDU,
instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, cstac-staff@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12256802263.14.DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
You are cordially invited to our
OPEN HOUSE
WHO: CSD Course Administration and Undergraduate Program
WHERE: CS-TAC (Computer Science - Tresidder Academic Center)
DATE: Monday, December 8, 1986
TIME: 4:00PM - 5:00PM
HOPE YOU CAN MAKE IT!
-------
∂21-Nov-86 2052 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU FOLIO update
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Nov 86 20:52:40 PST
Date: Fri 21 Nov 86 20:50:12-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: FOLIO update
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12256857693.14.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
FOLIO is a project that ITS is undertaking to provide some interesting
databases to the Stanford community. The project is being paid for by IBM
for its first three years. The library card catalogue (SOCRATES) was the first
database to be put in FOLIO. Other interesting databases are now starting to
appear (faculty interests, off-campus housing, student directory, faculty/staff
directory, internships, fellowships, etc.).
If you would like to find out more about FOLIO, let me know and I'll help you
get started. If there is enough interest, I'll try to arrange a demonstration
at a faculty lunch in Winter.
Here are a couple of examples from a session I just had on ITS (a session that
only cost 1 penny). I entered the FACULTY INTERESTS database and asked:
find interest analysis of algorithms
This is what I got:
1) Ernst W. Mayr - Assistant Professor. Computer Science.
Address: Bldg 460, Rm 334.
Phone: 723-1979.
2) Jeffrey D. Ullman - Professor. Computer Science.
Address: Bldg 460, Rm 338.
Phone: 723-1512.
3) Walter Murray - Professor (Research). Operations Research.
Address: Terman 414.
Phone: 723-1307.
4) Donald E. Knuth - Professor. Computer Science.
Address: Bldg. 460, Room 328.
Phone: 723-4367.
Then I went into the OFF-CAMPUS HOUSING database and asked:
find city Stanford
This is what I got there:
1) SHARED RENTAL (apartment) RENT: $400.00
(Stanford, On campus). Furnished. 2 bedrooms
(total). 1 vacancy for male only. Available:
12/01/86.
2) ROOM (house) RENT: $205.00
(Stanford, On campus). Furnished. 1 vacancy for
male only. Available: 01/01/87.
3) STUDIO APARTMENT RENT: $550.00
(Stanford, On campus). Furnished. Available:
11/17/86.
4) STUDIO APARTMENT RENT: $910.00
(Stanford, On campus). Unfurnished. Available:
11/13/86.
5) APARTMENT RENT: $990.00
(Stanford, On campus). Unfurnished. 1 bedroom.
Available: 11/13/86.
-------
∂22-Nov-86 1847 TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Greeting
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Nov 86 18:47:22 PST
Date: Sat 22 Nov 86 18:42:40-PST
From: Syun Tutiya <TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Greeting
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Syun Tutiya has arrived from Japan.
Main interests:Speech acts, anaphora and quantification in Japanese
Theory of action
Frege and history of logic after him
and so on...
Office: CSLI Trailer D-1 (with Boaz)
phone 3-2030
Home : 3651 Orinda St. Palo Alto CA94306
phone 856-3120
Have been translating with friends "Situations and Attitudes" into
Japanese.
Sorry to send a greeting so late but I have been busy this week settling
my family(a wife, 2 sons and a daughter) here. Excuse me.
I am looking forward seeing and talking with you all.
←←Syun Tutiya
-------
∂23-Nov-86 1054 SCHAFFER@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Talk of AFLB interest
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Nov 86 10:54:10 PST
Date: Sun 23 Nov 86 09:40:23-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Talk of AFLB interest
To: aflb.all@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12257260044.8.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Generating Random `Things' on Macines
Persi Diaconis, Dept. of Statistics (Stanford)
Monday 24 November 1986
Sequoia Hall 114, 4:15 PM (Cookies at 4PM in the lounge)
Abstract
There is a simple algorithm for generating random permutations due
to L. Moses and R.A. Fisher. A generalization allows generation of things
like random orthogonal matrices, or Rubik's cube positions, or invertible
binary matrices, or ...
The algorithm leads to strange new combinatorial and geometric facts.
-------
∂23-Nov-86 2212 lantz@gregorio.stanford.edu Re: Facilities Committee Minutes of 11/4/86
Received: from GREGORIO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Nov 86 22:12:10 PST
Received: by gregorio.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Sun, 23 Nov 86 22:10:22 pst
Date: 23 Nov 1986 2210-PST (Sunday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@gregorio.stanford.edu>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Cc: facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: Facilities Committee Minutes of 11/4/86
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU> / 17 Nov 86 1129 PST.
If in fact the $22K does get allocated to personnel, I would be
delighted to claim some amount retroactively for the time Mike Slocum
put in to bring up Calderon! Is possible?
A new item of business: I would like to remove Boise accounting and
spool files from Gregorio. I presume they could be moved to Navajo.
Could we sanction this and direct CSD-CF so to do, ASAP.
Keith
P.S. I was one of the other members present at the meeting.
∂24-Nov-86 0108 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #78
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 01:07:56 PST
Date: Sunday, November 23, 1986 7:49AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #78
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 24 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 78
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Call For Papers,
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part Y
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 86 08:50:58 EST
From: Leon Sterling <leon%case.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Call for Papers
Papers are requested for a special issue of the Journal of
Logic Programming concerned with
Applications of Logic Programming for Knowledge-Based Systems
The papers should describe applications which exploit special
features of logic programming. Two examples: a problem solved
by using a logic programming language where the solution would
be more difficult to state in another language; or the development
of a methodology for the more effective use of logic programs.
The reported research should be original and should not have
appeared elsewhere. Updates of successful, ongoing projects
containing material not otherwise available will also be
considered.
Applications of interest include, but are not limited to:
Financial expert systems Diagnosis systems
Medical expert systems Configuration systems
Expert system tools VLSI design
Natural language programs Problem-solving
Programming environments Learning
Please send 4 copies of your paper by May 31, 1987 to
Leon Sterling,
Department of Computer Engineering and Science,
Case Western Reserve University,
Cleveland, Ohio, USA 44106
Electronic mail address:
CSNET: leon@case
UUCP: ...!decvax!cwruecmp!leon
------------------------------
Date: Sun 23 Nov 86 07:44:02-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lauren Smith's Bibliography, Part W
YAGH83a *
Yaghi A.A.G.
The Compilation Of A Functional Language Into Intensional
Logic Theory of Computation Report No 56
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
December 1983
YAMA85a *
Yamamoto A. & Mitsui M. & Yoshida H. & Yokota M.
& Nakajima K.
The Program Characteristics in Logic Programming
Language ESP
in WADA86a, pp 204-213
1985
YAO82
Yao S.B. Waddle V.E. & Housel B.C.
View Modeling and Integration Using the Functional Data
Model
IEEE TOSE Vol SE-8 No.6 p544-553 ,Nov 1982
YASU83a *
Yasukawa H.
LFG in Prolog - Toward A Formal System for Representing
Grammatical
Relations
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-019
August 1983
YASU83b *
Yasuura H.
On The Parallel Computational Complexity of Unification
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-027
October 1983
YASU84a *
Yasuhara H. & Nitadori K.
ORBIT: A Parallel Computing Model of Prolog
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 3, pp 277-288
1984
YAZD86a *
Yazdani M.
Intelligent Tutoring Systems Survey
Artificial Intelligence Review, 1, pp 43-52
1986
YOKOI83a
Yokoi T.
A Perspective of the Japanese FGCS Project
( Presented to IJCAI, F.R.G., 1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0026
September 1983
YOKOM84a *
Yokomori T.
A Note on the Set Abstraction in Logic Programming Language
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-060
April 1984
YOKOT83a
Yokota H. & Kunifuji S. & Kakuta T. & Miyazaki N. & Shibayama S.
& Murakami K.
An Enhanced Inference Mechanism for Generating Relational
Algebra Queries
( Also in "Proceedings of Third ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symp. on
Principles of Database Systems", Waterloo, Canada, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-026
October 1983
YOKOT84a
Yokota M. & Yamamoto A. & Taki K. & Nishikawa H.
& Uchida S.
The Design and Implementation of a Personal Sequential
Inference Machine: PSI
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 2, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-045
February 1984
YOSH85a *
Yoshida H. & Kato H. & Sugimoto M.
Retrieval of Software Module Functions Using First-Order
Predicate Logical Formulae
in WADA86a, pp 117-127
1985
YOUN86a *
Young S.J. & Proctor C.
UFL : An Experimental Frame Language Based on Abstract
Data Types
The Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 4, pp 340-347
1986
YU84a *
Yu Y-H.
Translating Horn Clauses From English
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory AI-TR-84-3
Computer Science Department TR-84-29
University of Texas at Austin
August 1984
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂24-Nov-86 0834 PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Rawls Lecture
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 08:34:53 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 08:29:06-PST
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Rawls Lecture
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
The 1986-87 Robert Wesson Lecture in Democratic Theory and Practice will be
delivered by JOHN RAWLS, James Bryant Conant University Professor, Harvard,
on Monday, November 24, at 8:00 p.m. in Bldg. 200 (History Corner) Room 2.
Title: "Political Liberalism".
-------
∂24-Nov-86 0901 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 09:01:18 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 08:57:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12257514452.9.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
CSD lunch on Tuesday, Nov. 25 at 12:15 in MJH 146. Haresh Shah, the
chairman of Civil Engineering, will be joining us for a discussion of
"Opportunities for Computer Science in 'The New Civil Engineering'".
-------
∂24-Nov-86 0911 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Plans
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 09:11:25 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 09:07:54-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Plans
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12257516276.27.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The various departments of the School of Engineering must submit
3-year budgets on Monday December 8. These budgets are to be
accompanied by brief "plans" detailing whether or not we expect to
add to faculty/staff during these 3 years. If we expect to grow,
we must indicate in which areas and justify these proposals.
We (in CSD) are nearing completion of getting our figures in order
so we can see how 85/86 actuals, 86/87 budget, and the following
three years compare in various expense and income categories. I will
have a "strawman" budget letter and plan worked out over the
Thanksgiving holiday. Betty Scott (now on vacation) will help me
polish that up on Monday morning Dec 1 (won't you Betty?).
I would like faculty comments and recommendations on all of this before
I hand it in on Dec. 8. I suggest the following 3-level process:
a) On Wed, Nov. 26 at 2:15 in mjh 220, we will have preliminary figures
available for those who want to meet and discuss them.
b) On Wed, Dec. 3 at 2:15 in mjh 220, we will have revised figures
available for those who want to meet and discuss them.
[I presume that those having strong views on budget/growth matters will
meet with me at one or both of those times--or at a specially arranged
alternative time prior to Dec. 3 to discuss this.]
c) On Fri, Dec. 5 at 4:00 in mjh 220, we will have the final figures and
plan ready for final review. Last minute changes can be made over the
weekend.
I earnestly hope that people will help in this process. The union of
many arguments for what we want to do in the next three years will be
far better than the ones I will be able to think up on my own. Also,
in order to prevent "deficit financing" we will have to do a combination
of keeping our expenses under better control and of obtaining more
funds from the university. To the extent that part of this problem
must be solved by keeping expenses under better control, I would like
consensus on how we are to do this.
-Nils
-------
∂24-Nov-86 1059 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Holiday
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 10:59:52 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 10:49:13-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Holiday
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, Staff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Sec@Score.Stanford.EDU, CSD@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: Eppley@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12257534721.15.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The offices in the Computer Science Department will close at 3:00 p.m.
on Wednesday to begin our two day Holiday.
Happy Thanksgiving,
LaDonna
-------
∂24-Nov-86 1223 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Monthly
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 12:23:14 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 11:38:43-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Monthly
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
The CSLI Monthly will be coming either tomorrow or Wednesday. To
reduce the load on the system and on people's mail files, I will not
be sending the monthly to people with stanford or sri accounts on the
assumption (a) they can pick up the hardcopy or (b) they can ftp the
file easily. There will be a few exceptions (i.e., people with
forsythe accounts will receive the monthly, people who receive only
the monthly will receive the monthly).
-Emma Pease
ps. The Monthly will be stored online in <csli>csli-monthly.11-86
pps. This applies only to the monthly, you will continue to receive
the weekly Calendar.
-------
∂24-Nov-86 1244 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 12:44:18 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 24 Nov 86 12:37:46-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 24 Nov 86 12:32:43 PST
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 86 12:39:34 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.all@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 86 08:20:00 -0100
From: Marek Karpinski <uni12b.dbnrhrz1>
Subject: Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Resent-date: 24 Nov 1986 14:05:20-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
BONN WORKSHOP ON
FOUNDATIONS OF COMPUTING
B F C 87
with two Special Programs on
* randomized and parallel computation
and
* complexity of computation in algebra,
geometry and number theory
BONN, JUNE 28 - JULY 3, 1987
The workshop will be organized by the Max-Planck-Institut for
Mathematics and the Departments of Mathematics and Computer
Science at the University of Bonn and takes place shortly after
the Bonn 27. Internationale Mathematische Arbeitstagung (June 12
- 19, 1987).
The Program Committee consists of Ravi Kannan, Marek Karpinski
(co-chairman), Laszlo Lovasz, Hendrik W. Lenstra Jr., Michael
Sipser, Volker Strassen (co-chairman), Eli Upfal and Don Zagier.
The core of the workshop will consist of a series of expository
lectures (tentative list) to be given by Richard M. Karp, Hendrik
W. Lenstra Jr., Laszlo Lovasz, Andrew Odlyzko, Michael O. Rabin
and Volker Strassen. In addition there will be a number of
research communications presented and ample time for informal
discussions, problem oriented sessions, etc.
The mathematical and computer science communities are cordially
invited to attend.
For more information write to:
Marek Karpinski
BFC '87
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Bonn
5300 Bonn 1
W. Germany
(Phone: (0228) 733419 or 738720)
UUCP: marek.bnu
BITNET: uni12b.dbnrhrz1
∂24-Nov-86 1317 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Structure In Complexity Theory Conference
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 13:17:45 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 24 Nov 86 13:12:24-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 24 Nov 86 13:07:13 PST
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 86 13:13:49 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.all@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Structure In Complexity Theory Conference
Date: Fri 21 Nov EST 1986 14:10
From: srm.mrkos%btl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Structure In Complexity Theory Conference
Resent-date: 24 Nov 1986 14:03:10-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Structure In Complexity Theory Conference
Reminder: Deadline for submission of papers is November 28, 1986.
Send to: Stephen R. Mahaney
Room 2C-454
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
Addendum: The proceedings will be published by the IEEE Computer
Society; Northeastern University will also be a sponsor.
∂24-Nov-86 1455 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter RAships
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 14:55:26 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 14:51:42-PST
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Winter RAships
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12257578862.37.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
If you have any RA's who need to be terminated as of December 31
or if there are new RA's to appoint for Winter quarter, please
let me know as soon as possible. Graduate Awards needs to process
any changes immediately so that the correct tuition information will
appear on the students' bills. Thanks for your cooperation.
-Sharon Bergman
-------
∂24-Nov-86 1823 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU You're Invited
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 18:23:52 PST
Date: Mon 24 Nov 86 18:19:15-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: You're Invited
To: csd.list@Score.Stanford.EDU, csl-everyone@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12257616647.16.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
CSD/CSL Faculty, Staff and Students
are cordially invited to the
Third Annual
party hosted by
IBM
and the
Stanford Computer Forum
Wednesday, December 3, 1986
5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Red and Gold Rooms
Faculty Club
The reception immediately follows EE380
4:15 p.m., Skilling Auditorium
Speaker: Gregory F. Pfister, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
Title: The IBM Research Parallel Processing Project (RP3)
-------
∂24-Nov-86 2238 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,@HPP-3645-9.stanford.edu:Saraiya@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA AAP meeting this Wednesday, 11/26/86, 10:00am, Jim Rice.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Nov 86 22:38:11 PST
Received: from HPP-3645-9.stanford.edu by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Mon 24 Nov 86 18:14:41-PST
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 86 18:14 PST
From: Nakul Pratap Saraiya <Saraiya@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AAP meeting this Wednesday, 11/26/86, 10:00am, Jim Rice.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <861124181457.2.SARAIYA@HPP-3645-9.stanford.edu>
There will be a meeting of the AAP group after the usual HPP
meeting this Wednesday, 11/26/86. Nominally, we will start at
10:00am in the Welch Rd. conference room.
Jim Rice will describe the implementation of ELINT in POLIGON.
Nakul
∂25-Nov-86 0256 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #79
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Nov 86 02:56:31 PST
Date: Sunday, November 23, 1986 12:44PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #79
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 25 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 79
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Association for Logic Programming,
LP Library - Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 November 1986, 17:10:32 EST
From: Jean-Louis Lassez <JLL@ibm.com>
Subject: Announcement
THE ASSOCIATION FOR LOGIC PROGRAMMING
October 1986
Dear Colleague,
At this summer's Logic Programming Conference it was decided at a
meeting of the current and new programming committees and the
Editorial Board of the Journal of Logic Programming to establish the
Association for Logic Programming.
Keith Clark was elected President, Robert Kowalski Treasurer,
both for an interim period of two years.
The following people were proposed and accepted by the meeting as
trustees of the Association: Alain Colmerauer, Kazuhiro Fuichi, Herve
Gallaire, Alan Robinson, Ehud Shapiro, Sten-Ake Tarnlund, David
Warren.
It was also decided that the newsletter editor (currently Luis
Pereira) and both the retiring chairperson and the next chairperson of
the Logic Programming Conference would be officers of the Association
for the period between conferences (currently these are Keith Clark,
retiring chairman, and John Lloyd, new chairman).
The Articles of Constitution for the Association are at present
being drafted.
ROLES OF THE SOCIETY
1. The Society will be the official sponsor of the International
Conferences on Logic Programming, and will in future receive
any profits from the conference and all profits and royalties
from the sale of the proceedings of the conference. (We are
discussing the possibility also of sponsoring the Symposium on
Logic Programming currently sponsored by IEEE. In any case we
will undertake to coordinate the two conferences.)
2. The Society will publish a Newsletter (initially edited by
Luis Pereira in Lisbon).
3. It is intended that the Journal of Logic Programming will
become the official publication of the Association.
BENEFITS FOR MEMBERS
1. Members will receive the Newsletter free of charge. 2. Members
will receive a 15% discount on the Logic Programming
Conference fees. 3. Initially members will be offerred a reduced
rate subscription
to the Journal; eventually this subscription may be included
in an increased membership fee.
We very much hope that you will join the Association. Please complete
the attached membership form and return it to:
Robert Kowalski
Department of Computing
Imperial College
180 Queens Gate
London SW7 2BZ
England
Yours sincerely,
Keith Clark.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ASSOCIATION FOR LOGIC PROGRAMMING
MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM
Name:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Tel. No:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← Net mail:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Affliation:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
MEMBERSHIP CATEGORIES Annual membership for the year commencing
January 1987.
-- Full member $25
-- Full-time student $15 (copy of student id from institution reqd)
Please enter my subscription to the Journal of Logic Programming.
I enclose an additional $35 (US and Canada):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
$43 (Rest of the World):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
(Subscriptions can be paid in Sterling. To compute the
sterling subscription, add 5% to the amount to be remitted and
convert at the prevailing exchange rate.)
------------------------------
Date: Sun 23 Nov 86 12:43:35-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Update
[cwr]
The Plaisted prover and example files have been updated
and are in SCORE:<Prolog>
-ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂25-Nov-86 1158 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM talk
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Nov 86 11:58:14 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 25 Nov 86 11:44:22-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 25 NOV 86 11:24:00 PST
Date: 25 Nov 86 11:23 PST
From: Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: talk
To: folks@csli.stanford.edu, grammar↑.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <861125-112400-2748@Xerox>
The Lexical Project is pleased to announce a talk by
Bill Foley (Australian National University)
on
Accusativity and Ergativity in Yimas of New Guinea.
This talk will look a both the morphological and syntactic patterns in
Yimas, a morphological complex language of the split ergative type. It
will argue that Yimas is a split English-Dyirbal type language,
underlyingly accusative in the first and second person and ergative in
the third. The talk will be informal and discussion and objections
encouraged throughout.
Time: 3 p.m. Tuesday, december 2th; Trailer seminar Room (place not
confirmed)
Note the change from the normal hour and day!!!
Have a pleasant Thanksgiving weekend!
Annie
∂25-Nov-86 1302 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Reservation confirmation
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Nov 86 13:02:34 PST
Received: from ti-csl by csnet-relay.csnet id ad04601; 25 Nov 86 15:42 EST
Received: from Puff (puff.ARPA) by tilde id AA23037; Tue, 25 Nov 86 13:32:15 cst
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: ellen%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Reservation confirmation
Date: 25-Nov-86 13:28:28
From: ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <ELLEN.2742319706@Puff>
I have received reservation forms from the following
people:
Beckerle, Michael Hadden, George
Boelk, Mary Haflich, Steve
Brown, Gary Hewitt, Carl
Cugini, John Kiczales, Gregor
Daniels, Andrew Loeffler, David
Dussud, Patrick Margolin, Barry
Dabrowski, Christopher Perdue, Crispin
Ennis, Susan Rand, Douglas
Fahlman, Scott Rosenking, Jeffrey
Foderaro, John Wegman, Mark
Gabriel, Richard Wieland, Alexis
The following people have made reservations by phone
but the form has not yet arrived:
Beman, Richard Moon, David
Clinger, Will Vandeusen, Mary
Goldstein, Brad Weinreb, Dan
Masinter, Larry White, Jon
If your name is not in one of these lists and you
think it should be, please let me know ASAP.
Thanks,
Ellen
Waldrum%ti-csl@csnet-relay
214-995-6716
P.S. I will have receipts for the checks available
at the meeting.
∂25-Nov-86 1358 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:kannan@ernie.Berkeley.EDU Theory Seminar talk
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Nov 86 13:58:06 PST
Received: from ernie.Berkeley.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 25 Nov 86 13:55:25-PST
Received: by ernie.Berkeley.EDU (5.57/1.16)
id AA11867; Tue, 25 Nov 86 13:54:44 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 86 13:54:44 PST
From: kannan@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Sampath Kannan)
Message-Id: <8611252154.AA11867@ernie.Berkeley.EDU>
To: aflb.su@sushi.stanford.edu, theory-f@ernie.Berkeley.EDU,
theory-s@ernie.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Theory Seminar talk
The next talk will be on Monday the 1st of December
at 4:00 p.m. in the CS lounge. The speaker will be
Oliver Vornberger and he will speak on
MAINTAINING A PRIORITY QUEUE IN A DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM.
Sampath
∂25-Nov-86 1427 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Nov 86 14:27:30 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 25 Nov 86 14:20:18-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 25 Nov 86 14:14:36 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 86 14:20:38 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 86 08:20:00 -0100
From: Marek Karpinski <uni12b@dbnrhrz1>
Subject: Bonn Workshop on Foundations of Computing - First Announcement
Resent-date: 25 Nov 1986 16:45:34-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
BONN WORKSHOP ON
FOUNDATIONS OF COMPUTING
B F C 87
with two Special Programs on
* randomized and parallel computation
and
* complexity of computation in algebra,
geometry and number theory
BONN, JUNE 28 - JULY 3, 1987
The workshop will be organized by the Max-Planck-Institut for
Mathematics and the Departments of Mathematics and Computer
Science at the University of Bonn and takes place shortly after
the Bonn 27. Internationale Mathematische Arbeitstagung (June 12
- 19, 1987).
The Program Committee consists of Ravi Kannan, Marek Karpinski
(co-chairman), Laszlo Lovasz, Hendrik W. Lenstra Jr., Michael
Sipser, Volker Strassen (co-chairman), Eli Upfal and Don Zagier.
The core of the workshop will consist of a series of expository
lectures (tentative list) to be given by Richard M. Karp, Hendrik
W. Lenstra Jr., Laszlo Lovasz, Andrew Odlyzko, Michael O. Rabin
and Volker Strassen. In addition there will be a number of
research communications presented and ample time for informal
discussions, problem orened sssos etc.
The mathematical and computer science communities are cordially
invited to attend.
For more information write to:
Marek Karpinski
BFC '87
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Bonn
5300 Bonn 1
W. Germany
(Phone: (0228) 733419 or 738720)
UUCP: marek.bnu
BITNET: uni12b.dbnrhrz1
∂26-Nov-86 1021 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty/Staff ID's
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 10:20:52 PST
Date: Wed 26 Nov 86 10:10:21-PST
From: Katherine Howard <KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty/Staff ID's
To: mjh-sec@Score.Stanford.EDU, faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12258051932.15.KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The new Faculty/Staff Identification Cards for 1986-87 are here.
They are available at the reception desk.
--Kathy
-------
∂26-Nov-86 1039 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 10:38:55 PST
Date: Wed 26 Nov 86 10:33:06-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12258056075.28.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
There will be no AFLB on Thursday 27 November because nobody volunteered
to speak. :-)
In order to enable me to edit the bboard files without running out
of storage I have now split them as follows:
SUSHI:<schaffer.aflb>aflb.1984-bboard.txt --- Talks from 84-85 academic year
SUSHI:<schaffer.aflb>aflb.1985-bboard.txt --- Talks from 85-86 academic year
SUSHI:<schaffer.aflb>aflb.bboard.txt --- Talks from 86-87 academic year
Abstracts for the next two talks follow.
4-December-1986: Russell Impagliazzo(UC Berkeley)
Direct Zero-Knowledge Protocols for NP-complete Problems
A zero-knowledge protocol is a way for one party knowing a solution to
to a problem to convince another party that the problem is solvable
without revealing any other information about the problem.
Earlier protocols for NP-complete problems seemed to rely on the
fact that solutions to these problems, such as Hamiltonian Cicuit
or Graph 3-colorability, can be verified through ``geometric
properties''; i.e., verification of the solutions does not
involve computation of any complexity.
However, the same techniques can be extended to give general protocols
that enable one party to verify that she has performed a fixed
arithmetic, Boolean or Turing machine computation correctly, without
revealing any information about either the inputs or the outputs.
This leads to direct protocols for problems such as Subset Sum and
Satisfiability, as well as a general method for converting a
polynomial-time nondetermenistic Turing Machine program into a
zero-knowledge protocol for the language it recognizes. A slight
adaptation allowing probabilistic computation gives a general method
for converting any protocol into an equivalent zero-knowledge protocol.
***** Time and place: December 4, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
11-December-1986 Marshall Bern (UC - Berkeley)
A More General Special Case of the Steiner Tree Problem
The Steiner tree problem on networks asks for a minimum length tree
spanning a given subset N of the vertices in the network. (The vertices
not in N are optional.) This problem is NP-complete even for planar networks.
I'll give a polynomial-time algorithm for the Steiner tree problem
on planar networks in the special case that there are a small number of
faces which contain all the vertices in N. I'll then show improvements
of the basic algorithm as it applies to the rectilinear Steiner problem.
My basic algorithm is a refinement of a dynamic programming algorithm due to
Dreyfus and Wagner that is, in general, exponential time.
***** Time and place: December 11, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂26-Nov-86 1104 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Theory Net
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 11:04:15 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 26 Nov 86 11:00:19-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 26 Nov 86 10:55:16 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 86 11:02:26 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Theory Net
Date: 26 Nov 1986 13:54:22-EST (Wednesday)
From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX
Subject: Theory Net
Resent-date: 26 Nov 1986 13:57:04-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
You are listed as being a subscriber to theory net. Alejandro Schaffer
(schaffer@sushi) has added you to the local theory net redistribution at
stanford (called aflb.tn@sushi), so I am deleting you from the primary list.
Please direct adminstrative problems about additions and deletions to him.
Victor
∂26-Nov-86 1117 BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU House or apartment needed.
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 11:17:12 PST
Date: Wed 26 Nov 86 11:06:58-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: House or apartment needed.
To: Folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, bboard@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Robin Cooper, Elisabet Engdahl and their young daughter Anna will be
here from Jan 11 to Feb 2, and need a place to rent or house sit. Let
me know if you know of anything.
-------
∂26-Nov-86 1301 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA S10
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 13:00:26 PST
Date: Wed 26 Nov 86 12:59:24-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: S10
To: ksl-symbolics@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12258082706.68.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
With the help of S9 and S7, Michael and I believe we've gotten
S10's disk problems patched up. Please use this machine, and let
us know right away if there is a problem. If none are reported, we'll
package it back up in a few days.
-- Rich
-------
∂26-Nov-86 1442 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:marria@su-ardvax.arpa Re: S10
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Nov 86 14:40:06 PST
Received: from su-ardvax.arpa by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Nov 86 14:38:28-PST
Received: by su-ardvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Nov 86 14:35:58 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 86 14:35:58 pst
From: Michael Marria <marria@su-ardvax.arpa>
Subject: Re: S10
To: Acuff@Sumex-Aim, ksl-symbolics@Sumex-Aim
Rich,
S10 cannot even get thru the first 20 secoconds of booting any more. There are apparently
more real problems.
X12 is up and running (apparently).
Michael
∂27-Nov-86 1355 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Additional reservations
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Nov 86 13:55:32 PST
Received: from ti-csl by csnet-relay.csnet id bz12469; 27 Nov 86 16:45 EST
Received: from Puff (puff.ARPA) by tilde id AA09163; Wed, 26 Nov 86 15:41:43 cst
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: ellen%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Additional reservations
Date: 26-Nov-86 15:36:49
From: ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <ELLEN.2742413804@Puff>
When I send the original list of reservations, a
few names were inadvertently omitted. The following
people have also made phone reservations, but the
paperwork has not yet arrived:
Antonisse, James
Bobrow, Danny
Chaihalloux, Jerome
Giansiracusa, Bob
Mathis, Bob
Ohlander, Ron
Pitman, Kent
Steele, Guy
I have received a reservation form from Mary Van Deusen.
-- Ellen
∂28-Nov-86 1519 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Next Week's PLANLUNCH -- WEDNESDAY Dec. 3 -- Haim Gaifman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Nov 86 15:18:55 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 28 Nov 86 15:17:06-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA27901; Fri,
28 Nov 86 15:18:52 PST
Date: Fri 28 Nov 86 15:18:47-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: Next Week's PLANLUNCH -- WEDNESDAY Dec. 3 -- Haim Gaifman
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 28-Nov-86 15:18:47.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODELLING COMPUTATIONS OF FUNCTIONS IN CONCURRENT PROCESSES
Haim Gaifman (Joint work with Vaughn Pratt)
SRI International and Stanford University (GAIFMAN@SRI-AI)
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, December 3
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
A concurrent computation (or a part of it) can be described by an
abstract set of events, a type-function associating with each event
its type (action) and a set of constraints on their temporal ordering.
An object which consists of these components is called a *prosset*
(pre-order specification set). We use prossets in order to model
concurrency. They are intended to have, in the study of concurrency,
a role analogous to that of strings in the study of sequentiality.
(Strings are obtained as the special case in which the constraints
impose a total order). A *process* is defined as set of prossets.
Basic operations on networks include combining networks by wirings and
forming loops, and are expressible by means of algebraic operations
on processes. A general theorem establishes the desired connection
between this way of modelling networks and the least fixpoint
semantics which defines the computed function. Kahn's fixpoint
semantics for networks turns out to be a particular corollary
of this theorem.
There is a natural generalization of this for non-deterministic
computations which shows to what extent non-deterministic concurrent
computations (which compute many-valued functions) can be treated
by the least fixpoint semantics without giving rise to the Brock-
Ackerman anomaly.
-------
∂29-Nov-86 1130 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Nov 86 11:30:12 PST
ReSent-Date: Sat 29 Nov 86 11:26:17-PST
ReSent-From: Ivan Sag <SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Cognitive Science Postdoctoral Fellowship
at Stanford University
Stanford's multidisciplinary program in Cognitive Science, including
faculty from computer science, linguistics, philosophy and psychology,
is seeking applicants for a one-year postdoctoral research fellowship
beginning approximately Sept. 1, 1987. Interested candidates should
send a vita, a statement of research interests, three letters of
recommendation and selected reprints to
Dr. Ellen M. Markman,
Department of Psychology
Bldg 420
Stanford University
Stanford, CA. 94305.
∂30-Nov-86 1352 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Theory Net
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Nov 86 13:52:14 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Sun 30 Nov 86 13:46:14-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Sun, 30 Nov 86 13:40:30 PST
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 86 13:49:23 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Theory Net
Date: 29 Nov 1986 22:18:06-EST (Saturday)
From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Theory Net
If this message reaches you, you are on the Stanford redistribution list
for theory net. I mistakenly included this address in a list of other
addresses from Stanford which were being taken off the primary distribution
list of TheoryNet, and added to the redistribution list.
Thank You,
Victor S. Miller -- moderator, TheoryNet
∂30-Nov-86 1508 SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Housing Needed
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Nov 86 15:08:40 PST
Date: Sun 30 Nov 86 15:03:56-PST
From: Ivan Sag <SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Housing Needed
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: institute@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
A number of visiting faculty and visiting scholars who will be
attending next summer's Linguistic Institute here at Stanford are in
need of housing. Some of them will be here from June 29 - August 7,
1987; some from July 5 - August 7; others from July 12 - August 7.
Their housing needs vary: some would like a 1 bedroom apartment; some
would like a 2 or 3 bedroom house; others would like just a room in a
house.
If any of you know of rental housing that might be available during
any of these periods (some adjustment in dates may be possible in some
cases), we would be extremely grateful if you would contact us at:
institute@csli.stanford.edu
(or call the Linguistics Department at 723-4284)
-Ivan Sag
(for the Linguistic Institute Organizing Committee)
-------
∂01-Dec-86 0200 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #80
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 02:00:39 PST
Date: Sun 30 Nov 1986 12:12-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #80
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 1 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 80
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Utility Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 Nov 86 07:06:00 EST
From: John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: update of utility library
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%
%% NBS/ICST Prolog Utility Library
%% version date: Nov. 25, 1986
%%
%% developed by:
%%
%% John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms.arpa>
%% Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
%% National Bureau of Standards
%%
%% Product of US Government: not subject to copyright
%%
%% This file contains various utility predicates, some commonly used,
%% some not. They deal with lists, structures, I/O, sets, numeric
%% facilities, and some extensions of logic and control. This library
%% is written in and for the C-Prolog dialect of Prolog.
%%
%% Many of these predicates expect certain of their arguments to be
%% instantiated upon invocation. When such restrictions apply it is
%% usually the leading arguments which are thought of as input (and
%% hence instantiated), and the trailing arguments as output (and hence
%% allowed to be uninstantiated).
%%
%% There is a coding convention: the user-callable version of the
%% predicate has a plain name. If this predicate needs sub-predicates,
%% based on whether certain arguments are instantiated or not, the names
%% of the sub-predicates are formed by appending a string of c,v, or
%% x's, where c indicates argument must be constant (instantiated), v
%% that it must be a variable, and x that it may be either.
%%
%% Further, each main predicate is preceded by documentation lines,
%% which describe the declarative meaning of the predicate, and which
%% arguments must be instantiated.
%%
%% The overall organization of the library is:
%%
%% Basic predicates
%% Lists
%% Structures
%% Input/Output
%% Sets
%% Numeric
%% Control
%% Extended Logic
%%
%% Each section is prefaced by a header with lots of asterisks
%% ************ Basic Predicates *************
%% The following predicates test the type of the term passed
%% to them, using the terminology of the C-Prolog manual.
term(Term).
simple(Term) :- atomic(Term); var(Term).
compound(Term) :- not(simple(Term)).
literal(Term) :- nonvar(Term),
functor(Term, Name, _),
atom(Name).
float(Term) :- number(Term), not(integer(Term)).
rational(Term) :- integer(Term); ratio(Term).
ratio(Num/Den) :- integer(Num), integer(Den).
%% constant_term(Term) iff Term is currently instantiated and all
%% of its arguments, sub-arguments, etc. are constant.
constant_term(Term) :-
atomic(Term) -> true;
(nonvar(Term),
Term =.. [Functor | Args],
all(constant_term, Args)).
%% instantiation(Term, Type) iff Type describes the instantiation state
%% of Term: constant (completely ground), partial, or var.
instantiation(Term, Type) :-
var(Term) -> Type = var;
constant_term(Term) -> Type = constant;
Type = partial.
%% ************* Lists **************
%% islist(X) iff X is a list. (Really just checks for [] or that
%% main functor is '.').
islist([]) :- !.
islist([_|_]).
%% is_real_list(X) iff X is a properly formed list. Does not allow
%% "dotted" lists, a la [a|b], as does islist.
is_real_list([]) :- !.
is_real_list([_ | Rest]) :- is_real_list(Rest).
%% non_null_list(List) iff List is a real list containing at least
%% one element.
non_null_list([_ | Rest]) :- is_real_list(Rest).
%% member(Elem, List) iff Elem is a member of List.
member(Elem, [Elem | _]).
member(Elem, [_ | Rest_of_list]) :- member(Elem, Rest_of_list).
%% member_rest(Elem, List, Rest) iff Elem is a member of List and
%% Rest is the rest of the list following Elem.
member_rest(Elem, [Elem | Rest], Rest).
member_rest(Elem, [_ | Rest], Rest_rest) :-
member_rest(Elem, Rest, Rest_rest).
%% append(First_part, Second_part, List) iff List is the
%% concatenation of the first two arguments.
append([], List, List).
append([Elem | First_part], Second_part, [Elem | List]) :-
append(First_part, Second_part, List).
%% append_n(L1, L2) iff L1 is a list of lists, which, if concatenated,
%% is L2. When L1 is var, no null lists are generated for it, even
%% though logically they could appear anywhere. Thus, this isn't
%% symmetric, in that L1=[[],[1]] will generate L2=[1], but not
%% vice-versa. Note especially that L1=[[]] will generate L2=[], but
%% not the reverse. L1 and L2 can be partially instantiated, and this
%% usually works. NG if both args are var.
%% avoid generating the null list in arg1.
append_n([List1], List2) :-
not((var(List1), List2 == [])),
List1=List2.
append_n([SL1, SL2 | Rest], List) :-
(var(SL1) -> V=t; V=f),
append(SL1, Right_part, List),
not((V=t, SL1=[])),
append_n([SL2 | Rest], Right_part).
%% delete(Elem, Old_list, New_list) iff New_list equals Old_list except
%% for the removal of all occurrences of Elem. NG if arg2 is var.
delete(Elem, Old, New) :-
(var(Elem) -> (remove_dupl(Old, Smaller_old),
member(Elem, Smaller_old)
);
Elem=X % dummy statement to fill else-part
),
delete_c(Elem, Old, New).
delete_c(_, [], []).
delete_c(Elem1, [Elem2 | Rest_of_old], New_list) :-
Elem1 = Elem2 -> (delete_c(Elem1, Rest_of_old, New_list)
);
(New_list = [Elem2 | Rest_of_new],
delete_c(Elem1, Rest_of_old, Rest_of_new)
).
%% delete_all(Del_list, Old_list, New_list) iff New_list equals Old_list
%% except for the removal of any occurrences of any elements of Del_list.
%% NG if arg1 or 2 is var.
delete_all([], L, L).
delete_all([E | R_del], Old_list, New_list) :-
delete(E, Old_list, M),
delete_all(R_del, M, New_list).
%% remove_dupl(List, Shriven_list) iff Shriven_list equals List
%% in same order, sans leading duplicate members. Ie, only the
%% rightmost of duplicate members remain. NG if arg1 is var.
remove_dupl([],[]).
remove_dupl([Elem | Rest_list], Rest_shriven) :-
member(Elem, Rest_list),
!,
remove_dupl(Rest_list, Rest_shriven).
remove_dupl([Elem | Rest_list], [Elem | Rest_shriven]) :-
remove_dupl(Rest_list, Rest_shriven).
%% no_dupls(List) iff List is a list with no duplicate elements.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
no_dupls([]).
no_dupls([Elem | Rest]) :-
not(member(Elem, Rest)),
no_dupls(Rest).
%% ordered(List) iff List is a list whose elements are in non-
%% decreasing order. NG if List is var.
ordered([]).
ordered([Elem]).
ordered([Elem1, Elem2 | Rest]) :-
Elem1 @=< Elem2,
!,
ordered([Elem2 | Rest]).
%% last(Elem, List) iff Elem is the last element in List.
last(Elem, [Elem]).
last(Elem, [_ | Rest]) :- last(Elem, Rest).
%% next_to(X,Y,L) iff X and Y are adjacent in list L.
next_to(X, Y, [X,Y | _]).
next_to(X, Y, [_ | Rest]) :- next_to(X, Y, Rest).
%% reverse(List1, List2) iff List1 is List2 in reverse order.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
reverse([], []) :- !.
reverse([Head | Tail], List) :-
reverse(Tail, Liat), append(Liat, [Head], List).
%% efface(Elem, Old_list, New_list) iff New_list = Old_list
%% with first occurrence of Elem removed. NG if more than
%% one arg is var.
efface(Elem, [Elem | Rest], Rest) :- !.
efface(Elem, [Non_elem | Old_rest], [Non_elem | New_rest]) :-
not(Elem = Non_elem),
efface(Elem, Old_rest, New_rest).
%% insert(Elem, List, Bigger_list) iff Bigger_list = List plus
%% Elem inserted somewhere. NG if all args are var.
insert(Elem, List, [Elem | List]).
insert(Elem, [Non_elem | List], [Non_elem | Bigger_list]) :-
insert(Elem, List, Bigger_list).
%% subst(Old_elem, Old_list, New_elem, New_list) iff New_list equals
%% Old_list except for the substitution of New_elem for any
%% occurrences of Old_elem. NG for arg1;2;3 var.
subst(_, [], _, []).
subst(Old_elem, [Old_elem | Rest_of_old],
New_elem, [New_elem | Rest_of_new]) :-
!, subst(Old_elem, Rest_of_old, New_elem, Rest_of_new).
subst(Old_elem, [Non_elem | Rest_of_old],
New_elem, [Non_elem | Rest_of_new]) :-
subst(Old_elem, Rest_of_old, New_elem, Rest_of_new).
%% prefix(Part, Whole) iff Part is a leading substring of Whole.
prefix([], _).
prefix([Elem | Rest_of_part], [Elem | Rest_of_whole]) :-
prefix(Rest_of_part, Rest_of_whole).
%% suffix(Part, Whole) iff Part is a trailing substring of Whole.
suffix(List, List) :- islist(List).
suffix(Part, [Elem | Rest_of_whole]) :- suffix(Part, Rest_of_whole).
%% trim(List, Elem, Ans) iff Ans is List with all leading and
%% trailing occurrences of Elem removed. NG if arg1 or arg2
%% is var.
trim(List, Elem, Ans) :-
trim_left(List, Elem, Temp),
trim_right(Temp, Elem, Ans).
%% trim_left(List, Elem, Ans) iff Ans is List with all leading
%% occurrences of Elem removed. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
trim_left([Elem | Rest], Elem, Ans) :-
trim_left(Rest, Elem, Ans), !.
trim_left(List, _, List).
%% trim_right(List, Elem, Ans) iff Ans is List with all trailing
%% occurrences of Elem removed. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
trim_right([], _, []) :- !.
trim_right([Elem | Rest], Elem, []) :-
trim_right(Rest, Elem, []), !.
trim_right([Arb | Rest], Elem, [Arb | Rest_Trim]) :-
trim_right(Rest, Elem, Rest_Trim).
%% sublist(List, Start, End, Sublist) iff Sublist is a contiguous
%% sub-list within List, starting at position Start, and ending at
%% position End. Note that [] is a valid sublist, so for
%% List = [1,2], valid solutions are:
%%
%% Start End Sublist
%% 1 0 []
%% 1 1 [1]
%% 1 2 [1,2]
%% 2 1 []
%% 2 2 [2]
%% 3 2 []
%%
%% NG if arg1 is var.
sublist(List, Start, End, Sublist) :-
prefix(Sublist, List),
Start = 1,
length(Sublist, End).
sublist([Elem | Rest], Start, End, Sublist) :-
sublist(Rest, Startx, Endx, Sublist),
Start is Startx + 1,
End is Endx + 1.
%% matchlist(List1, List2, Common, New1, New2) iff List1 and
%% List2 are sorted instantiated lists (possibly with repetitions)
%% and Common is a list of their matching elements, and New1 and New2
%% are List1 and List2 minus the matching elements in Common, eg:
%% matchlist([1,2,3,3,3,4,5,5,6], [3,3,4,4,5,5], [3,3,4,5,5],
%% [1,2,3,6], [4]) is true. NG if Arg1 or Arg2
%% is var or unsorted.
matchlist([], List2, [], [], List2) :- !.
matchlist([Elem | Rest], [], [], [Elem | Rest], []) :- !.
matchlist([Elem | Rest1], [Elem | Rest2], [Elem | Com_Rest], New1, New2) :-
matchlist(Rest1, Rest2, Com_Rest, New1, New2), !.
matchlist([El1 | Rest1], [El2 | Rest2], Com, New1, New2) :-
(El1 @< El2 ->
(matchlist(Rest1, [El2 | Rest2], Com, New_Rest1, New2),
New1 = [El1 | New_Rest1]);
(matchlist([El1 | Rest1], Rest2, Com, New1, New_Rest2),
New2 = [El2 | New_Rest2])
),
!.
%% list_length(List, Number) iff List has Number elements.
%% NG if arg1 is var. Note that, apparently, C-Prolog has an
%% undocumented evaluable predicate, length(List, Number).
list_length([], 0).
list_length([Elem | Rest], Number) :-
list_length(Rest, N_minus),
Number is N_minus + 1.
%% position(List, Elem, Number) iff Elem is in position Number
%% in the List. NG if arg1 is var.
position([Elem | Rest], Elem, 1).
position([_ | Rest], Elem, Number) :-
var(Number) -> (position(Rest, Elem, N_minus),
Number is N_minus + 1);
(N_minus is Number - 1,
position(Rest, Elem, N_minus),
!).
%% repeat_list(Elem, Number, List) iff List is a list of Elem
%% repeated Number times. No var restrictions.
repeat_list(Elem, Number, List) :-
(nonvar(Number), var(List)) ->
repeat_list_xcv(Elem, Number, List);
repeat_list_xxx(Elem, Number, List).
repeat_list_xcv(Elem, 0, []).
repeat_list_xcv(Elem, N, [Elem | Rest]) :-
N_minus is N - 1,
!,
N_minus > -1,
repeat_list_xcv(Elem, N_minus, Rest).
repeat_list_xxx(Elem, 0, []).
repeat_list_xxx(Elem, N, [Elem | Rest]) :-
repeat_list_xxx(Elem, N_minus, Rest),
N is N_minus + 1.
%% permute(List1, List2) iff List1 is a permutation of List2.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
permute(Whole, [Elem | Rest_of_part]) :-
islist(Whole),
member(Elem, Whole),
efface(Elem, Whole, Reduced_whole),
permute(Reduced_whole, Rest_of_part).
permute([], []).
%% reduce(Bin_op, List, Ans) iff Ans is the result of applying
%% Bin_op, left-associatively, to the elements of List. NG if
%% arg1 or arg2 is var, or if List contains fewer than two
%% elements. If ID is an identity element for Bin_op, and the List
%% may contain only one element, invoke with: reduce(Bin_op, [ID |
%% List], Ans). To allow a null list to return ID, invoke
%% with: reduce(Bin_op, [ID, ID | List], Ans).
reduce(Bin_op, [El1, El2 | Rest], Ans) :-
Callit =.. [Bin_op, El1, El2, Temp],
Callit,
(Rest = [] ->
Ans = Temp;
reduce(Bin_op, [Temp | Rest], Ans)
).
%% maplist(Pred, Old, New) iff for each corresponding element in
%% Old and New, Pred(Old, New) is true. NG if arg1 is var.
maplist(_, [], []).
maplist(Pred, [Elem_old | Rest_of_old], [Elem_new | Rest_of_new]) :-
Pred_call =.. [Pred, Elem_old, Elem_new], % constructs predicate
Pred_call, % invokes constructed predicate
maplist(Pred, Rest_of_old, Rest_of_new).
%% maplist_2(Pred, L1, L2, L3) iff L1, L2, and L3 are lists of equal length
%% and for each element (E1, E2, E3) in corresponding positions in the
%% lists, Pred(E1, E2, E3) is true. Thus, E3 should be a function of E1
%% and E2 - if there is more than one solution, only the first will be
%% used. NG if arg1 is var. Whether arg2 or arg3 can be var depends on
%% the nature of Pred.
maplist_2(_, [], [], []).
maplist_2(Pred, [Elem1 | Rest1], [Elem2 | Rest2], [Elem3 | Rest3]) :-
Pred_call =.. [Pred, Elem1, Elem2, Elem3],
Pred_call,
!,
maplist_2(Pred, Rest1, Rest2, Rest3).
%% for_all(Op_list, Pre_list, Post_list) iff a predicate is
%% successfully invoked for each member of Op_List. Each
%% predicate is formed by pre-pending Pre_list to a member
%% of Op_List, appending Post_list to it, and then forming
%% the corresponding functor.
%%
%% Thus, for_all([a,b,c], [wiggle,x], [y]) will invoke:
%% wiggle(x, a, y)
%% wiggle(x, b, y)
%% wiggle(x, c, y).
%%
%% and for_all([number, atomic], [], [A]) will invoke:
%% number(A)
%% atomic(A).
for_all([], _, _).
for_all([Op | Rest_Ops], Pre_list, Post_list) :-
append(Pre_list, [Op | Post_list], Pred_list),
Pred =.. Pred_list,
!,
Pred,
for_all(Rest_Ops, Pre_list, Post_list).
%% maxlist(List, Max) iff Max is the highest value in a List of numbers.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
maxlist([Elem], Elem).
maxlist([Elem | Rest], Max) :-
maxlist(Rest, Rmax),
(Elem > Rmax -> Max = Elem; Max = Rmax).
%% minlist(List, Min) iff Min is the lowest value in a List of numbers.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
minlist([Elem], Elem).
minlist([Elem | Rest], Min) :-
minlist(Rest, Rmin),
(Elem < Rmin -> Min = Elem; Min = Rmin).
%% bestlist(List, Pred, Best) iff Best is the best value in a List,
%% according to some binary predicate Pred(A,B), which succeeds iff
%% A is better than B. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
bestlist([Elem], _, Elem).
bestlist([Elem | Rest], Pred, Best) :-
bestlist(Rest, Pred, Rbest),
Call =.. [Pred, Elem, Rbest],
(Call -> Best = Elem; Best = Rbest).
%% all(Pred, List) iff Pred is a single-place predicate true of
%% all members of the list. NG if either arg is var.
all(Pred, []) :- atom(Pred).
all(Pred, [Elem | Rest]) :-
Callit =.. [Pred, Elem],
Callit,
all(Pred, Rest).
%% some(Pred, List) iff Pred is a single-place predicate true of
%% at least one member of the list. NG if either arg is var.
some(Pred, List) :- atom(Pred), some_cx(Pred, List).
some_cx(Pred, [Elem | Rest]) :-
(Callit =.. [Pred, Elem],
Callit);
some_cx(Pred, Rest).
%% notall(Pred, List) iff Pred is a single-place predicate false of
%% at least one member of the list. NG if either arg is var.
notall(Pred, List) :- atom(Pred), not(all(Pred,List)).
%% none(Pred, List) iff Pred is a single-place predicate true of
%% none of the members of the list. NG if either arg is var.
none(Pred, List) :- atom(Pred), not(some(Pred,List)).
%% string_of(Alphabet, String) iff String is a list composed of
%% elements of the non-redundant non-null Alphabet.
%% NG if both args are var.
string_of(Alphabet, String) :-
var(Alphabet) -> remove_dupl(String, Alphabet);
(Alphabet = [_|_], % ie non-null
no_dupls(Alphabet),
string_of_cv(Alphabet, String)
).
string_of_cv(Alphabet, []).
string_of_cv(Alphabet, [Elem | Rest]) :-
string_of_cv(Alphabet, Rest),
member(Elem, Alphabet).
%% sort_all(In_list, Out_list) iff Out_list is a sorting of In_list,
%% saving duplicates. The Xing allows the use of keysort, which
%% doesn't delete duplicates.
sort_all(In, Out) :-
sort_all_xit(In, Xed_list),
keysort(Xed_list, Sorted_xed_list),
sort_all_xit(Out, Sorted_xed_list).
%% sort_all_xit(List, Xed_list) iff each element of list is matched
%% by an xed element in Xed_list.
sort_all_xit([],[]).
sort_all_xit([Elem | In_rest], [Elem-x | Out_rest]) :-
sort_all_xit(In_rest, Out_rest), !.
%% tot_sort(In_list, Out_list) iff Out_list is a total sorting
%% of In_list. This means that not only are the elements of
%% In_list sorted, but that any of those elements which are lists
%% are also transformed by sorting, and so on. Thus:
%% tot_sort([1,[a3,a2,a3,a1],2,1], [1,2,[a1,a2,a3]]). Recall that
%% sort eliminates duplicates, and so Out_list might be shorter
%% than In_list. Tot_sort can be thought of as providing a
%% normalized form for multi-level sets. NG if arg1 is var.
tot_sort(In, Out) :-
norm_elem(In, Normalized_list),
sort(Normalized_list, Out).
%% norm_elem(In, Out) iff Out is the same list as In, except that
%% any elements of In which are themselves lists, are transformed
%% by tot_sorting. NG if arg1 is var.
norm_elem([],[]).
norm_elem([In_elem | In_rest], [Out_elem | Out_rest]) :-
(islist(In_elem) -> tot_sort(In_elem, Out_elem); In_elem = Out_elem),
norm_elem(In_rest, Out_rest),
!.
%% ordered_merge(List1, List2, List3) iff List3 is the ordered merging
%% of List1 and List2. If more than one arg is var, returns only a
%% single solution. To find all decompositions of a list into two
%% lists, use merge. NG if all args are var.
ordered_merge([], List, List) :-
islist(List),
!.
ordered_merge([Elem1 | Rest1], [], [Elem1 | Rest1]) :- !.
ordered_merge([Elem1 | Rest1], [Elem2 | Rest2], [Elem1 | Rest3]) :-
(var(Elem2) -> true; Elem1 @< Elem2),
!,
ordered_merge(Rest1, [Elem2 | Rest2], Rest3).
ordered_merge(List1, [Elem2 | Rest2], [Elem2 | Rest3]) :-
ordered_merge(List1, Rest2, Rest3).
%% merge(List1, List2, List3) iff List3 is a random merge of List1 and
%% List2, ie, order is preserved within List1 and List2 but not between
%% them. This is like a combination: pick 2 of 5. Eg, for
%% List1=[1,2,3], and List2=[a,b], List3 can be [1,2,a,3,b],
%% [a,1,2,b,3],... NG if List3 and (List1 or List2) are var.
merge([], List, List) :- islist(List).
merge([Elem | Rest], [], [Elem | Rest]).
% pick from List1
merge([Elem1 | Rest1], [Elem2 | Rest2], [Elem1 | Rest3]) :-
merge(Rest1, [Elem2 | Rest2], Rest3).
% pick from List2
merge([Elem1 | Rest1], [Elem2 | Rest2], [Elem2 | Rest3]) :-
merge([Elem1 | Rest1], Rest2, Rest3).
%% ***************** Structures ****************
%% full_name(Term, Name) iff Name is the name of Term, which may be
%% atomic or compound. NG if both args are var.
full_name(Term, Name) :-
atomic(Term),
!,
name(Term, Name).
full_name(Term, Name) :-
var(Term),
telling(Cur_output),
tell('x.x'),
print_string(Name),
print_string("."),
told,
tell(Cur_output),
seeing(Cur_input),
see('x.x'),
read(Term),
seen,
!,
see(Cur_input).
full_name(Term, Name) :-
Term =.. [Functor, Arg1 | Arglist],
name(Functor, Func_name),
full_name(Arg1, Arg1_name),
full_name_list(Arglist, Arglist_name),
append_n([Func_name, "(", Arg1_name, Arglist_name, ")"], Name).
full_name_list([], []) :- !.
full_name_list([Arg1 | Arg_rest], Arglist_name) :-
full_name(Arg1, Arg1_name),
full_name_list(Arg_rest, Arg_rest_name),
append_n([",", Arg1_name, Arg_rest_name], Arglist_name).
%% tree_position(Term, Subterm, Location) iff Term is a
%% non-variable containing Subterm, at the Location, which
%% is a list of numbers corresponding to position, eg, for
%% Term = a(b,c,d(e,f),g), the solutions are:
%%
%% Subterm Location
%% ------- --------
%% a(b,c,d(e,f),b) []
%% b [1]
%% c [2]
%% d(e,f) [3]
%% e [3,1]
%% f [3,2]
%% g [4]
tree_position(Term, Sub, []) :-
nonvar(Term),
Term = Sub.
tree_position(Term, Sub, [Number | Sub_pos]) :-
Term =.. [Func | Args],
position(Args, Elem, Number),
tree_position(Elem, Sub, Sub_pos).
%% contains(Term, Sub) iff Term is a non-variable containing Sub,
%% either immediately or indirectly. NG if arg1 is var.
contains(Term, Sub) :-
nonvar(Term),
Term = Sub.
contains(Term, Sub) :-
Term =.. [Func | Args],
member(Elem, Args),
contains(Elem, Sub).
%% compound_contains(Term, Tester, Count) iff Count is the number of
%% terms, compound or atomic, within Term for which Tester is true.
%% Tester is either the name of a unary predicate, or a list of predicate
%% name, followed by arguments.
compound_contains(Term, Tester, Count) :-
(Tester = [Pred | Args] -> true;
(Pred = Tester, Args = [])),
Test =.. [Pred, Term | Args],
!,
(Test -> N=1; N=0),
(simple(Term) -> Count = N;
(Term =.. [Functor | Arglist],
compound_contains_list(Arglist, Pred, Args, Subcount),
Count is Subcount + N)).
compound_contains_list([], _, _, 0).
compound_contains_list([Elem | Rest], Pred, Args, Subcount) :-
compound_contains(Elem, [Pred | Args], Elemcount),
compound_contains_list(Rest, Pred, Args, Restcount),
Subcount is Elemcount + Restcount.
%% atomic_contains(Term, Tester, Count) iff Count is the number of
%% atomic terms or vars within Term for which Tester is true. Tester is
%% either the name of a unary predicate, or a list of predicate
%% name, followed by arguments.
atomic_contains(Term, Tester, Count) :-
(Tester = [Pred | Args] -> true;
(Pred = Tester, Args = [])),
!,
(simple(Term) -> (Test =.. [Pred, Term | Args],
(Test -> Count=1; Count=0)
);
(Term =.. Termlist,
atomic_contains_list(Termlist, Pred, Args, Count)
)).
atomic_contains_list([], _, _, 0).
atomic_contains_list([Elem | Rest], Pred, Args, Count) :-
atomic_contains(Elem, [Pred | Args], Elemcount),
atomic_contains_list(Rest, Pred, Args, Restcount),
Count is Elemcount + Restcount.
%% ************* Input and Output *************
%% readline(List) iff user enters characters of list, followed
%% by a carriage return (whose ASCII code is 10, under VMS).
readline(List) :-
get0(Char),
(Char=10 -> List = [];
(Char=26 -> List = end_of_file;
(List = [Char | Rest], readline(Rest))
) ).
%% user_pick(List, Selection) iff Selection is a member of the list
%% chosen by the user. NG if arg1 is var.
user_pick(List, Selection) :-
List = [E | R],
nl, print('Select one of the following: '),
user_pick_1(List, 1),
nl,
print('Enter the number of your preferred entry, '),
print('terminated by a period.'),
nl,
print('Anything besides a valid number will select none of the above.'),
nl,
read(Num),
!,
integer(Num),
position(List, Selection, Num).
user_pick_1([], _).
user_pick_1([Elem | Rest], N) :-
nl, print(' '),
(N < 10 -> print(' '); true),
print(N),
print(' - '),
print(Elem),
N1 is N+1,
user_pick_1(Rest, N1).
%% user_yes_no(Prompt) iff the user responds affirmatively to the Prompt.
%% The Prompt should be a yes or no type question, suitable for printing,
%% user_yes_no('Do you wish to continue?'). The current input stream
%% is assumed to be set correctly.
user_yes_no(Prompt) :-
nl, print(Prompt),
print(' (respond with "y." or "n.")'), nl,
read(Ans),
!,
(Ans = y -> true;
(Ans = n -> (!,fail);
(user_yes_no(Prompt)
) ) ).
%% print_string(S) succeeds if S is a list of printable integers, and
%% it prints the string as a side-effect to the current output stream.
print_string([]).
print_string([Elem | Rest]) :-
integer(Elem),
Elem > 31,
Elem < 127,
put(Elem),
print_string(Rest).
%% tree_print(Term) prints term in tree-fashion, indented by two.
tree_print(Term) :-
nl,
tree_print_sub(Term,0,' ').
tree_print_sub(Term, Depth, Prefix) :-
print_prefix(Depth, Prefix),
(var(Term) -> (Name = Term, Arglist = []);
Term =.. [Name | Arglist]),
print(Name), nl,
Depth_plus is Depth+1,
print_args(Arglist, Depth_plus, Prefix).
print_prefix(0,_).
print_prefix(Depth, Prefix) :-
Depth > 0,
print(Prefix),
Depth_minus is Depth-1,
print_prefix(Depth_minus, Prefix).
print_args([], Depth, _).
print_args([First | Rest], Depth, Prefix) :-
tree_print_sub(First, Depth, Prefix),
print_args(Rest, Depth, Prefix).
%% tree_list_print(Term) prints Term just like tree_print, except that
%% it keeps lists flat (at the same level), rather than indenting.
%% Further it uses '[' and ']' to delimit the lists instead of the
%% true internal functor '.'.
tree_list_print(Term) :-
nl,
tree_list_print_sub(Term,0,' ').
tree_list_print_sub(Term, Depth, Prefix) :-
print_prefix(Depth, Prefix),
(var(Term) -> (Name = Term, Arglist = []);
(non_null_list(Term) ->
(Name = '[', Term = Arglist);
Term =.. [Name | Arglist]
) ),
print(Name), nl,
D_plus is Depth+1,
list_print_args(Arglist, D_plus, Prefix),
(Name == '[' -> (print_prefix(Depth, Prefix), print(']'), nl); true).
list_print_args([], Depth, _).
list_print_args([First | Rest], Depth, Prefix) :-
tree_list_print_sub(First, Depth, Prefix),
list_print_args(Rest, Depth, Prefix).
%% *************** Sets ****************
%% Following predicates treat lists as sets. Note that only
%% outer brackets are interpreted as set-constructors. Any inner
%% nested brackets are interpreted as ordered lists - thus these
%% sets are "flat"; they do not contain other sets. Eg, the
%% set: [a,b,[1,2,1]] has a list as its 3rd element and is
%% distinct from: [a,b,[2,1]], but *not* from [b,b,[1,2,1],a,a],
%% since duplication and order at the highest (set) level are
%% insignificant.
%%
%% To treat lists as multi-level sets, perform tot_sort on them, eg
%% both [a,b,[1,2,1]] and [a,b,[2,1]] map to: [a,b,[1,2]], which
%% may be thought of as a normalized form for multi-level sets.
%%
%% Thus, the only easy choice is to treat all inner brackets as
%% list-constructors (default) or as set-constructors (using
%% tot_sort). To explicitly distinguish and therefore allow
%% both kinds, a structure must be set up, something like:
%% set(List) to be interpreted as a set. Then, eg:
%%
%% set([1,2,[d,d,c,a]]) : 3rd element is list
%%
%% set([1,2,set([d,d,c,a])]) : 3rd element is set
%%
%% [1,2,1] : (ordered) list of 3 integers
%%
%% set([1,2,1]) : (unordered) set of 2 integers (= set([1,2]))
%%
%% Set structure would accept unordered/duplicate elements, but
%% assume their insignificance. Conversion predicate might be:
%%
%% set_list(Set, List) :- Set =.. [set, List], is_real_list(List).
%% subset(Part, Whole) iff Part is an subset of Whole.
%% NG if both args are var.
subset(Part, Whole) :-
var(Whole) -> (var(Part) -> fail;
subset_cv(Part, Whole)
);
(remove_dupl(Whole, Shorn_whole),
(var(Part) -> subset_vc(Part, Shorn_whole);
subset_cc(Part, Shorn_whole))
).
subset_vc([Elem | Rest_part], [Elem | Rest_whole]) :-
subset_vc(Rest_part, Rest_whole).
subset_vc( Rest_part, [Elem | Rest_whole]) :-
subset_vc(Rest_part, Rest_whole).
subset_vc([],[]).
subset_cv(Part, Whole) :- remove_dupl(Part, Whole).
subset_cc([], Whole) :- islist(Whole).
subset_cc([Elem | Rest_of_part], Whole) :-
member(Elem, Whole),
subset_cc(Rest_of_part, Whole).
%% intersection(S1, S2, Ans) iff Ans is the intersection of S1 and S2.
%% NG if arg1;2 is var.
intersection(S1, S2, Ans) :-
remove_dupl(S1, Better_S1),
(var(Ans) -> intersection_1(Better_S1, S2, Ans);
intersection_2(Better_S1, S2, Ans)
).
intersection_1([], S2, []).
intersection_1([E | R1], S2, Ans) :-
member(E, S2) -> (Ans = [E | RA],
intersection_1(R1, S2, RA)
);
intersection_1(R1, S2, Ans).
intersection_2(S1, S2, Ans) :-
intersection_1(S1, S2, X),
set_equal(X, Ans).
%% union(S1, S2, Ans) iff Ans is the union of S1 and S2.
%% NG if arg1;2 is var.
union(S1, S2, Ans) :-
var(Ans) -> union_1(S1, S2, Ans);
union_2(S1, S2, Ans).
union_1(S1, S2, Ans) :- append(S1, S2, X),
remove_dupl(X, Ans).
union_2(S1, S2, Ans) :- union_1(S1, S2, X),
set_equal(X, Ans).
%% set_diff(S1, S2, Ans) iff Ans is the set difference S1 - S2.
%% NG if arg1;2 is var.
set_diff(S1, S2, Ans) :-
remove_dupl(S1, Better_S1),
(var(Ans) -> set_diff_1(Better_S1, S2, Ans);
set_diff_2(Better_S1, S2, Ans)
).
set_diff_1(S1, S2, Ans) :- delete_all(S2, S1, Ans).
set_diff_2(S1, S2, Ans) :- set_diff_1(S1, S2, X),
set_equal(X, Ans).
%% set_equal(A,B) iff A and B contain the same elements (set equality).
set_equal(A, B) :-
nonvar(A), nonvar(B), set_equal_cc(A, B);
var(A), var(B), A = B;
var(A), nonvar(B), remove_dupl(B, A);
nonvar(A), var(B), remove_dupl(A, B).
set_equal_cc(A, B) :- subset(A,B), subset(B,A).
%% disjoint(A,B) iff A and B have no common element.
%% NG if arg1;2 is var.
disjoint(A,B) :- not(joint(A,B)).
%% joint(A,B) iff A and B have at least one common element.
%% NG if arg1;2 is var.
joint(A,B) :- member(E,A), member(E,B).
%% set_plus(S1, S2, Both) iff S1 and S2 are disjoint, and their
%% union equals Both. NG if Both and (S1 or S2) are var.
set_plus(S1, S2, Both) :-
nonvar(S1) -> (nonvar(S2) -> set_plus_ccx(S1, S2, Both);
set_plus_vxc(S2, S1, Both)
);
set_plus_vxc(S1, S2, Both).
set_plus_ccx(S1, S2, Both) :- disjoint(S1, S2), union(S1, S2, Both).
set_plus_vxc(S1, S2, Both) :-
nonvar(Both),
subset(S2, Both),
set_diff(Both, S2, S1).
%% powerset(Set, Power) iff Power is the power set of Set, ie, a list
%% of all subsets of Set. NG if arg1 is var.
powerset(Set, Power) :-
remove_dupl(Set, Shrunk_set),
powerset_xx(Shrunk_set, Power).
powerset_xx([], [[]]).
powerset_xx([Elem | Rest], Power) :-
powerset_xx(Rest, Sub_Power),
double_list(Elem, Sub_Power, Power).
double_list(New_elem, [Single], [Single, [New_elem | Single]]) :- !.
double_list(New_elem, [Elem | Rest], [Elem, [New_elem | Elem] | List]) :-
double_list(New_elem, Rest, List).
%% Here's an alternative version of powerset, perhaps a bit less
%% efficient, but easier to understand. It is deliberately
%% commented out, so as not to conflict with the above.
%% NG if arg1 is var.
%%
%% powerset(Set, Power) :- setof(Sub, subset(Sub, Set), Power).
%% partition(S1, S2) iff S2 is a partition of S1, ie S2 is a set of
%% non-null pairwise disjoint sets, whose union = S1.
%% NG if both args are var.
partition(S1, S2) :-
nonvar(S1), nonvar(S2), partition_cc(S1, S2);
var(S1), nonvar(S2), partition_vc(S1, S2);
nonvar(S1), var(S2),
remove_dupl(S1, Slim_S1), partition_cv(Slim_S1, S2).
partition_vc(S1, S2) :-
not(member([], S2)), % partition members must be non-null
append_n(S2, S1), % take all elements of all members
no_dupls(S1). % ensure pairwise disjoint
partition_cc(S1, S2) :-
partition_vc(Test, S2),
set_equal(Test, S1).
partition_cv([Elem], [[Elem]]).
partition_cv([Elem | Rest], S2) :-
partition_cv(Rest, Sub_S2), % take a partition of set minus elem
( S2 = [[Elem] | Sub_S2]; % either add a new singleton member
% containing elem
(insert(Sub_S2_Elem, Sub_S2_Less_1, Sub_S2),
% or take one of the old members
S2 = [[Elem | Sub_S2_Elem] | Sub_S2_Less_1]
) % and add elem to it
).
%% closure2(List1, Pred2, List2) iff List2 is the closure of List1
%% according to the binary predicate Pred2, for which the first
%% operand is the "old" element and the second is the "new" or
%% generated element. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
closure2(List1, Pred2, List2) :-
sort(List1, Sorted_list1),
(setof(Arg2, Arg1↑Test↑(member(Arg1, Sorted_list1),
Test =.. [Pred2, Arg1, Arg2],
Test),
New_list)
->
(append(Sorted_list1, New_list, Combined_list),
sort(Combined_list, Sorted_combined_list),
(Sorted_combined_list = Sorted_list1
-> List2 = Sorted_combined_list;
closure2(Sorted_combined_list, Pred2, List2)
));
List2 = Sorted_list1
).
%% closure3(List1, Pred3, List2) iff List2 is the closure of List1
%% according to the ternary predicate Pred3, for which the first 2
%% operands are the "old" elements and the third is the "new" or
%% generated element. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
closure3(List1, Pred3, List2) :-
sort(List1, Sorted_list1),
(setof(Arg3, Arg1↑Arg2↑Test↑(member(Arg1, Sorted_list1),
member(Arg2, Sorted_list1),
Test =.. [Pred3, Arg1, Arg2, Arg3],
Test),
New_list)
->
(append(Sorted_list1, New_list, Combined_list),
sort(Combined_list, Sorted_combined_list),
(Sorted_combined_list = Sorted_list1
-> List2 = Sorted_combined_list;
closure3(Sorted_combined_list, Pred3, List2)
));
List2 = Sorted_list1
).
%% **************** Numeric ****************
%% numvar(X, Limit) iff X and Limit are non-negative integers,
%% with X =< Limit. In generative mode, solutions are produced
%% from zero to higher values. Either, both, or neither argument
%% may be instantiated. NG if arg1 is fraction and arg2 var.
numvar(X,Limit) :- var(Limit), natural(Limit), numvar(X, Limit).
numvar(X,Limit) :- nonvar(Limit), natural(X), ((X>Limit, !, fail); true).
%% natural(X) iff X is a non-negative integer.
natural(X) :- nonvar(X), integer(X), X>=0;
var(X), gen_integer(X, 0).
%% gen_integer(X,Seed) generates integers, incrementing from Seed.
%% NG if arg1 is nonvar or arg2 is var.
gen_integer(X, Seed) :-
var(X),
integer(Seed),
gen_integer_vc(X, Seed).
gen_integer_vc(X, Seed) :-
X is Seed;
(New_seed is Seed+1,
gen_integer_vc(X, New_seed)).
%% random(Max, N) instantiates N to a random integer between
%% 1 and Max. NG if arg1 is var.
seed(13).
random(R,N) :-
retract(seed(S)),
N is (S mod R) +1,
NewSeed is (125*S+1) mod 4096,
asserta(seed(NewSeed)),!.
%% rationalize(Exprs, R_Exprs) iff Exprs is a numeric expression,
%% and R_Exprs is a mostly evaluated form of the expression.
%% Rational numbers are preserved and reduced to lowest terms,
%% or integers if possible. If no floating-point numbers are in
%% the expression, the results are exact, except for raising to a
%% fractional power. NG if Exprs is not a fully instantiated
%% numeric expression. Routines for handling exponentiation
%% override some C-Prolog defaults. X↑0 always equals 1, even for
%% 0↑0. A negative base is allowed with an integer power, so
%% (-2)↑4 = 16, and (-2)↑5 = -32. Negative powers are handled
%% correctly, eg, 2↑(-3) = 1/8, (-2)↑(-3) = -1/8, (2/3)↑(-3) =
%% 27/8. A negative base to a fractional power fails, as does zero
%% to a negative power.
rationalize(Exprs, Exprs) :- number(Exprs), !.
%% handle plus and minus unary ops
rationalize(-(Exprs), R_Exprs) :- rationalize(Exprs*(-1), R_Exprs).
rationalize(+(Exprs), R_Exprs) :- rationalize(Exprs, R_Exprs).
%% all other unary ops to be handled by regular evaluation.
rationalize(Exprs, R_Exprs) :-
Exprs =.. [Un_op, Opnd1],
Un_op \== '+',
Un_op \== '-',
rationalize(Opnd1, R_Opnd1),
Eval =.. [Un_op, R_Opnd1],
R_Exprs is Eval.
%% handle binary ops
rationalize(Exprs, R_Exprs) :-
Exprs =.. [Bin_op, Opnd1, Opnd2],
rationalize(Opnd1, R_Opnd1),
rationalize(Opnd2, R_Opnd2),
(plain_eval(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2)
-> (Eval =.. [Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2], R_Exprs is Eval, !);
(rationalize_1(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2, R_Exprs), !)
).
%% plain_eval is true if the expression can be evaluated directly,
%% either because: 1) the result will be exact (eg integer subtraction),
%% or 2) the result is (probably) not rational anyway (eg, when
%% a floating-point number is an operand, or raising to a fractional
%% power).
plain_eval(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2) :-
not(member(Bin_op, [+,-,*,/,↑])).
plain_eval(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2) :-
Bin_op \== '↑',
(float(R_Opnd1); float(R_Opnd2)).
plain_eval(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2) :-
integer(R_Opnd1), integer(R_Opnd2),
member(Bin_op, [+,-,*]).
plain_eval(↑, Base, Power) :-
Base > 0,
(not(integer(Power));
Power =:= 0;
float(Base);
(number(Base), Power > 0)
).
rationalize_1(↑, 0, Power, _) :-
Power < 0,
nl, print('Error: raising zero to negative power.'), nl,
!, fail.
rationalize_1(↑, 0, Power, 0) :-
Power > 0.
rationalize_1(↑, _, 0, 1).
rationalize_1(↑, Base, Power, R_Exprs) :-
Base < 0,
not(integer(Power)),
nl, print('Error: raising negative to fractional power.'), nl,
!, fail.
rationalize_1(↑, Base, Power, R_Exprs) :-
Base < 0,
float(Base),
Mag is (-Base) ↑ Power, !,
(Power mod 2 =:= 0 -> R_Exprs is Mag;
R_Exprs is -Mag).
rationalize_1(Bin_op, R_Opnd1, R_Opnd2, R_Exprs) :-
(integer(R_Opnd1) -> (Num1 = R_Opnd1, Den1 = 1);
Num1/Den1 = R_Opnd1),
(integer(R_Opnd2) -> (Num2 = R_Opnd2, Den2 = 1);
Num2/Den2 = R_Opnd2),
rationalize_2(Bin_op, Num1, Den1, Num2, Den2, Num, Den),
(Den =:= 0 -> (nl, print('Error: divide by zero'), nl,
!, fail
);
reduced(Num/Den, R_Exprs)
),
!.
rationalize_2(+, Num1, Den1, Num2, Den2, Num, Den) :-
Num is Num1*Den2 + Num2*Den1,
Den is Den1*Den2.
rationalize_2(-, Num1, Den1, Num2, Den2, Num, Den) :-
Num is Num1*Den2 - Num2*Den1,
Den is Den1*Den2.
rationalize_2(*, Num1, Den1, Num2, Den2, Num, Den) :-
Num is Num1*Num2,
Den is Den1*Den2.
rationalize_2(/, Num1, Den1, Num2, Den2, Num, Den) :-
Num is Num1*Den2,
Den is Den1*Num2.
rationalize_2(↑, Num1, 1, Num2, 1, Num, Den) :-
abs(Num1, Base),
abs(Num2, Power),
Mag is Base↑Power,
((Num1 >= 0; Power mod 2 =:= 0) -> Sign = 1; Sign = -1),
(Num2 < 0 -> (Num = Sign, Den = Mag);
(Num is Sign*Mag, Den = 1)).
rationalize_2(↑, Num1, Den1, Num2, 1, Num, Den) :-
rationalize_2(↑, Num1, 1, Num2, 1, NumNum, NumDen),
rationalize_2(↑, Den1, 1, Num2, 1, DenNum, DenDen),
Num is NumNum*DenDen,
Den is NumDen*DenNum,
!.
%% reduced(Exprs, R_Exprs) iff R_Exprs is Exprs reduced to
%% lowest terms. R_Exprs is an integer if the denominator
%% would be 1. NG if arg1 is var.
reduced(Exprs,Exprs) :- integer(Exprs), !.
reduced(Num/Den, Ans) :-
Num mod Den =:= 0,
Ans is Num/Den, !.
reduced(Num_In/Den_In, Num_Out/Den_Out) :-
gcd(Num_In, Den_In, GCD),
Num_Temp is Num_In/GCD,
Den_Temp is Den_In/GCD,
(Den_Temp < 0 -> (Num_Out is -Num_Temp, Den_Out is -Den_Temp);
(Num_Out is Num_Temp, Den_Out is Den_Temp)
),
!.
%% gcd(X, Y, Ans) iff Ans is the greatest common divisor of the
%% integers X and Y. NG if arg1 or arg2 is var.
gcd(X, 0, X) :- !.
gcd(0, X, X) :- !.
gcd(X, Y, Ans) :-
L is Y mod X,
gcd(L, X, Ans), !.
%% abs(X, Y) iff Y is the absolute value of X. Ng if arg1 is var.
abs(X,Y) :-
X < 0 -> Y is -X; Y is X.
%% ***************** Control ****************
%% loop(Pred) repeatedly invokes Pred until it fails. Loop always
%% fails and so is executed only for side-effects. If Pred has
%% several clauses, enclose in parens. A typical use might be:
%% loop((pred(X,Y), write(X), write(' '), write(Y), nl)).
%% to write out all solutions.
loop(Pred) :-
repeat,
(Pred; (!, fail)), % Pred succeeds, or kill loop
fail. % Force repetition.
%% invoke(Pred_list) creates a predication from Pred_list and
%% invokes it. Pred_list must be instantiated. The reason for
%% the 2nd arg is that otherwise invoke will quit after first
%% success with all nonvars. Even if all args are nonvar,
%% users may wish to re-invoke by re-instantiating Pred_list.
invoke(Pred_list, Pred_call) :- Pred_call=..Pred_list, Pred_call.
%% ************* Extended Logic **************
%% counter_eg(If, Then) iff there exists some instantiation of If
%% and Then such that If is true and Then is false. If and Then
%% must be predicates. Their arg-lists may contain vars, but the
%% predicates themselves must be specified. Eg:
%% counter_eg((gender(X,male), gender(Y,female)), taller(X,Y)).
%% may be understood as "Are there any counter-examples to the rule
%% that if X is male and Y is female, then X is taller than Y?"
counter_eg(If, Then) :- If, not(Then).
%% implies(If, Then) iff If and Then form a true implication for
%% this DB, ie there are no counter-examples.
implies(If, Then) :- not(counter_eg(If, Then)).
%% The following stuff is meant to provide some capability for expressing
%% disjunction and negation. The three predicates visible at the user
%% level are:
%%
%% or(L) - to ask if this is a true disjunction; defined herein, but
%% invoked by the user.
%%
%% ground_or(L) - to tell the system that this is a true disjunction,
%% ie, at least one disjunct is true. Defined by the user
%% as part of the DB.
%%
%% false(P) - says that P is definitely false (not just not provable,
%% a la "not" in normal Prolog). Defined by the user as part
%% of the DB.
%%
%% start_or. - the user has to invoke this to fire up the system,
%% before he starts asking things.
%%
%% eg, if the user, in the DB, says:
%%
%% ground_or([e,f,g,h,i]).
%% false(f).
%% false(g).
%% ground_or([a,b,c]) :- d.
%% d.
%% false(b).
%% false(a) :- w; d.
%%
%% and then invokes start_or, the system will be able to conclude
%% that the following succeed:
%%
%% c. (because (a or b or c) is true and a and b are
%% both false)
%% or([x1,d,x2]). (because d is a true disjunct)
%% or([f,g,t,h,r,e,i]). (because it contains a true disjunct: [e,f,g,h,i]).
%% or([e,h,i]) (because its residue from [e,f,g,h,i] is [f,g] all
%% of which are false.)
%%
%% It's probably not wise for "ground_or" itself to depend on "or".
%% or(L) iff L is a list of disjuncts, at least one of which is true.
%% NG if L is var.
or(L) :- nonvar(L), L = [_|_], (or_1(L); or_2(L); or_3(L)).
%% or_1 tries to find a true individual disjunct.
%% or_2 tries to find a subset of L already known to be true.
%% or_3 tries to find a superset of L already known to be true,
%% and then show the rest are false.
or_1([E | R]) :- E; or_1(R).
or_2(L1) :- ground_or(L2), subset(L2, L1).
or_3(L) :- ground_or(Ground_list),
set_plus(L, Residue, Ground_list),
false_list(Residue).
%% false_list(L) iff all members of L are provably false.
false_list([]).
false_list([E1 | Rest]) :- false(E1), false_list(Rest).
%% start_or always fails, but in the meantime, it builds clauses
%% for each disjunct of the ground_or's.
start_or :-
clause(ground_or(Disjuncts), Antecedents),
set_plus([One_disjunct], Rest, Disjuncts),
assertz((One_disjunct :- Antecedents, false_list(Rest))),
fail.
%% Some meta-logical facilities coming up.
%% kb_object(Type, Head, Tail) iff there is a clause "Head :- Tail."
%% in the current program. If the Tail=true, and the Head is
%% composed of all constants, Type = fact, otherwise Type = rule.
kb_object(Type, Head, Tail) :-
current_predicate(_, Head),
clause(Head, Tail),
((Tail = true, constant_term(Head)) -> Type = fact;
Type = rule).
%% assert1(Term) iff there is exactly one matching instance of Term
%% asserted in the DB. Term should be at least partially instantiated.
assert1(Term) :-
repeat,
(retract(Term) -> fail;
assert(Term)
),
!.
%% ed allows for some very primitive run-time program modification.
%% The user can enter terms, facts or rules, without the "extra"
%% parentheses needed by assert, and ed then asserts and writes out
%% the term for later editing into the permanent program.
ed :-
nl, print('Enter fact or rule ([] to quit).'), nl,
read(T),
(T = [] -> true; (ed_1(T), !, ed)).
ed_1(T) :-
assert(T),
tell('x.tmp'),
nl, writeq(T), put(46), nl,
tell(user).
%% End of Prolog Utilities
%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂01-Dec-86 0900 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 09:00:03 PST
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 08:56:50-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259349270.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a general faculty meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 2 at 2:30 in
MJH 146 to discuss the possible promotion of Matt Ginsberg to Senior
Research Associate.
-------
∂01-Dec-86 0955 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 09:55:23 PST
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 09:52:28-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259359396.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Lunch on Tuesday, Dec. 2 at 12:15 in MJH 146. Ray Bacchetti of the Provost's
office will be joining us for discussion of "The University Budget Process".
-------
∂01-Dec-86 1104 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday information
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 11:04:27 PST
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 11:01:17-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday information
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12259371924.25.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
As previously mentioned Gray Tuesday will take place Tuesday, December
16, in Jacks 146, from 2:30-5 pm. In about a week you will receive
the online records of all of your advisees. (The students are looking
at it this week.) Please look them over and let me know of any
information that should be added/deleted, etc. as soon as possible.
Having all relevant material noted before the meeting will make it
run more smoothly and quickly.
Victoria
-------
∂01-Dec-86 1132 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS committee meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 11:31:58 PST
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 11:30:04-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MS committee meeting
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12259377165.22.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The winter quarter admissions meeting will be this Friday, December 5, at
10:00 a.m., in MJH 301.
--Jutta
-------
-------
∂01-Dec-86 1210 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM reminder
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 12:07:35 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 1 Dec 86 11:59:11-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 01 DEC 86 11:58:32 PST
Date: 1 Dec 86 11:58 PST
From: zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: reminder
To: folks@csli.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <861201-115832-1665@Xerox>
just a reminder:
The Lexical Project is pleased to announce a talk by
Bill Foley (Australian National University)
on
Accusativity and Ergativity in Yimas of New Guinea.
This talk will look a both the morphological and syntactic patterns in
Yimas, a morphological complex language of the split ergative type. It
will argue that Yimas is a split English-Dyirbal type language,
underlyingly accusative in the first and second person and ergative in
the third. The talk will be informal and discussion and objections
encouraged throughout.
Time: 3 p.m. Tuesday, december 2nd; Trailer seminar Room (place not
confirmed)
Note the change from the normal hour and day!!!
Annie
∂01-Dec-86 1234 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM tinlunch pre-newsletter
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 12:34:50 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 1 Dec 86 12:25:19-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 01 DEC 86 12:17:53 PST
Date: 1 Dec 86 12:17 PST
From: zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: tinlunch pre-newsletter
To: folks@csli.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <861201-121753-1695@Xerox>
As i wasn't well organized enough to get this in the previous
newsletter, here a quick description of the topic of next tinlunch:
paper: B.Lvin and M.Rappoport: What to do with theta-Roles?
When EST won the linguistic wars (Newmeyer's version of linguistic
history), lexical semantics went out of fashion in mainstream generative
grammar but, as is often the case with victories that are the results of
power politics rather than reason, the problems that were raised in the
generative semantics research remained unsolved and recent years have
seen them resurface. At this point several attempts to specify the role
of lexical semantics in syntax are under elaboration. Among the debated
issues are 1. the way semantic information has to be represented in the
lexicon; 2. the number and the properties of the levels of
representation needed to link semantics and syntax.
The paper tries to give a partial answer to these questions from a GB
related view. I choose it because that point of view will most likely
not be widely represented among the live participants at the tin lunch.
The main purpose of the lunch should be a discussion of the general
issues raised in the paper rather than a critique of the paper itself.
Other relevant recent writings on the topic include: Dowty (1986): On
the semantic content of thematic roles; Jackendoff (1986) The status of
Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory; Foley and Van Valin (1984):
Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar; and Kiparsky's manuscript on
Morphosyntax.
If you send me a request, i can make you a copy of the Dowty and/or
Jackendoff paper.
Annie
∂01-Dec-86 2014 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 20:14:13 PST
Received: from ames-io.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 1 Dec 86 20:11:10-PST
Received: from MER by IO with VMS ;
Mon, 1 Dec 86 18:41:58 PST
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 86 18:41:58 PST
From: WELCH%MER@ames-io.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: @sig03.dis
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Wednesday, Dec. 3, 1986, 7:30 PM
Newt Purdue / ULTRA Corp.
ULTRA-High Speed Supercomputer Input and Output
CYDROME
1589 Centre Pointe Drive, Milpitas
Near Montague & Capital, east of 17
For directions: 408/943-9460
Wheelchair Access
For more information: Mary Fowler, 415/972-6531, 839-6547
∂01-Dec-86 2313 NUNBERG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU A point of usage
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Dec 86 23:12:56 PST
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 23:05:34-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: A point of usage
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Can anyone provide me with a lapidary explanation of the difference
between a theorist and a theoretician?
-------
∂02-Dec-86 0755 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Reminder of IBM/Forum party
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 07:55:05 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 07:51:22-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Reminder of IBM/Forum party
To: csd.list@Score.Stanford.EDU, csl-everyone@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
Reis@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, Peterson@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
Linvill@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, gibbons@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259599495.15.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
CSD/CSL/CIS Faculty, Staff and Students
are invited to the
Fourth Annual
party hosted by
IBM
and the
Stanford Computer Forum
Wednesday, December 3, 1986
5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Red and Gold Rooms
Faculty Club
The reception immediately follows EE380
4:15 p.m., Skilling Auditorium
Speaker: Gregory F. Pfister, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
Title: The IBM Research Parallel Processing Project (RP3)
p.s. The party idea came from Brent Hailpern after graduating. He
thought it would be fun. It has been fun! Lots of work for
the Forum staff, but still it's a PARTY! Shel Finkelstein got
the budget increased this year, so there will be more food.
-------
∂02-Dec-86 0859 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU fac mtg
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 08:59:47 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 08:57:50-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: fac mtg
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259611596.32.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The main purpose of today's faculty mtg is to consider the promotion
of Matt Ginsberg to Sr. Res. Assoc. Since scheduling the mtg, some other
things have come up that I would like us to attend to today if there
is time.
1) Consideration of reappointment of consulting Professors.
2) Possibility of new CSD billets (beyond the famous "six billets")
Background on this last item:
The School of Engineering (in connection with its preparations for
submitting a three-year budget) will be making an appeal to the
Provost for additional faculty billets. The process for their doing
this is for them to ask all of the dept heads for their wish lists.
We will be discussing at SOE excom mtgs our billet needs. The process
is designed to be very collegial---everyone suggests many more billets
than they will ever get, we discuss the merits of the various proposals,
and Dean Eustis hopes that some movement toward consensus will take place.
Probably we will all give highest priority, of course, to our own
suggestions, and what will be meaningful will be peoples' second
choice priorities. That is, if each department places its highest priority
vote on its own billet requests but if they all think that CSD's
suggestions are the next-most meritorious, that would be good for CSD.
In the end, I suppose, Jim Gibbons and the Dean's staff will have the
final say about how billets get assigned (if indeed they are successful
in getting commitments from Rosse).
I am coming on strong for four more billets (beyond the 6 earlier
assigned to CSD/CSL) and have suggested the following important areas:
1) Natural Language Processing (I think it begins to border on the
embarrassing that CSD has no one working in this important area);
2) Robotics; 3) Scientific Computing; 4) Foundations of Computer
Science. These suggestions are made against a background of looking
carefully at our current strengths, plans for additional hiring toward
the earlier 6 billets, and anticipation of importance of these
areas in the future. (By the way, it is important for us to understand
that we cannot ask for four "general billets" that we will use as
best suits us as the times and circumstances suggest. SOE is not
going to approve any blank checks, and even if it would, blank check
proposals will not compete well against specific proposals being put
forward by the other departments.)
We can discuss all of this in more detail this afternoon, and I also
invite individual responses to this message. -Nils
-------
∂02-Dec-86 1110 FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU visiting
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 11:10:37 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 11:02:02-PST
From: Marilyn Ford <FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: visiting
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Just to let people know -- I'm visiting CSLI for the next 6 weeks
and would love to talk to anyone interested in language processing or
reasoning. I'm in Casita 43 and my extension is 3 - 0488.
Marilyn Ford
-------
∂02-Dec-86 1210 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:southall.pa@Xerox.COM Re: A point of usage
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 12:10:47 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 2 Dec 86 12:03:31-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 02 DEC 86 12:04:27 PST
Date: 2 Dec 86 11:59 PST
From: southall.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: A point of usage
In-reply-to: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>'s message of
Mon, 1 Dec 86 23:05:34 PST
To: Nunberg@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <861202-120427-2936@Xerox>
How about this: a theorist is someone who studies or
elaborates theories, while a theoretician is someone
who applies them to problems? (Cf. "technician"; but
there's no "technist".)
New usages: does "enqueue" count along with "agenda"?
r
∂02-Dec-86 1217 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu CARLETON UNIV. S.C.S. TECHNICAL REPORTS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 12:15:39 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 2 Dec 86 11:59:02-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 2 Dec 86 11:52:48 PST
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 86 12:01:04 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: CARLETON UNIV. S.C.S. TECHNICAL REPORTS
Date: 28 Nov 86 12:10:00 EST
From: DEHNE <F95DEHNP@CARLETON.BITNET>
Subject: CARLETON UNIV. S.C.S. TECHNICAL REPORTS
Message_id: <C022.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 2 Dec 1986 14:43:27-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T S
School of Computer Science
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
KlS 5B6
SCS-TR-50 The Design of a Program Editor Based on Constraints
_______ Christopher A. Carter and Wilf R. LaLonde, May l984.
SCS-TR-5l Discretized Linear Inaction-Penalty Learning Automata
B.J. Oommen and Eldon Hansen, May l984.
out of print
_______
SCS-TR-52 Sense of Direction, Topological Awareness and
Communication Complexity
_______ Nicola Santoro, May l984.
SCS-TR-53 Optimal List Organizing Strategy Which Uses
Stochastic Move-to-Front Operations
_______ B.J. Oommen, June l984.
SCS-TR-54 Rectilinear Computational Geometry
J. Sack, June l984.
SCS-TR-55 An Efficient, Implicit Double-Ended Priority Queue
M.D. Atkinson, Joerg-R. Sack, Nicola Santoro,
________ T. Strothotte, July84.
SCS-TR-56 Dynamic Multipaging: A Multidimensional Structure
for Fast Associative Searching
________ E. Otoo, T.H. Merrett, August l984.
SCS-TR-57 Specialization, Generalization and Inheritance
_______ Wilf R. LaLonde, John R. Pugh, August l984.
SCS-TR-58 Computer Access Methods for Extendible Arrays of
Varying Dimensions
_______ E. Otoo, August l984.
SCS-TR-59 Area-Efficient Embeddings of Trees
_______ J.P. Corriveau, Nicola Santoro, August l984.
SCS-TR-60 Uniquely Colourable m-Dichromatic Oriented Graphs
_______ V. Neumann-Lara, N. Santoro, J. Urrutia, August l984.
SCS-TR-6l Analysis of Distributed Algorithms for Extrema
Finding in a Ring
_______ D. Rotem, E, Korach and N. Santoro, August l984.
SCS-TR-62 On Zigzag Permutations and Comparisons of Adjacent
Elements
out-of-print M.D. Atkinson, Ocober l984. See Information
_______ Processing Letters 21 ('85) 187-189
SCS-TR-63 Sets of Integers with Distinct Differences
_______ M.D. Atkinson, A. Hassenklover, October l984.
SCS-TR-64 Teaching Fifth Generation Computing: The Importance
of Small Talk
Wilf R. LaLonde, Dave A. Thomas, John R. Pugh,
_______ October l984.
SCS-TR-65 An Extremely Fast Minimum Spanning Circle Algorithm
_______ B.J. Oommen, October l984.
SCS-TR-66 On the Futility of Arbitrarily Increasing Memory
Capabilities of Stochastic Learning Automata
_______ B.J. Oommen, October l984. Revised May l985.
SCS-TR-67 Heaps in Heaps
T. Strothotte, J.-R. Sack, November l984.
_______ Revised April l985.
SCS-TR-68 Partial Orders and Comparison Problems
out-of-print M.D. Atkinson, November l984. See Congressus
Numerantium 47 ('86), 77-88
_______
SCS-TR-69 On the Expected Communication Complexity of
Distributed Selection
________ N. Santoro, J.B. Sidney, S.J. Sidney, February l985.
SCS-TR-70 Features of Fifth Generation Languages: A Panoramic
View
_______ Wilf R. LaLonde, John R. Pugh, March l985.
SCS-TR-7l Actra: The Design of an Industrial Fifth Generation
Smalltalk System
_______ David A. Thomas, Wilf R. LaLonde, April l985.
SCS-TR-72 Minmaxheaps, Orderstatisticstrees and their
Application to the Coursemarks Problem
_______ M.D. Atkinson, J.-R. Sack, N. Santoro, T. Strothotte, March l985
SCS-TR-73 Designing Communities of Data Types
_______ Wilf R. LaLonde, May l985.
SCS-TR-74 Absorbing and Ergodic Discretized Two Action Learning Automata
B. John Oommen, May l985.
out of print
_______
SCS-TR-75 Optimal Parallel Merging Without Memory Conflicts
_______ Selim Akl and Nicola Santoro, May l985
SCS-TR-76 List Organizing Strategies Using Stochastic
Move-to-Front and Stochastic Move-to-Rear Operations
_______ B. John Oommen, May 1985.
SCS-TR-77 Linearizing the Directory Growth in Order Preserving
Extendible Hashing
_______ E.J. Otoo, July 1985.
SCS-TR-78 Improving Semijoin Evaluation in Distributed Query
Processing
_______ E.J. Otoo, N. Santoro, D. Rotem, July 1985.
SCS-TR-79 On the Problem of Translating an Elliptic Object
Through a Workspace of Elliptic Obstacles
_______ B.J. Oommen, I. Reichstein, July 1985.
SCS-TR-80 Smalltalk - Discovering the System
_______ W. LaLonde, J. Pugh, D. Thomas, October l985.
SCS-TR-81 A Learning Automation Solution to the Stochastic
Minimum Spanning Circle Problem
_______ B.J. Oommen, October 1985.
SCS-TR-82 Separability of Sets of Polygons
________ Frank Dehne, Joerg-R. Sack, October 1985.
SCS-TR-83 Extensions of Partial Orders of Bounded Width
_______ M.D. Atkinson and H.W. Chang, November 1985.
SCS-TR-84 Deterministic Learning Automata Solutions to the
Object Partitioning Problem
_______ B. John Oommen, D.C.Y. Ma, November 1985
SCS-TR-85 Selecting Subsets of the Correct Density
_______ M.D. Atkinson, December 1985
SCS-TR-86 Robot Navigation in Unknown Terrains Using Learned
Visiblity Graphs. Part I: The Disjoint Convex
Obstacles Case
________ B. J. Oommen, S.S. Iyengar, S.V.N. Rao, R.L. Kashyap, February
1986
SCS-TR-87 Breaking Symmetry in Synchronous Networks
________ Greg N. Frederickson, Nicola Santoro, April 1986
SCS-TR-88 Data Structures and Data Types: An Object-Oriented
Approach
John R. Pugh, Wilf R. LaLonde and David A. Thomas,
________ April 1986
SCS-TR-89 Ergodic Learning Automata Capable of Incorporating
Apriori Information
________ B. J. Oommen, May 1986
SCS-TR-90 Iterative Decomposition of Digital Systems and Its
Applications
_______ Vaclav Dvorak, May 1986.
SCS-TR-91 Actors in a Smalltalk Multiprocessor: A Case for
Limited Parallelism
Wilf R. LaLonde, Dave A. Thomas and John R. Pugh,
________ May 1986
SCS-TR-92 ACTRA - A Multitasking/Multiprocessing Smalltalk
David A. Thomas, Wilf R. LaLonde, and John R. Pugh,
________ May 1986
SCS-TR-93 Why Exemplars are Better Than Classes
________ Wilf R. LaLonde, May 1986
SCS-TR-94 An Exemplar Based Smalltalk
Wilf R. LaLonde, Dave A. Thomas and John R. Pugh,
________ May 1986
SCS-TR-95 Recognition of Noisy Subsequences Using Constrained
Edit Distances
________ B. John Oommen, June 1986
SCS-TR-96 Guessing Games and Distributed Computations in
Synchronous Networks
J. van Leeuwen, N. Santoro, J. Urrutia and S. Zaks,
_______ June 1986.
SCS-TR-97 Bit vs. Time Tradeoffs for Distributed Elections in
Synchronous Rings
________ M. Overmars and N. Santoro, June 1986.
SCS-TR-98 Reduction Techniques for Distributed Selection
________ N. Santoro and E. Suen, June 1986.
SCS-TR-99 A Note on Lower Bounds for Min-Max Heaps
________ A. Hasham and J.-R. Sack, June 1986.
SCS-TR-102 Computing on a Systolic Screen: Hulls,
Contours, and Applications
__________ F. Dehne, J.-R. Sack and N. Santoro, Oct.1986
SCS-TR-103 Stochastic Automata Solutions to the Object
Partitioning Problem
__________ B.J. Oomen and D.C.Y Ma, November 1986
- To order copies,
- to be included in the mailing list for further technical
report titles , or
- to initiate a technical report exchange between departments
please send mail to
SCSTECH@CARLETON (BITNET)
or write to
Technical Report Librarian
School of Computer Science
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada KlS 5B6
Tel.: (613) 564-7549
--------------------------------------------------------------
Please include your correct (non electronic) mailing address.
--------------------------------------------------------------
∂02-Dec-86 1225 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Thank You
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 12:25:47 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 12:23:15-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Thank You
To: officers: ;
cc: MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12259648989.39.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I would like to thank the members of the Council for the lovely
wedding gift of two prints by a local SF artist. We were quite
suprised and pleased by the gesture.
By-the-way, ny husband's name is Richard Swan and was once affiliated
with CMU as an assistant professor, but currently works at a VLSI
tester company, Megatest.
Thank you again for the most generous gift!
Cheers,
Claudia
PS I know "Amy Vanderbilt" suggests the hand writing of personal
thank-yous, but ....
-------
∂02-Dec-86 1536 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER and ROOM CHANGE: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH: Haim Gaifman
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 15:35:49 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Tue, 2 Dec 86 15:29:38-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA00517; Tue,
2 Dec 86 15:31:29 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 15:31:24-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER and ROOM CHANGE: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH: Haim Gaifman
To: planlunch_reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 2-Dec-86 15:31:24.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODELLING COMPUTATIONS OF FUNCTIONS IN CONCURRENT PROCESSES
Haim Gaifman (Joint work with Vaughn Pratt)
SRI International and Stanford University (GAIFMAN@SRI-AI)
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, December 3
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
A concurrent computation (or a part of it) can be described by an
abstract set of events, a type-function associating with each event
its type (action) and a set of constraints on their temporal ordering.
An object which consists of these components is called a *prosset*
(pre-order specification set). We use prossets in order to model
concurrency. They are intended to have, in the study of concurrency,
a role analogous to that of strings in the study of sequentiality.
(Strings are obtained as the special case in which the constraints
impose a total order). A *process* is defined as set of prossets.
Basic operations on networks include combining networks by wirings and
forming loops, and are expressible by means of algebraic operations
on processes. A general theorem establishes the desired connection
between this way of modelling networks and the least fixpoint
semantics which defines the computed function. Kahn's fixpoint
semantics for networks turns out to be a particular corollary
of this theorem.
There is a natural generalization of this for non-deterministic
computations which shows to what extent non-deterministic concurrent
computations (which compute many-valued functions) can be treated
by the least fixpoint semantics without giving rise to the Brock-
Ackerman anomaly.
-------
∂02-Dec-86 1727 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU more about the 12 December Party . . .
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Dec 86 17:27:08 PST
Date: Tue 2 Dec 86 17:19:19-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: more about the 12 December Party . . .
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
CSLI HOLIDAY PARTY
Friday, 12 December from 6:00 p.m. -- 10:00 p.m.
Burgess Park Recreation Center, Room 105.
The potluck dinner will begin at 6:00 p.m on Friday, 12 December. You
can count on plenty of turkey, ham, and wine and cold drinks being
there already, and, we hope each of you will bring other things to help
fill the table -- salads, vegetables, bread, other main course dishes,
deserts, coffee, etc. -- or as an alternative help clean up afterwards.
Suzy Parker will have a sign-up list at the front desk in Ventura
Hall. Sign up there, or call her at 723-0628. We'll try to make sure
we get a good distribution of all essential and festive nutrients, and
really do hope some of you will help straighten things up as an
alternative to bringing food.
Hope to see you all there!
Note:
(Burgess Park is near the corner of Alma and Ravenswood in Menlo Park.
The Recreation Center is at 700 Alma, the second building on Alma
south of Ravenswood. )
-------
∂03-Dec-86 0850 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Terry Winograd
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Dec 86 08:50:46 PST
Date: Wed 3 Dec 86 08:48:20-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Terry Winograd
To: AC@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259872008.13.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils asked me to let you know that as of September, 1986, Terry Winograd's
appointment is 100% Commputer Science. I'm sorry that I forgot to send this
message earlier.
Betty
-------
∂03-Dec-86 1044 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLBs
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Dec 86 10:43:54 PST
Date: Wed 3 Dec 86 10:38:00-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12259891975.31.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the next two talks follow.
4-December-1986: Russell Impagliazzo(UC Berkeley)
Direct Zero-Knowledge Protocols for NP-complete Problems
A zero-knowledge protocol is a way for one party knowing a solution to
to a problem to convince another party that the problem is solvable
without revealing any other information about the problem.
Earlier protocols for NP-complete problems seemed to rely on the
fact that solutions to these problems, such as Hamiltonian Cicuit
or Graph 3-colorability, can be verified through ``geometric
properties''; i.e., verification of the solutions does not
involve computation of any complexity.
However, the same techniques can be extended to give general protocols
that enable one party to verify that she has performed a fixed
arithmetic, Boolean or Turing machine computation correctly, without
revealing any information about either the inputs or the outputs.
This leads to direct protocols for problems such as Subset Sum and
Satisfiability, as well as a general method for converting a
polynomial-time nondetermenistic Turing Machine program into a
zero-knowledge protocol for the language it recognizes. A slight
adaptation allowing probabilistic computation gives a general method
for converting any protocol into an equivalent zero-knowledge protocol.
***** Time and place: December 4, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
11-December-1986 Marshall Bern (UC - Berkeley)
A More General Special Case of the Steiner Tree Problem
The Steiner tree problem on networks asks for a minimum length tree
spanning a given subset N of the vertices in the network. (The vertices
not in N are optional.) This problem is NP-complete even for planar networks.
I'll give a polynomial-time algorithm for the Steiner tree problem
on planar networks in the special case that there are a small number of
faces which contain all the vertices in N. I'll then show improvements
of the basic algorithm as it applies to the rectilinear Steiner problem.
My basic algorithm is a refinement of a dynamic programming algorithm due to
Dreyfus and Wagner that is, in general, exponential time.
***** Time and place: December 11, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂03-Dec-86 1753 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, December 4, No. 9
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Dec 86 17:53:11 PST
Date: Wed 3 Dec 86 16:41:57-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, December 4, No. 9
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
_____________________________________________________________________________
December 4, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 9
_____________________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, December 4, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: What to do with theta-Roles?
Conference Room by B. Levin and M. Rappaport
Discussion led by Annie Zaenen
(Zaenen.pa@xerox.com)
Abstract in the this Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Rational Behavior in Resource-bounded Agents
Room G-19 David Israel
(Israel@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in the this Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Talk
Redwood Hall Rational Speech Activity: The Case of Discourse
Room G-19 Politeness
Professor Asa Kasher
University of Tel Aviv, Dept. of Philosophy
Abstract in the this Calendar
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, December 11, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: Differences in Rule Type and their
Conference Room Structural Basis
by Stephen R. Anderson
Discussion led by Donald Churma
(Churma@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in the next Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Rational Agency
Room G-19 Phil Cohen
(pcohen@sri-warbucks.arpa)
Abstract in the next Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: What to do with theta-Roles?
Discussion led by Annie Zaenen
December 4
When Extended Standard Theory won the linguistic wars (Newmeyer's
version of linguistic history), lexical semantics went out of fashion
in mainstream generative grammar but, as is often the case with
victories that are the results of power politics rather than reason,
the problems that were raised in the generative semantics research
remained unsolved and recent years have seen them resurface. At this
point several attempts to specify the role of lexical semantics in
syntax are under elaboration. Among the debated issues are (1) the way
semantic information has to be represented in the lexicon; (2) the
number and the properties of the levels of representation needed to
link semantics and syntax.
The paper tries to give a partial answer to these questions from a
Government Binding related view. I choose it because that point of
view will most likely not be widely represented among the live
participants at the TINLunch. The main purpose of the lunch should be
a discussion of the general issues raised in the paper rather than a
critique of the paper itself.
Other relevant recent writings on the topic include: Dowty (1986):
On the semantic content of thematic roles; Jackendoff (1986): The
status of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory; Foley and Van Valin
(1984): Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar; and Kiparsky's
manuscript on Morphosyntax.
--------------
THIS WEEK'S SEMINAR
Rational Behavior in Resource-bounded Agents
David Israel
December 4
Members of the Rational Agency Project at CSLI (RatAg) have been
involved in research to develop an architecture for the production of
rational behavior in resource-bounded agents. The overall aim of this
work is to combine techniques that have been constructed in artificial
intelligence for automating means-end reasoning with a computational
instantiation of techniques that have been developed in decision
theory for weighing alternative courses of action. The focus is on
ensuring that the resulting synthesis is a viable architecture for
agents who, like humans and robots, are resource-bounded, i.e., unable
to perform arbitrarily large computations in constant time.
Predicating the architecture on the fact that agents have resource
bounds will enable its use both as a device for producing rational
behavior in robots that are situated in dynamic, real-world
environments, and as a model of human rational behavior. In taking
seriously the problem of resource boundedness, we draw heavily on the
view of plans as ``filters'' on practical reasoning. We are concerned
with determining what regularities there are in the relationship
between an agent and her environment that can be exploited in the
design of the filtering process.
--------------
THIS WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Rational Speech Activity: The Case of Discourse Politeness
Asa Kasher
December 4
The paper will briefly outline the role to be played by rationality
considerations in governing understanding and production of speech
acts. It will be argued that a certain aspect of rationality
considerations, namely cost, has been neglected. Its importance will
be demonstrated in the case of discourse politeness as well as in some
apparent counter-examples to Grice's conversational maxims.
-------
∂04-Dec-86 0121 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #81
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Dec 86 01:21:13 PST
Date: Wed 3 Dec 1986 11:26-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #81
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 4 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 81
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Thesis,
LP Library - PDProlog & Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 86 13:14 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim@cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: Defense
Dissertation Defense
Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
A HIGHER-ORDER LOGIC AS THE BASIS FOR LOGIC PROGRAMMING
GOPALAN NADATHUR
(gopalan@cis.upenn.edu)
The objective of this thesis is to provide a formal basis for
higher-order features in the paradigm of logic programming. Towards
this end, a non-extensional form of higher-order logic that is based
on Church's simple theory of types is used to provide a generalisation
to the definite clauses of first-order logic. Specifically, a class
of formulas that are called higher-order definite sentences is
described. These formulas extend definite clauses by replacing
first-order terms by the terms of a typed lambda calculus and by
providing for quantification over predicate and function variables.
It is shown that these formulas together with the notion of a proof in
the higher-order logic provide an abstract description of computation
that is akin to the one in the first-order case. While the
construction of a proof in a higher-order logic is often complicated
by the task of finding appropriate substitutions for predicate
variables, it is shown that the necessary substitutions for predicate
variables can be tightly constrained in the context of higher-order
definite sentences. This observation enables the description of a
complete theorem-proving procedure for these formulas. The procedure
constructs proofs essentially by interweaving higher-order unification
with backchaining on implication, and constitutes a generalisation to
the higher-order context of the well-known SLD-resolution procedure
for definite clauses. The results of these investigations are used to
describe a logic programming language called lambda Prolog. This
language contains all the features of a language such as Prolog, and,
in addition, possesses certain higher-order features. The uses of
these additional features are illustrated, and it is shown how the use
of the terms of a (typed) lambda calculus as data structures provides
a source of richness to the logic programming paradigm.
Thesis Supervisor: Dale Miller
Committee: Tim Finin, Jean Gallier (Chairman), Andre Scedrov, Richard
Statman
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 86 23:25:46 GMT
From: David Fiore <ucdavis!ucrmath!hope!fiore@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: PD PROLOG
This is in response to all the letters I have recieved requesting PD
PROLOG. I have had very little luck responding to the letters, much
less getting copies of PD PROLOG to those that wanted it. I am
therefore submitting for the second time a copy of PD PROLOG in
uuencoded format to the Digest.
Good luck with the program!
-- David Fiore
UseNet : ...!ucdavis!ucrmath!hope!fiore
BITNET : consult@ucrvms
------------------------------
Date: Wed 3 Dec 86 11:25:01-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: PDProlog
[cwr]
I left the following files in SCORE:'s Prolog directory. You'll
need these to use PDProlog.
PS:<PROLOG>
PDPROLOG.CODE.2;P775252 75 189686(7) 3-Dec-86 11:14:13 RESTIVO
.DOCUMENTATION.2;P775252 24 61299(7) 3-Dec-86 11:15:14 RESTIVO
.HELP.1;P775252 1 711(7) 3-Dec-86 11:08:41 RESTIVO
.UUDECODE.2;P775252 3 5560(7) 3-Dec-86 11:18:03 RESTIVO
.UUENCODE.2;P775252 2 4872(7) 3-Dec-86 11:18:59 RESTIVO
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂04-Dec-86 0829 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU ICIT Dissertation Awards
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Dec 86 08:28:58 PST
Date: Thu 4 Dec 86 08:26:02-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ICIT Dissertation Awards
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12260130093.9.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
ICIT (The International Center for Information Technologies)
is offering up to five awards for outstanding doctoral dissertations.
The criteria for selecting each winning dissertation are:
1. It makes an original and substantive contribution to our understanding
of how to use information technology effectively in organizations.
2. It is scholarly and of high research standards, in terms of theory
and/or method.
3. It is relevant to and readable by practititioners.
Dissertations submitted and accepted between 1/1/86 and 12/31/86
are eligible.
Prizes are $10K for each of the 5 chosen.
If you have an advisee (or former advisee) who you consider a likely
candidate, please let me know.
Carolyn
p.s. This applies to CSL and CSD students (EE and CS)
-------
∂04-Dec-86 1255 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU SPRING ROLLS/WHITE PLAZA/TOMORROW!!!
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Dec 86 12:52:32 PST
Date: Thu 4 Dec 86 12:38:02-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: SPRING ROLLS/WHITE PLAZA/TOMORROW!!!
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: krix@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
* * * * * *
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* * * * *
* * * * *
* * *
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * * * *
* * * *
* * * * * *
IT'S THE HOLIDAY SEASON.........* * *
* * * *
* * AND THE TIME OF THE YEAR....*
* * *
FOR GOOD WILL TOWARDS ALL PEOPLE...... * *
* * *
* * * *
* * IT'S A SEASON OF CHEER.....
* * * *
* * *
SO, YOU ARE ALL INVITED TO COME TO THE * *
*
* * STANFORD CHRISTMAS FAIRE....
* AND SHARE IN THE DELECTABLE DELIGHTS OF...
* * OUR VERY OWN, BACH-HONG TRAN!!! *
* * * * *
* SPRING ROLLS ! AGAIN! * *
* * *
COME ON! AREN'T YOU TIRED OF THE SAME OLD SANDWICH, SALAD AND A COOKIE?!!
* * *
* * *
* THEN GET ON OVER TO TRESIDDER UNION/WHITE PLAZA AND...
*
* * * * FOLLOW YOUR NOSE! *
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * * *
* * * *
BACH-HONG'S SPRING ROLLS----TOMORROW, SAT , SUN------
@ THE STANFORD CHRISTMAS FAIRE, WHITE PLAZA, U.S.A.-----
* * *
* * * * *
tell her SANTA sent you............* *
* * * * * *
-------
∂04-Dec-86 1318 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu POPL '87
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Dec 86 13:18:00 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 4 Dec 86 12:57:54-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Thu, 4 Dec 86 12:51:26 PST
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 86 13:00:31 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: POPL '87
Date: 4 Dec 1986 15:36:59-EST (Thursday)
From: "Victor S. Miller" <VICTOR@YKTVMX>
Subject: POPL '87
Message_id: <C023.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 4 Dec 1986 15:40:37-EST (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Principles of Programming Languages '87 (POPL)
--------------------------------
o Co-Chair - Mark Wegman, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research
Center
o Co-Chair - Steve Muchnick, Sun Microsystems
o Program Chairman - Michael O'Donnell, University of
Chicago
o Local Arrangements - Manfred Paul, Institut fueur
Informatik Technische Universitaet Mueunchen
Registration Form
All fees are listed in US $. Please send this form
along with a check or money order (payable to ACM Sympo-
sium on Principles of Programming Languages) one of:
John Sopka Uta Weber
ACM POPL Institut fuer Informatik
Box 3682 Technische Universitaet Muenchen
Nashua, NH 03081 Arcisstrasse 21
USA D-8000 Muenchen 2 / FRG
Tel.: 49 - (0)89 / 21058176
The regular registration rate includes three lunches,
the reception Tuesday evening, coffee breaks and a copy
of the proceedings. The student rate includes only the
reception Tuesday evening, coffee breaks and a copy of
the proceedings. Additional copies of the proceedings
will be $18.00 US.
Before 1/1/87 After 1/1/87
Member of ACM and either
SIGACT, SIGPLAN or GI $175 $235
ACM, SIG or GI
member only $190 $250
non-member $225 $285
student $60 $100
Name
Affiliation
Address
City State Zip
Country
Telephone or Net Address
Vegetarian Meals: Kosher Meals:
Hotel Reservation Form
Please return before December 20, 1986 to:
Penta Hotel
Hochstrasse 3
D-8000 Muenchen 80, FRG
x49 - 89 / 4485555
Please reserve (\# singles at DM 140,-)
(\# doubles at DM 185,-)
Date of arrival
Date of departure
Name
Address
City State Zip
Country
Credit Card Number
Amex ↑ | Visa ↑ | Master Card ↑ | Diners ↑ |
General Note: All local prices are given in Deutsche Marks
(DM). The rate of exchange fluctuates, but at the beginning
of October, 1986, 1 DM was equal to about $.50 US. The only
meals included with the conference registration fee will be
lunch on all three days (January 21-23, 1987). Any special
dietary requests should be included with conference regis-
tration.
Transportation: The Munich airport is about 25km from the
center of town. There is a bus to the main station. From
there you can take the underground ("S" with every number)
in the direction "Ostbahnhof" to the stop "Rosenheimer
Platz". A taxi from the airport to the Penta Hotel costs
about DM 20,-.
HOTEL: The conference hotel is the Penta Hotel, Hochstrasse
3, D-8000 Muenchen 80, FRG. Its telephone is: 49 - 89 /
4485555. The rates per night are: DM 140,- (single room),
DM 185,- (double room). You may ask for breakfast to be
served for an additional DM 18,- per person, per night. The
Deadline for the special rate at the hotel is December 20,
1986. The conference has reserved a block of rooms at this
special rate from January 20 through 24, 1987.
There will be a cocktail party the evening before the con-
ference: January 20, 1987.
Things to do: The American writer Thomas Wolfe said that
"Munich is a kind of German heaven". In addition to its fa-
mous beer halls, it has a large number of art galleries and
museums, and the castle Schloss Nymphenburg. Its technical
museum is the largest in the world. The automobile manufac-
turer BMW also has a museum and factory tour available. De-
tails about these will be available at the registration desk
of the conference.
Weather: The average temperature in Munich in late January
is 28 F (2 C), and there is a good possibility of snow.
Participants from North America should find the weather sim-
ilar to that of New York City at the same time of year.
Travel Arrangements for Participants from North America:-
Negotiations are underway with several airlines to obtain
cheaper fares or waivers of minimum stay requirements. The
specific arrangements will depend on the number of people
traveling with each airline. In addition, a group travel
grant has been requested from NSF. Although first priority
will go to authors, some travel money may be available for
other participants from North America.
People interested in more information about special air
fares or in applying for travel support should send a note
to Prof. Susan L. Graham (preferably by e-mail) indicating
whether they intend to stay in Munich less than 7 days,
whether they must use a U.S. carrier, and from which North
American city they will travel. An electronic mailing list
will be established to provide up-to-date information about
travel arrangements.
Professor Susan L. Graham, Computer Science Division - EECS,
University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
(graham@berkeley.edu or ucbvax!graham)
∂04-Dec-86 1325 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu How to get the POPL special airline fare
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Dec 86 13:24:57 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 4 Dec 86 12:58:30-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Thu, 4 Dec 86 12:52:09 PST
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 86 13:01:38 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: How to get the POPL special airline fare
Date: 3 Dec 1986 12:14:44-EST (Wednesday)
From: Mark Wegman <wegman@ibm.com>
Subject: How to get the POPL special airline fare
Message_id: <C024.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 4 Dec 1986 15:49:01-EST (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Send requests to the userid popl@ibm.com for information about the special
airline fares for available to attendees of the Principles of Programming
Languages Conference in January 1987.
∂05-Dec-86 1148 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice PLANLUNCH -- Wednesday 12/10 -- Roger Hale
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 11:47:51 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 5 Dec 86 11:40:59-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA02792; Fri,
5 Dec 86 11:44:45 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 11:44:40-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: PLANLUNCH -- Wednesday 12/10 -- Roger Hale
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 5-Dec-86 11:44:40.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
NOTICE CHANGE IN USUAL DAY AND TIME!! (Wednesday, 4:15)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USING INTERVAL TEMPORAL LOGIC FOR PARALLEL PROGRAMMING
Roger Hale
Computer Laboratory
Cambridge University, England
4:15 PM, WEDNESDAY, December 10
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Interval Temporal Logic (ITL) was originally proposed by Moszkowski
for reasoning about the behaviour of hardware devices. Since then it
has shown itself to have a much wider field of application, and has
been used to specify a variety of concurrent and time-dependent
systems at different levels of abstraction. Moreover, it has been
found that a useful subset of ITL specifications are executable in the
programming language TEMPURA. Experience gained from prototyping
temporal logic specifications in Tempura leads us to believe that this
is a practical (and enjoyable) way to produce formal specifications.
In the talk I will present some temporal logic specifications which
are also Tempura programs, and will indicate how these programs are
executed by the Tempura interpreter. I will give examples of both
high- and low-level specifications, and will describe a way to relate
different levels of abstraction. In conclusion, I will outline some
future plans, which include the provision of a decision support system
for Tempura.
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1203 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Newsletter item
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 12:03:28 PST
Mail-From: LAURI created at 1-Dec-86 16:19:50
Date: Mon 1 Dec 86 16:19:50-PST
From: Lauri Karttunen <Lauri@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Newsletter item
To: Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
ReSent-Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 11:50:56-PST
ReSent-From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Bente Maegaard from the University of Copenhangen is visiting CSLI until
Dec. 12. Prof. Maegaard is the head of the liaison group for the
EUROTRA machine translation project. EUROTRA is the machine translation
project of the European Communities and involves 9 languages. The
Liaison group is the committee where the heads of language groups meet
once a month to make plans, to evaluate results and to take decisions in
all technical matters of the project.
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1223 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU PhD Orals of AFLB interest
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 12:17:26 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 12:13:25-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: PhD Orals of AFLB interest
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12260433633.41.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
University Oral Examination
A Spectral Lower-Bound Technique for the Size of
Decision Trees and Two-Level Circuits
Yigal Brandman (yigal@isl.stanford.edu)
Department of Electrical Engineering
Abstract
Given an arbitrary Boolean function f, a universal lower bound method will
be shown for the size of any decision tree that computes f, the average
number of decisions in any decision tree that computes f, the length of any
path in any decision tree that computes f, the number of AND gates in any
two level AND/OR logic circuit that computes f and the number of OR gates
in any two level OR/AND logic circuit that computes f. The Bounds are based on
the power spectrum coefficients of the n-dimensional Fourier Transform of f.
The bounding techniques are also applicable to the following distributed
communication problem: Suppose n input bits are distributed between n persons,
each person gets to know only the value of one input bit.
On the average, what is the minimum number of bits that are needed to be
exchanged among the individuals to compute f ?
The bounds vary from constant to exponential, and are tight in many cases.
Examples will be shown by applying the method for the implementation of
several functions.
Time and place: Friday, Dec 12, 9:30 am at AEL 109. Refreshments
will be served at 9:15.
(For those who don't know what AEL means: it is the Applied Electronics
Laboratory located between Sequoia Lane and Via Palou near the Hansen
Labs. It might be appropriate for me to suggest a *circuitous* route to
AEL, but I'll refrain from doing so. Alex)
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1308 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Directions to AEL
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 13:08:33 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 13:04:02-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Directions to AEL
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12260442847.41.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
It has been suggested that ``On Via Crespi, opposite McCullough,
next to ERL'' is a better description of where AEL is.
Alex
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1353 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bente Maergaard
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 13:53:47 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 13:45:23-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Bente Maergaard
To: researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, visitors-patrol@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
(415) 723-9007
Bente Maegaard from the University of Copenhangen is visiting CSLI until
Dec. 12. Prof. Maegaard is the head of the liaison group for the
EUROTRA machine translation project. EUROTRA is the machine translation
project of the European Communities and involves 9 languages. The
Liaison group is the committee where the heads of language groups meet
once a month to make plans, to evaluate results and to take decisions in
all technical matters of the project.
Bente Maergaard is housed in Casita 51, and can be reached at
725-2319 or via her netmail address, Maergaard@csli.
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1533 KAY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Seminar on EUROTRA
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 15:33:47 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 15:24:47-PST
From: Martin Kay <Kay@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Seminar on EUROTRA
To: FOLKS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
On Wednesday, 10th December, at noon, there will be a talk in the Ventura
Conference room on
EUROTRA
The Machine Translation Project of the European Communities.
by
Professor Bente Maegaard
University of Copenhagen,
Chairman of the Liaison Group of Eurotra.
This research and development project, which runs until 1990, was adopted by
the Council of Ministers in 1982. Is is big: covering 9 languages and 12
countries.
In the talk, she will comment on
- the background of EUROTRA
- its goals
- its organization, and
- the fundamental ideas on which it is based.
--Martin Kay
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1536 LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Bente Maegaard - Correction
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 15:36:42 PST
Date: Fri 5 Dec 86 15:25:27-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Bente Maegaard - Correction
To: researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, visitors-patrol@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
(415) 723-9007
I misspelled Bente's last name, it should be MAEGAARD -- not
Maergaard, and her netmail address is Maegaard@csli.
Leslie
-------
∂05-Dec-86 1733 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU meeting in Dallas
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 17:33:15 PST
Date: 5 Dec 1986 11:46-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: meeting in Dallas
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Dec-86 11:46:24.MATHIS>
I have just sent out some last minute documents. I hope that you
have all made your arrangements. Two messages follow: first is
cover letter on that mailing; second is draft agenda outline. If
you have any questions or comments, please be in touch. -- Bob
∂05-Dec-86 1733 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU third mailing cover letter
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 17:33:25 PST
Date: 5 Dec 1986 11:56-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: third mailing cover letter
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Dec-86 11:56:16.MATHIS>
Doc. No.: X3J13/86-015
Date: December 1, 1986
Project: X3J13 Common Lisp
Reply to:
Robert F. Mathis
9712 Ceralene Dr.
Fairfax, VA 22032
Ph: (703)425-5923
Mathis
X3J13 Members, alternates, observers, and potential participants:
This is a last minute reminder of the next meeting in Dallas on
December 10-12, 1986. If you have yet to make your reservations,
call Beverly at TI at (214)997-2108 or for general information,
Ellen Waldrum at (214)995-6716.
1. The minutes of first meeting have been delayed due to an
unforeseen sequence of unforeseeable circumstances which should
have been predictable. They are promised for the meeting in
Dallas.
2. Enclosed with this letter are the preliminary papers on
function cells and error systems.
3. At the ISO/TC97/SC22 Advisory Group meeting in Vienna, it was
decided to move ahead for a new work item on Lisp with a convenor
coming from France and a project editor coming from the United
States. This will be an item for discussion at the Dallas
meeting.
4. I had the opportunity to meet with Cathie Kachurik of the X3
Secretariat and Gary Robinson of DEC (who also happens to be
quite active in X3 and ISO/TC97) about the use of the Steele book
as a basis for the eventual standard. This issue was the basis
for some motions at the last meeting, which at the current time
are out of order. In our general discussions of goals and
objectives for the X3J13 committee, we need to discuss the actual
form we envision for the eventual standard and how closely it may
be related to the Steele book or to other manuals which have been
developed by other companies.
5. Remember that after this second meeting, we will have to
propose to X3 a set of officer candidates for X3J13. If anybody
wants to serve they should be prepared to make it known at this
meeting.
6. There will be a detailed proposed agenda at the start of the
meeting, but for your planning: Wednesday afternoon will include
brief overviews of the various topics on the agenda and an
extended discussion of goals and objectives for X3J13; Thursday
morning will begin with the function/value cell discussion;
Thursday afternoon will begin with the error system discussion;
and Friday morning will be devoted to finishing up remaining
topics.
Sincerely yours,
Robert F. Mathis
Acting Chairman, X3J13
Attachments:
X3J13/86-010 "Issues of Separation in Function Cells and Value
Cells" by Gabriel and Pitman with others
X3J13/86-011 "Exceptional Situations in Lisp" by Pitman
X3J13/86-012 "Error Proposal #8 as of 8/4/86" by Pitman
X3J13/86-013 "Error Proposal #8 implementation suggestion as
of 8/4/86" by Pitman
X3J13/86-014 "Error Proposal Feedback up to 11/19/86"
∂05-Dec-86 1734 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Dallas meeting draft agenda outline
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 17:34:02 PST
Date: 5 Dec 1986 12:00-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: Dallas meeting draft agenda outline
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Dec-86 12:00:32.MATHIS>
agenda header -- 1
1 Call to Order, December 10, 1:00pm
2 Opening Remarks and Introductions
3 Approval of Agenda
4 Approval of Minutes of Sept 23-24 Meeting (Doc: 86-???)
5 Report on International Activities (Doc: 86-017)
6 Other Liaison Reports
7 Review of Goals and Objectives (Doc: 86-005)
8 Brief Overview of Technical Topics on Agenda
9 Recess, 5:00pm
agenda header -- 2
10 Call to Order, December 11, 9:00am
11 Function/Value Cells (Doc: 86-010)
12 Relationship of Common Lisp and Scheme
13 European approach to defining via levels
14 LUNCH Second Day, 12:00-1:00pm
15 Error Systems (Doc: 86-011, 86-012, 86-013, 86-014)
16 Update on object system discussions (Doc: 86-018)
17 Handling technical discussions
18 Recess, 5:00pm
agenda header -- 3
19 Call to Order, December 12, 9:00am
20 Summary of Technical Issues and Discussions
21 Planning Relative to Other Technical Issues
22 Call for Officer Candidates
23 Future Meeting Schedule (Doc: SD-04)
24 Review of Action Item Assignments
25 Adjournment, 12:00noon
∂05-Dec-86 1825 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Logisitcs for Dallas meeting
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Dec 86 18:25:39 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 5 Dec 86 21:25:36-EST
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1986 21:25 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12260501376.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Logisitcs for Dallas meeting
I have a couple of questions about local arrangements for the Dallas
meeting. Could someone from TI send the following info to this mailing
list. (My apologies if this info was in some earlier mailing -- I can't
seem to find it if so. Maybe it was on the reservation form, which I
mailed in and didn't copy.)
1. Mailing address and phone number of the Sheraton Park Central.
2. How to get there from DFW airport. Approximate price and time
required for a taxi. Is there any cheaper way to make the trip, such as
a hotel limo? A lot of us will probably be arriving 10 - noon on
Wednesday, and will be heading back to the airport after adjornment on
Friday.
Thanks,
Scott
∂08-Dec-86 0116 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #82
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 01:16:37 PST
Date: Sun 7 Dec 1986 6:58-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 858.0300
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #82
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 8 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 82
Today's Topics:
Programming - Comment Style
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Dec 86 06:04:14 GMT
From: Bruce T. Smith <ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!bsmith@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: comment style
I like that kind of comment, too. In the Prolog systems I've used,
they are only comments, so it's safe to extend it a bit.
For example:
1) Give multiple specifications when appropriate. E.g., foo(+X,-Y)
and foo(-X,+Y) might make sense for a clause, and are not the
same as foo(?X,?Y).
2) For some patterns of instantiated variables a particular argument
may be ignored. I use a prefix '_', like the anonymous variable.
3) Use types, e.g., foo(+Int,-Float).
-- Bruce T. Smith
------------------------------
Date: 3 Dec 86 12:22:01 GMT
From: R. Innis <mcvax!ukc!its63b!csrdi@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Style
In Prolog Digest V4 #80 John Cugini <cugini@nbs-vms.arpa> writes:
Many of these predicates expect certain of their arguments to be
instantiated upon invocation. When such restrictions apply it is
usually the leading arguments which are thought of as input (and
hence instantiated), and the trailing arguments as output (and
hence allowed to be uninstantiated).
A standard way (at least, in Edinburgh) of denoting the status of
arguments to a Prolog predicate is to include a comment line before
the body of the clause, in which arguments expected to be instantiated
are prefixed by '+', uninstantiated arguments by a '-', and arguments
where it doesn't matter (or where either can be used) by '?'. For
example,
%% Append(+L1, +L2, -L3)
indicates the status of the arguments to the usual use of the standard
'append' clause. To illustrate further uses, further comments could be
added, viz:
%% Append(+L1, -L2, +L3) is the calling pattern for finding if L1 is a
member %% of L3. (?L2 would also be acceptable).
In use, I've found that this notation makes Prolog code much easier to
read and understand, which given some of what is possible in Prolog is
a very desirable attribute. What say anyone else?
-- Rick Innis
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂08-Dec-86 0902 jjohnson@mitre.ARPA Re: meeting in Dallas
Received: from MITRE.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 09:00:46 PST
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 86 11:50:17 est
From: jjohnson@mitre.ARPA (Jerry Johnson)
Full-Name: Jerry Johnson
Message-Id: <8612081650.AA17339@mitre.ARPA>
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Washington, D.C.
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU, x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: meeting in Dallas
Bob
My new mailing address is
Jerry Johnson
MITRE Corp
Mail Stop W418
1820 Dolley Madison Blvd
McLean VA 22102
Jerry
∂08-Dec-86 0940 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 09:40:09 PST
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 09:35:27-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261191308.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Tomorrow is the final lunch for the Fall Quarter in MJH 146 at 12:15.
William Reynolds will be joining us for a discussion on the topic of
"Studies of the Indirect Cost Rate at Stanford".
-------
∂08-Dec-86 1134 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Open House
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 11:34:22 PST
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 11:21:51-PST
From: Gerda de Werk <DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Open House
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, staff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
students@Score.Stanford.EDU, tas@Score.Stanford.EDU,
instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, cstac-staff@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261210677.23.DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
A reminder that
you are cordially invited to our
OPEN HOUSE
WHO: Computer Science Department Course Administration and
Undergraduate Program
WHERE: CS-TAC (Computer Science - Tresidder Academic Center)
DATE: TODAY
TIME: 4:00PM - 5:00PM
-------
∂08-Dec-86 1134 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Open House
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 11:34:22 PST
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 11:21:51-PST
From: Gerda de Werk <DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Open House
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU, staff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
students@Score.Stanford.EDU, tas@Score.Stanford.EDU,
instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, cstac-staff@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: dewerk@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261210677.23.DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
A reminder that
you are cordially invited to our
OPEN HOUSE
WHO: Computer Science Department Course Administration and
Undergraduate Program
WHERE: CS-TAC (Computer Science - Tresidder Academic Center)
DATE: TODAY
TIME: 4:00PM - 5:00PM
-------
∂08-Dec-86 1203 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Budget Letter
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 12:03:41 PST
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 11:59:51-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Budget Letter
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261217595.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
A copy of the 'budget letter' which was sent to SOE is in my office (MJH 214)
if you would like to come by and take a look at it.
-Anne
-------
∂08-Dec-86 1724 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:nunberg.pa@Xerox.COM self-reflexivity (applied)
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 17:24:20 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 8 Dec 86 17:06:28-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 08 DEC 86 17:05:30 PST
Date: 8 Dec 86 17:06 PST
From: nunberg.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: self-reflexivity (applied)
To: folks@csli.stanford.edu
cc: nunberg.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <861208-170530-2745@Xerox>
Thanks for all the comments on the theorist/theoretician distinction.
No clear consensus emerged, though various of the comments were surely
lapidary and instructive. For your delectation, here are the responses:
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> Subject: A point of
usage To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Can anyone provide me with a lapidary
explanation of the difference between a theorist and a theoretician?
From: Tom Burke: A theorist makes theories, whereas a theoretician
merely studies them
From: John Perry <JOHN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>: A theorist is one who creates
theories. A theoretician is one who applies them, especially one who
does so at inappropriate times. By the way, I have no evdience for this
at all.
From: Julius Moravcsik <JULIUS@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> A theorist constructs
a theory to explain facts; a theoretician deals with theories; i.e. has
a "theory?" about theories. E.g. as in "party theoretician" - I never
heard anyone saying "party theorist" If you don't agree. let me know
why. Julius.
From: Ivan Sag <SAG@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> Hey, man. You're the usage
editor around here!
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> I can't be lapidary, but
how's this for a fuzzy distinction? A theorist is one who puts forward
or promotes theoretical ideas, and a theoretician constructs and
develops theories. Theorists need not be concerned with building whole
theoretical systems, but theoreticians are. Thus, for example, a GB
theorist might just be a linguist who speaks GBerish and formulates
hypotheses in terms of it; a GB theoretician, however, would have to be
involved in the development and refinement of GB theory. Tom P.S. Those
are my intuitions; I have no idea whether they conform to more general
usage. Webster treats these as full synonyms.
From: southall.pa@Xerox. How about this: a theorist is someone who
studies or elaborates theories, while a theoretician is someone who
applies them to problems? (Cf. "technician"; but there's no "technist".)
From: zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM Subject: Re: A point of usage In-reply-to:
southall.pa's message of 2 Dec 86 doesn't Marxist~Marxian go the other
way? annie
From: Carl Pollard <POLLARD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> No. But I can tell you
that i never use "theorist".
From: Ray Perrault <RPERRAULT@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Geoff, My sense is that one refers to someone as a theorist if he is a
theoretician of a discipline whose name is "X theory", such as "number
theorist" (and certainly not "number theoretician").
From: Jane (aka) Jrobinson <JROBINSON@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA> A theorist
forms theories; a theoretician tinkers with them. J
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU> My non-lapidary
(marshmallow?) feeling about theoretician and theorist is that
theoreticians are more concrete and complete in their theories.
From: Lauri Karttunen <LAURI@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA> On the analogy of
"pragmatist," I think a "theorist" is one with a theoretical bent of
mind, one who is prone to theorizing. I feel that the word could easily
be used pejoratively. The word "theoretician",on the other hand, sounds
professional. A theoretician is a guy who earns his living by
constructing theories. So, I would say of someone that he is a theorist
at heart but not a theoretician.
From: Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM A theorist likes to build theories but
doesn't do it necessarily well and a theoretician knows how to do it but
doesn't necessarily like it. This is a non native intuition, let me know
if the difference is along totally other dimensions annie
∂08-Dec-86 2302 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu U.T. Year of Programming
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 23:02:17 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 8 Dec 86 22:38:42-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 8 Dec 86 22:31:59 PST
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 86 22:37:47 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: U.T. Year of Programming
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 14:52:29-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: U.T. Year of Programming
Message_id: <C025.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 8 Dec 1986 16:58:17-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Please Post Please Distribute
The U.T. YEAR of PROGRAMMING
An Overview
5 December 1986
INTRODUCTION
The Year of Programming--a project of the Department of Computer Sciences of
The University of Texas at Austin, underwritten principally by a grant from the
U.S. Office of Naval Research--is a series of computer-scientific activities to
take place during 1987. From the original proposal:
Programming includes all aspects of creating an executable representation
of a problem through all levels of abstraction from mathematical formula-
tion to representation of an algorithmically specific architecture in a
hardware description language. Aspects of this process which have been
identified for attention include problem formulation, specification
languages, programming languages, presentation languages, and the trans-
formations between these many representations. The Year of Programming
will attempt to identify and address the subset of these problem domains
and issues which are the bottlenecks to progress towards the conversion
of programming into a mathematical and tool supported discipline and one
which extends from high levels of abstraction to computer architecture.
GOALS
The general objectives of The Year of Programming are the following:
* to advance the art and science of programming by bringing together
leading scientists for discussions and collaboration
* to disseminate among leading practitioners the best of what has been
learned about the theory and practice of programming
OVERALL FORMAT
The Year of Programming will consist primarily of a series of Programming
Institutes, each devoted to a specific topic. Institutes are currently being
organized for the following topics:
Programming Concurrent Computations (Feb-Mar) -- C.A.R. Hoare
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) -- D. Gries
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) -- G. Huet
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) -- M.J.C. Gordon
Declarative Programming (August) -- D.A. Turner
Specification and Design (Sept) -- J. R. Abrial
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) -- E.W. Dijkstra
(This list is subject to change.)
A Year of Programming contributor may be involved in any of various
activities--directing an entire Institute, organizing and presenting a
tutorial, giving one or more lectures, participating in workshops and panel
discussions, and assisting in writing and editing YoP publications.
INSTITUTE FORMAT
Each Institute's duration and format will be determined primarily by its
scientific director. Components of the typical Institute would be drawn from
the following menu:
* Tutorial of 2-5 days' duration. Audience: practitioners. Purpose: to
help each participant develop a thorough working knowledge of the
subject. Format: Lectures, accompanied by exercises and problem sessions
in which participants test and strengthen their understanding. Tutorials
will be prominent components--even centerpieces--of most Institutes.
* Lecture [series]. Audience: specialists and practitioners. Purpose: to
present latest research results.
* Public lecture. Audience: nonspecialists. Purpose: to present an
overview of the Institute's topic and of its significance and its
relationships with other topics.
* Workshop of 2-3 days' duration. Participants: specialists prepared for
intensive discussion of their current work. Purpose: sustained
interaction among active researchers.
* Panel discussion. Audience: specialists and research directors. Purpose:
to identify important problems and promising avenues of research.
* Private consultations with sponsoring organizations. Purpose: to advise
on problems and applications that are proprietary, confidential, or not of
general interest.
Each Year of Programming Institute will be directed by a technical leader in
its field, with all necessary support provided by the Year of Programming
Office.
PUBLICATIONS
Proceedings of the Year of Programming are to be published in a variety of
formats and media:
* Tutorial: videotape with notes (including problems and solutions); printed
materials prepared in advance by instructor.
* Lecture [series]: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations; papers by speakers.
* Workshop: collection of papers submitted by participants.
* Panel discussion: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations.
FUNDING
In addition to its major grant from the Office of Naval Research, the Year of
Programming receives supplementary funding from Lockheed Missiles and Space
Company (LMSC) and other sponsors. Its budget allows for contributing visitors
to be paid their travel and living expenses and customary honoraria.
MANAGEMENT
The Year of Programming is supervised by its Management Committee (all members
not otherwise identified are affiliated with the Department of Computer
Sciences of The University of Texas at Austin):
J. C. Browne* E. W. Dijkstra* E. A. Emerson
M. G. Gouda C. A. R. Hoare* C. Lengauer
J. Misra J. Pavone H. Richards*~
S. W. Sherman (LMSC)
* member of executive subcommittee
~ coordinator
The Year of Programming Office staff consists of a coordinator (H. Richards)
and an administrative assistant (S.K. Rhoads).
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
telephone: 512-471-9526
electronic mail: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[End of overview]
∂08-Dec-86 2343 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Concurrent Programming Institute
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Dec 86 23:43:15 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon 8 Dec 86 22:34:11-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 8 Dec 86 22:27:20 PST
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 86 22:33:41 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Concurrent Programming Institute
Date: Mon 8 Dec 86 14:53:24-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Concurrent Programming Institute
Message_id: <C026.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 8 Dec 1986 16:59:57-EST (Monday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Please Post Please Distribute
The 1987 U. T. Year of Programming
with the generous support of the
U.S. Office of Naval Research
announces
THE INSTITUTE OF CONCURRENT PROGRAMMING
Scientific Director: C. A. R. Hoare
Austin, Texas 23 February - 6 March 1987
The Institute of Concurrent Programming is intended to advance the state of the
art in the specification, design, and implementation of concurrent computer
systems, including both hardware and software, by supplementing and
complementing the more traditional forms of scientific and educational
interchange.
Concurrent programming has been selected as a field of study which is
approaching sufficient maturity that the results of its research can begin to
be put into practice, and that practical experience can suggest future
directions for fundamental investigation.
The aims of the Institute are
1. To identify those branches of science that can presently be applied to
practical problems, and to study them more deeply.
2. To emphasize the issues that arise in the design of mixed systems, including
both hardware and software.
3. To concentrate on techniques that aid in specification, design, and
planning--in particular, the breakdown of a complex product into simpler
parts, or the breakdown of a large project into shorter phases, with clearly
defined interfaces between them.
The Institute is made up of four parts; applications are invited for all
combinations of the first three.
1. Monday 23 February. Programming of Parallel Processors.
Lectures on the design of concurrent systems using the Inmos Transputer(TM)
and the occam(TM) programming notation; demonstrations of multi-Transputer
systems. The course is organised and presented by Inmos Corporation, and is
free of charge.
2. Tuesday-Friday 24-27 February. Communicating Sequential Processes.
A study of the basic ideas of concurrent programming of communicating
systems, based on Hoare's book of the same title. The material taught will
be illustrated by exercises drawn from a range of applications. The course
will be a suitable introduction to the following Research Seminar for those
less familiar with the field and with its theoretical background.
Instructors: Jim Woodcock (Oxford), C. A. R. Hoare (Texas), He Jifeng
(Oxford).
3. Monday-Wednesday 2-4 March. Research Seminar.
The seminar will include reports of practical experience using a combina-
tion of formal and informal methods, with some emphasis on recent results
in CSP. Newer promising directions of research will also be explored.
Topics will include computer architecture, protocol design and
standardisation, distributed system design, fair iterated assignments,
self-timed circuits, and silicon compilation. Speakers include C. A. R.
Hoare, Leslie Lamport (DEC), Jayadev Misra (Texas), David May (Inmos),
K. Mani Chandy (Texas), Jim Woodcock, and Amir Pnueli (Weizmann).
4. Thursday-Friday 5-6 March. Workshop.
The aim of the workshop is to discuss the structure of the discipline and
the most promising directions for application and for future research.
Attendance is by invitation only.
The Institute on Concurrent Programming is the first of a series of Programming
Institutes comprising the 1987 U. T. Year of Programming, which is underwritten
principally by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, with supplementary funding
from the University of Texas, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, and other
sponsors. Other Institutes now being organized include
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) D. Gries (Cornell)
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) G. Huet (INRIA)
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) M.J.C. Gordon
(Cambridge)
Declarative Programming (August) D.A. Turner (Kent)
Specification and Design (September) J.R. Abrial (Paris)
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) E.W. Dijkstra (Texas)
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124 telephone: 512-471-9526
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
Prerequisites
The typical applicant should have a degree in a technical discipline, such as
mathematics or computing science, and at least two years of experience in
programming.
Admission
Places in the Institute's tutorials and research seminar are necessarily
limited in number. Should the applicants outnumber the places, they will be
admitted on the basis of their qualifications as described in their answers to
the questionnaire below, whose purpose is to enable the Year of Programming
staff to select those applicants who will derive the greatest benefits from the
Institute and who will be the most likely to disseminate the benefits further.
Fees and Expenses
The Concurrent Programming Institute includes three separate events to which
admittance is limited (its other events are either open to the public or by
invitation only).
Event dates tuition
1. occam course 23 Feb (no charge)
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500*
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000*
*includes a copy of C. A. R. Hoare's Communicating Sequential
Processes, which will be sent to each participant upon receipt
of tuition payment
Discounts are available for academic participants. Faculty members are charged
50% of the standard rate; students and postdoctoral fellows are charged 25%. A
few tuition scholarships are available for qualified applicants who could not
otherwise attend.
Living expenses, including lodging, meals, and local transportation, are
estimated at $100/day.
Accommodations
Participants are strongly encouraged to lodge in the same hotel with the
lecturers and their fellow participants. Unless we are advised to the
contrary, we will reserve a single room for each participant for
1. the night preceding the first event the participant will attend,
2. the night following the last event the participant will attend, and
3. all intervening nights
Detailed information on accommodations, schedule, weather to be expected, and
other routine matters will accompany notices of acceptance.
Selection and Notification
The selection process will begin on 19 January, and the YoP Office will
consider, in the order of their arrival, all applications that it has received
by that date. Applicants will be notified by express mail as soon as they have
been accepted either for immediate admission or for the waiting list.
Applications received after 19 January will be considered to the extent that
places remain open. The selection process will continue until all places have
been filled, and a waiting list will be maintained for all qualified applicants
who are not admitted immediately.
Invoices will be sent to accepted applicants by express mail. An accepted
applicant will be expected to remit his or her tuition payment within 10 days
of notification or by 23 February, whichever is earlier. An applicant whose
payment is not received in time may lose his or her place to someone on the
waiting list.
Withdrawals
An accepted applicant may withdraw at any time before 23 February. Any fees
that have been paid will be refunded provided that the YoP office can find a
replacement (the earlier we are advised of a withdrawal, the more likely we are
to find a replacement).
APPLICATION FOR ENROLLMENT
Concurrent Programming Institute
University of Texas at Austin
23 February - 6 March 1987
You may either fill in a paper copy of this application and the following
questionnaire and send it by ordinary mail, or edit your replies into the
document and send it by net mail. Net-mailed applications and questionnaires
will be acknowledged by return mail.
name:
mailing address (in sufficient detail for Federal Express deliveries--e.g., no
P.O. box numbers):
telephone: office: home:
net address:
your current employer:
Tuition Fees
are you applying
Component dates tuition for admission?
1. occam course 23 Feb $0 yes/no
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500 yes/no
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000 yes/no
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000 yes/no
Do you qualify for the faculty discount (50%)? (Y/N):
Do you qualify for the student discount (75%)? (Y/N):
Do you request scholarship assistance? (Y/N): (If Y, please attach a letter
of explanation.)
Do you understand that you are to pay separately for your lodging and meals?
(Y/N):
Please complete the following questionnaire; mail application and questionnaire
to
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
QUESTIONNAIRE
(In your responses, please concentrate on material that is related to the
topics of the Institute.)
Your degrees (discipline, university, year received or expected; thesis topic
and supervisor where appropriate):
Your current position:
The technical journals you read regularly:
A technical book you have read recently:
Your publications:
Industrial applicants: please describe the sorts of problems on which you are
working. Faculty applicants: please describe the courses you are teaching,
the courses you plan to teach, and your research interests. Student and
postdoctoral applicants: please describe the research in which you are engaged
and include a brief statement from your research supervisor attesting to your
qualifications.
Please describe your expectations from the Institute and how they relate to
your preceding answer.
[end of questionnaire]
∂09-Dec-86 1042 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Tau Beta Pi evaluation forms
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 10:42:02 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 10:39:17-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Tau Beta Pi evaluation forms
To: instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12261465072.23.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Tau Beta Pi evaluation forms are now available from Tina in CS TAC. The TAs
were notified last week, and many have come in to pick up the forms for their
classes. If your TA has not already been in to see us, or if you will be
handing out the evaluations yourselves, please come in soon.
Claire
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1235 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU UT Year of Programming
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 12:35:06 PST
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 9 Dec 86 12:15:41-PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 14:17:41-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: UT Year of Programming
To: aflb.tn@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Message-ID: <12261482985.60.CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Please Post Please Distribute
The U.T. YEAR of PROGRAMMING
An Overview
5 December 1986
INTRODUCTION
The Year of Programming--a project of the Department of Computer Sciences of
The University of Texas at Austin, underwritten principally by a grant from the
U.S. Office of Naval Research--is a series of computer-scientific activities to
take place during 1987. From the original proposal:
Programming includes all aspects of creating an executable representation
of a problem through all levels of abstraction from mathematical formula-
tion to representation of an algorithmically specific architecture in a
hardware description language. Aspects of this process which have been
identified for attention include problem formulation, specification
languages, programming languages, presentation languages, and the trans-
formations between these many representations. The Year of Programming
will attempt to identify and address the subset of these problem domains
and issues which are the bottlenecks to progress towards the conversion
of programming into a mathematical and tool supported discipline and one
which extends from high levels of abstraction to computer architecture.
GOALS
The general objectives of The Year of Programming are the following:
* to advance the art and science of programming by bringing together
leading scientists for discussions and collaboration
* to disseminate among leading practitioners the best of what has been
learned about the theory and practice of programming
OVERALL FORMAT
The Year of Programming will consist primarily of a series of Programming
Institutes, each devoted to a specific topic. Institutes are currently being
organized for the following topics:
Programming Concurrent Computations (Feb-Mar) -- C.A.R. Hoare
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) -- D. Gries
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) -- G. Huet
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) -- M.J.C. Gordon
Declarative Programming (August) -- D.A. Turner
Specification and Design (Sept) -- J. R. Abrial
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) -- E.W. Dijkstra
(This list is subject to change.)
A Year of Programming contributor may be involved in any of various
activities--directing an entire Institute, organizing and presenting a
tutorial, giving one or more lectures, participating in workshops and panel
discussions, and assisting in writing and editing YoP publications.
INSTITUTE FORMAT
Each Institute's duration and format will be determined primarily by its
scientific director. Components of the typical Institute would be drawn from
the following menu:
* Tutorial of 2-5 days' duration. Audience: practitioners. Purpose: to
help each participant develop a thorough working knowledge of the
subject. Format: Lectures, accompanied by exercises and problem sessions
in which participants test and strengthen their understanding. Tutorials
will be prominent components--even centerpieces--of most Institutes.
* Lecture [series]. Audience: specialists and practitioners. Purpose: to
present latest research results.
* Public lecture. Audience: nonspecialists. Purpose: to present an
overview of the Institute's topic and of its significance and its
relationships with other topics.
* Workshop of 2-3 days' duration. Participants: specialists prepared for
intensive discussion of their current work. Purpose: sustained
interaction among active researchers.
* Panel discussion. Audience: specialists and research directors. Purpose:
to identify important problems and promising avenues of research.
* Private consultations with sponsoring organizations. Purpose: to advise
on problems and applications that are proprietary, confidential, or not of
general interest.
Each Year of Programming Institute will be directed by a technical leader in
its field, with all necessary support provided by the Year of Programming
Office.
PUBLICATIONS
Proceedings of the Year of Programming are to be published in a variety of
formats and media:
* Tutorial: videotape with notes (including problems and solutions); printed
materials prepared in advance by instructor.
* Lecture [series]: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations; papers by speakers.
* Workshop: collection of papers submitted by participants.
* Panel discussion: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations.
FUNDING
In addition to its major grant from the Office of Naval Research, the Year of
Programming receives supplementary funding from Lockheed Missiles and Space
Company (LMSC) and other sponsors. Its budget allows for contributing visitors
to be paid their travel and living expenses and customary honoraria.
MANAGEMENT
The Year of Programming is supervised by its Management Committee (all members
not otherwise identified are affiliated with the Department of Computer
Sciences of The University of Texas at Austin):
J. C. Browne* E. W. Dijkstra* E. A. Emerson
M. G. Gouda C. A. R. Hoare* C. Lengauer
J. Misra J. Pavone H. Richards*↑
S. W. Sherman (LMSC)
* member of executive subcommittee
↑ coordinator
The Year of Programming Office staff consists of a coordinator (H. Richards)
and an administrative assistant (S.K. Rhoads).
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
telephone: 512-471-9526
electronic mail: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[End of overview]
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1243 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Concurrent Programming Institute
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 12:43:38 PST
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 9 Dec 86 12:16:50-PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 14:18:40-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Concurrent Programming Institute
To: aflb.tn@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Message-ID: <12261483163.60.CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Please Post Please Distribute
The 1987 U. T. Year of Programming
with the generous support of the
U.S. Office of Naval Research
announces
THE INSTITUTE OF CONCURRENT PROGRAMMING
Scientific Director: C. A. R. Hoare
Austin, Texas 23 February - 6 March 1987
The Institute of Concurrent Programming is intended to advance the state of the
art in the specification, design, and implementation of concurrent computer
systems, including both hardware and software, by supplementing and
complementing the more traditional forms of scientific and educational
interchange.
Concurrent programming has been selected as a field of study which is
approaching sufficient maturity that the results of its research can begin to
be put into practice, and that practical experience can suggest future
directions for fundamental investigation.
The aims of the Institute are
1. To identify those branches of science that can presently be applied to
practical problems, and to study them more deeply.
2. To emphasize the issues that arise in the design of mixed systems, including
both hardware and software.
3. To concentrate on techniques that aid in specification, design, and
planning--in particular, the breakdown of a complex product into simpler
parts, or the breakdown of a large project into shorter phases, with clearly
defined interfaces between them.
The Institute is made up of four parts; applications are invited for all
combinations of the first three.
1. Monday 23 February. Programming of Parallel Processors.
Lectures on the design of concurrent systems using the Inmos Transputer(TM)
and the occam(TM) programming notation; demonstrations of multi-Transputer
systems. The course is organised and presented by Inmos Corporation, and is
free of charge.
2. Tuesday-Friday 24-27 February. Communicating Sequential Processes.
A study of the basic ideas of concurrent programming of communicating
systems, based on Hoare's book of the same title. The material taught will
be illustrated by exercises drawn from a range of applications. The course
will be a suitable introduction to the following Research Seminar for those
less familiar with the field and with its theoretical background.
Instructors: Jim Woodcock (Oxford), C. A. R. Hoare (Texas), He Jifeng
(Oxford).
3. Monday-Wednesday 2-4 March. Research Seminar.
The seminar will include reports of practical experience using a combina-
tion of formal and informal methods, with some emphasis on recent results
in CSP. Newer promising directions of research will also be explored.
Topics will include computer architecture, protocol design and
standardisation, distributed system design, fair iterated assignments,
self-timed circuits, and silicon compilation. Speakers include C. A. R.
Hoare, Leslie Lamport (DEC), Jayadev Misra (Texas), David May (Inmos),
K. Mani Chandy (Texas), Jim Woodcock, and Amir Pnueli (Weizmann).
4. Thursday-Friday 5-6 March. Workshop.
The aim of the workshop is to discuss the structure of the discipline and
the most promising directions for application and for future research.
Attendance is by invitation only.
The Institute on Concurrent Programming is the first of a series of Programming
Institutes comprising the 1987 U. T. Year of Programming, which is underwritten
principally by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, with supplementary funding
from the University of Texas, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, and other
sponsors. Other Institutes now being organized include
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) D. Gries (Cornell)
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) G. Huet (INRIA)
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) M.J.C. Gordon
(Cambridge)
Declarative Programming (August) D.A. Turner (Kent)
Specification and Design (September) J.R. Abrial (Paris)
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) E.W. Dijkstra (Texas)
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124 telephone: 512-471-9526
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
Prerequisites
The typical applicant should have a degree in a technical discipline, such as
mathematics or computing science, and at least two years of experience in
programming.
Admission
Places in the Institute's tutorials and research seminar are necessarily
limited in number. Should the applicants outnumber the places, they will be
admitted on the basis of their qualifications as described in their answers to
the questionnaire below, whose purpose is to enable the Year of Programming
staff to select those applicants who will derive the greatest benefits from the
Institute and who will be the most likely to disseminate the benefits further.
Fees and Expenses
The Concurrent Programming Institute includes three separate events to which
admittance is limited (its other events are either open to the public or by
invitation only).
Event dates tuition
1. occam course 23 Feb (no charge)
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500*
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000*
*includes a copy of C. A. R. Hoare's Communicating Sequential
Processes, which will be sent to each participant upon receipt
of tuition payment
Discounts are available for academic participants. Faculty members are charged
50% of the standard rate; students and postdoctoral fellows are charged 25%. A
few tuition scholarships are available for qualified applicants who could not
otherwise attend.
Living expenses, including lodging, meals, and local transportation, are
estimated at $100/day.
Accommodations
Participants are strongly encouraged to lodge in the same hotel with the
lecturers and their fellow participants. Unless we are advised to the
contrary, we will reserve a single room for each participant for
1. the night preceding the first event the participant will attend,
2. the night following the last event the participant will attend, and
3. all intervening nights
Detailed information on accommodations, schedule, weather to be expected, and
other routine matters will accompany notices of acceptance.
Selection and Notification
The selection process will begin on 19 January, and the YoP Office will
consider, in the order of their arrival, all applications that it has received
by that date. Applicants will be notified by express mail as soon as they have
been accepted either for immediate admission or for the waiting list.
Applications received after 19 January will be considered to the extent that
places remain open. The selection process will continue until all places have
been filled, and a waiting list will be maintained for all qualified applicants
who are not admitted immediately.
Invoices will be sent to accepted applicants by express mail. An accepted
applicant will be expected to remit his or her tuition payment within 10 days
of notification or by 23 February, whichever is earlier. An applicant whose
payment is not received in time may lose his or her place to someone on the
waiting list.
Withdrawals
An accepted applicant may withdraw at any time before 23 February. Any fees
that have been paid will be refunded provided that the YoP office can find a
replacement (the earlier we are advised of a withdrawal, the more likely we are
to find a replacement).
APPLICATION FOR ENROLLMENT
Concurrent Programming Institute
University of Texas at Austin
23 February - 6 March 1987
You may either fill in a paper copy of this application and the following
questionnaire and send it by ordinary mail, or edit your replies into the
document and send it by net mail. Net-mailed applications and questionnaires
will be acknowledged by return mail.
name:
mailing address (in sufficient detail for Federal Express deliveries--e.g., no
P.O. box numbers):
telephone: office: home:
net address:
your current employer:
Tuition Fees
are you applying
Component dates tuition for admission?
1. occam course 23 Feb $0 yes/no
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500 yes/no
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000 yes/no
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000 yes/no
Do you qualify for the faculty discount (50%)? (Y/N):
Do you qualify for the student discount (75%)? (Y/N):
Do you request scholarship assistance? (Y/N): (If Y, please attach a letter
of explanation.)
Do you understand that you are to pay separately for your lodging and meals?
(Y/N):
Please complete the following questionnaire; mail application and questionnaire
to
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
QUESTIONNAIRE
(In your responses, please concentrate on material that is related to the
topics of the Institute.)
Your degrees (discipline, university, year received or expected; thesis topic
and supervisor where appropriate):
Your current position:
The technical journals you read regularly:
A technical book you have read recently:
Your publications:
Industrial applicants: please describe the sorts of problems on which you are
working. Faculty applicants: please describe the courses you are teaching,
the courses you plan to teach, and your research interests. Student and
postdoctoral applicants: please describe the research in which you are engaged
and include a brief statement from your research supervisor attesting to your
qualifications.
Please describe your expectations from the Institute and how they relate to
your preceding answer.
[end of questionnaire]
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1421 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Holiday Party
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 14:20:20 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 13:51:45-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Holiday Party
Sender: EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, consultants@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
* * * * * *
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* * * * *
* * * * *
* * *
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * * * *
* * * *
* * * * * *
* ___ * CCC SSSS LLL III
* | | C C S S L I
| | * C S * L * I
-------- * C SSS L I
( + + ) * C S L I
* \ v / * C C S S L I
* /~~~\ CCCCC * SSSSS LLLLLLLL III *
/ \ * * * *
/ \ * * + *
/ \ * +++
/ \ + * *
/ \ * * /↑\ * *
< > / \ * *
\ / * / \ *
\ / * / \ *
↑↑↑|↑↑↑↑|↑↑↑/ * / \ *
| | / HOLIDAY \ *
↑ ↑ * / \ *
/ PARTY \ *
* * / \ *
* / REMINDER \ *
* <↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑>
[ ]
* [ ]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE WHY'S, WHERE'S , HOW'S , WHO'S , AND WHAT'S OF THE PARTY.......
WHY? Because........
WHERE? Burgess Park Recreation Center, Menlo Park (700 Alma, right
off of Ravenswood Ave. near SRI and the Menlo Park City Hall...we'll
get a direction flyer drawn up and signs will be posted at the
park for easy "access".)
HOW? EASY! just show up!
WHO? The FOLKS and spouses of CSLI...
WHEN? THIS Friday, December 12, 1986 6:00-10:00 PM
There will be plenty to drink+ but the "eats" are up to US!(well, most
of them are....Turkey and Ham will be provided but the rest is POT-LUCK!)
and that's the point of this reminder.
We are hoping to have a balanced POT-LUCK and you are encouraged to
bring a side-dish, main course, holiday favorite or delightful dessert
AND to respond with your prospective dish to
POTLUCK @ CSLI
In any case, the order of the evening will be celebrating the holidays,
so we hope to see you there with a smile on your face!
+ ....the drinks will be of the cold variety...if anyone has a special
hot holiday drink, that would be a great "pot-luck" item!
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1514 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER : Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 4:15 -- Roger Hale
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 15:13:52 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Tue, 9 Dec 86 15:04:52-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA04012; Tue,
9 Dec 86 15:09:09 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 15:09:04-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER : Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- 4:15 -- Roger Hale
To: planlunch_reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 9-Dec-86 15:09:04.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
NOTICE CHANGE IN USUAL DAY AND TIME!! (Wednesday, 4:15)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USING INTERVAL TEMPORAL LOGIC FOR PARALLEL PROGRAMMING
Roger Hale
Computer Laboratory
Cambridge University, England
4:15 PM, WEDNESDAY, December 10
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Interval Temporal Logic (ITL) was originally proposed by Moszkowski
for reasoning about the behaviour of hardware devices. Since then it
has shown itself to have a much wider field of application, and has
been used to specify a variety of concurrent and time-dependent
systems at different levels of abstraction. Moreover, it has been
found that a useful subset of ITL specifications are executable in the
programming language TEMPURA. Experience gained from prototyping
temporal logic specifications in Tempura leads us to believe that this
is a practical (and enjoyable) way to produce formal specifications.
In the talk I will present some temporal logic specifications which
are also Tempura programs, and will indicate how these programs are
executed by the Tempura interpreter. I will give examples of both
high- and low-level specifications, and will describe a way to relate
different levels of abstraction. In conclusion, I will outline some
future plans, which include the provision of a decision support system
for Tempura.
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1617 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU End Quarter Reports
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 16:17:16 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 16:07:10-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: End Quarter Reports
To: instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, tas@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12261524760.53.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The End Quarter Reports, or grade sheets, are in my hands and ready to be
distributed. Please send your TAs to my office in CS TAC to pick up
your sheets. If it is not possible to come by, please send me a
message via email with instructions as to where you would like them sent.
The deadline for getting the completed sheets back to me is Monday,
December 22. Please let me know if there's any way we can help the
process go more smoothly.
Thanks again.
Claire
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1658 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU TINLunch abstract
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 16:57:57 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 16:40:20-PST
From: Donald Churma <CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: TINLunch abstract
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Anderson is arguing, in somewhat programmatic fashion, for what is in
effect a fairly highly modularized view of phonology (although he
doesn't use this term). Essentially, he views phonology as having
three modules, one in which the metrical formalism is appropriate (in
which apparently only stress and syllabification belong), one where
things are done autosegmentally (tone, nasality, etc.), and one that
contains only `Garden-Variety' phonological rules (dissimilation,
funky morphophonemic rules, (controversially) vowel harmony). The
argument is basically the standard Chomsky/Pullum/Zwicky one that
modularization allows for a more constrained theory. Curiously, this
paper has had little or no effect on subsequent phonological practice.
Why?
-------
∂09-Dec-86 1742 Mailer%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU PHIL-SCI
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 17:42:11 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet with SMTP; 9 Dec 86 20:31-EST
Received: from MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (TCP 1200000006) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 9 Dec 86 20:30:58 EST
Received: from ALBNYVM1(MAILER) by MITVMA (Mailer X1.23) id 7978;
Tue, 09 Dec 86 20:06:59 EST
Received: by ALBNYVM1 (Mailer X1.23b) id 8527; Tue, 09 Dec 86 19:57:48 EST
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 86 19:56:45 EST
From: JIM TEDESCHI <JTT58@ALBNYVM1>
Subject: PHIL-SCI
To: PHIL-SCI@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
PLEASE ADD ME TO YOUR MAILING LIST. I WOULD APPRECIATE RECEIVING ANY RECENT
COMMUNICATIONS TO LET ME IN ON TOPICS OF RECENT DISCUSSION. THANKS. I LOOK
FORWARD TO PARTICIPATING IN THIS TELE-GROUP.
∂09-Dec-86 1740 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice NEXT MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 17:37:58 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Tue, 9 Dec 86 17:30:47-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA04169; Tue,
9 Dec 86 17:35:17 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 17:35:12-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: NEXT MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 9-Dec-86 17:35:12.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THEORY OF IMPERATIVE LISP
Richard Waldinger (WALDINGER@SRI-AI)
Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, December 15
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Imperative LISP is LISP with destructive operations, such as rplaca
and setq, which can alter data structures. We present a theory, based
on situational logic, intended for the specification and automatic
synthesis of imperative LISP programs. Hand derivations of programs
for destructive reverse and append have been conducted within this
theory.
-------
∂09-Dec-86 2233 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU colloquium announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Dec 86 22:32:55 PST
Date: Tue 9 Dec 86 22:12:33-PST
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: colloquium announcement
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Linguistics Department Colloquium
Stanford University
Mark Durie
University of California at Santa Cruz
Preferred argument structure in discourse: a window into the
Unaccusative Hypothesis
Date:16 December 1986 (Tuesday)
Time:15:15
Place:420-050 (Jordan Hall)
Refreshments will be served after the talk in the Greenberg Room.
Dr. Durie received his degree from the Australian National
University, with a dissertation entitled A Grammar of Achenese
(since published by Foris). He spent 1984 in the Netherlands
on a Dutch Government grant, and 1985-86 in the USA on a
Harkness Fellowship. During the past two years he has been a
visitor at MIT, UCLA, and now UCSC. Beginning in January he
will take up a position as a Research Fellow at the University
of Melbourne, Australia, working on the lexical semantics of
Wh-words.
Abstract
In this talk I argue that unaccusative splits are subject
to certain discourse constraints having to do with the
maintenance of information flow.
Next Colloquium: 6 January 1987 - Melissa Monroe (Stanford)
Title to be announced.
$9
$9
-------
∂10-Dec-86 0358 ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET Logistics for Dallas Meeting
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 03:57:48 PST
Received: from ti-csl by csnet-relay.csnet id ad02710; 10 Dec 86 6:34 EST
Received: from Puff (puff.ARPA) by tilde id AA00397; Mon, 8 Dec 86 17:37:01 cst
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: ellen%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Logistics for Dallas Meeting
Date: 8-Dec-86 16:50:13
From: ELLEN%Puff%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-Id: <ELLEN.2743455011@Puff>
Thanks for the suggestion, Scott.
The mailing address of the hotel is
Sheraton Park Central
12720 Merit Drive
Dallas, Texas 75251
and the phone number is 214-385-3000.
Taxi fare from DFW to the hotel should be
approximately $20. There is also a shuttle
service called The Link that charges $9.
The approximate travel time is 30 minutes.
-- Ellen
∂10-Dec-86 0600 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 05:59:53 PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 05:56:12-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261675683.7.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I need a speaker for January 15. Most slots in February and March are
still open.
The abstract for the next talk follows.
11-December-1986 Marshall Bern (UC - Berkeley)
A More General Special Case of the Steiner Tree Problem
The Steiner tree problem on networks asks for a minimum length tree
spanning a given subset N of the vertices in the network. (The vertices
not in N are optional.) This problem is NP-complete even for planar networks.
I'll give a polynomial-time algorithm for the Steiner tree problem
on planar networks in the special case that there are a small number of
faces which contain all the vertices in N. I'll then show improvements
of the basic algorithm as it applies to the rectilinear Steiner problem.
My basic algorithm is a refinement of a dynamic programming algorithm due to
Dreyfus and Wagner that is, in general, exponential time.
***** Time and place: December 11, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂10-Dec-86 0707 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU UT Year of Programming
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 07:06:44 PST
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Dec 86 06:57:25-PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 08:59:35-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: UT Year of Programming
To: aflb.tn@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Message-ID: <12261687220.6.CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Please Post Please Distribute
The U.T. YEAR of PROGRAMMING
An Overview
5 December 1986
INTRODUCTION
The Year of Programming--a project of the Department of Computer Sciences of
The University of Texas at Austin, underwritten principally by a grant from the
U.S. Office of Naval Research--is a series of computer-scientific activities to
take place during 1987. From the original proposal:
Programming includes all aspects of creating an executable representation
of a problem through all levels of abstraction from mathematical formula-
tion to representation of an algorithmically specific architecture in a
hardware description language. Aspects of this process which have been
identified for attention include problem formulation, specification
languages, programming languages, presentation languages, and the trans-
formations between these many representations. The Year of Programming
will attempt to identify and address the subset of these problem domains
and issues which are the bottlenecks to progress towards the conversion
of programming into a mathematical and tool supported discipline and one
which extends from high levels of abstraction to computer architecture.
GOALS
The general objectives of The Year of Programming are the following:
* to advance the art and science of programming by bringing together
leading scientists for discussions and collaboration
* to disseminate among leading practitioners the best of what has been
learned about the theory and practice of programming
OVERALL FORMAT
The Year of Programming will consist primarily of a series of Programming
Institutes, each devoted to a specific topic. Institutes are currently being
organized for the following topics:
Programming Concurrent Computations (Feb-Mar) -- C.A.R. Hoare
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) -- D. Gries
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) -- G. Huet
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) -- M.J.C. Gordon
Declarative Programming (August) -- D.A. Turner
Specification and Design (Sept) -- J. R. Abrial
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) -- E.W. Dijkstra
(This list is subject to change.)
A Year of Programming contributor may be involved in any of various
activities--directing an entire Institute, organizing and presenting a
tutorial, giving one or more lectures, participating in workshops and panel
discussions, and assisting in writing and editing YoP publications.
INSTITUTE FORMAT
Each Institute's duration and format will be determined primarily by its
scientific director. Components of the typical Institute would be drawn from
the following menu:
* Tutorial of 2-5 days' duration. Audience: practitioners. Purpose: to
help each participant develop a thorough working knowledge of the
subject. Format: Lectures, accompanied by exercises and problem sessions
in which participants test and strengthen their understanding. Tutorials
will be prominent components--even centerpieces--of most Institutes.
* Lecture [series]. Audience: specialists and practitioners. Purpose: to
present latest research results.
* Public lecture. Audience: nonspecialists. Purpose: to present an
overview of the Institute's topic and of its significance and its
relationships with other topics.
* Workshop of 2-3 days' duration. Participants: specialists prepared for
intensive discussion of their current work. Purpose: sustained
interaction among active researchers.
* Panel discussion. Audience: specialists and research directors. Purpose:
to identify important problems and promising avenues of research.
* Private consultations with sponsoring organizations. Purpose: to advise
on problems and applications that are proprietary, confidential, or not of
general interest.
Each Year of Programming Institute will be directed by a technical leader in
its field, with all necessary support provided by the Year of Programming
Office.
PUBLICATIONS
Proceedings of the Year of Programming are to be published in a variety of
formats and media:
* Tutorial: videotape with notes (including problems and solutions); printed
materials prepared in advance by instructor.
* Lecture [series]: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations; papers by speakers.
* Workshop: collection of papers submitted by participants.
* Panel discussion: videotape; audio tape with copies of illustrations;
edited transcript including illustrations.
FUNDING
In addition to its major grant from the Office of Naval Research, the Year of
Programming receives supplementary funding from Lockheed Missiles and Space
Company (LMSC) and other sponsors. Its budget allows for contributing visitors
to be paid their travel and living expenses and customary honoraria.
MANAGEMENT
The Year of Programming is supervised by its Management Committee (all members
not otherwise identified are affiliated with the Department of Computer
Sciences of The University of Texas at Austin):
J. C. Browne* E. W. Dijkstra* E. A. Emerson
M. G. Gouda C. A. R. Hoare* C. Lengauer
J. Misra J. Pavone H. Richards*↑
S. W. Sherman (LMSC)
* member of executive subcommittee
↑ coordinator
The Year of Programming Office staff consists of a coordinator (H. Richards)
and an administrative assistant (S.K. Rhoads).
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
telephone: 512-471-9526
electronic mail: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[End of overview]
-------
∂10-Dec-86 0720 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Concurrent Programming Institute
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 07:20:39 PST
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Dec 86 06:58:27-PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 09:00:16-CST
From: Hamilton Richards <CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Concurrent Programming Institute
To: aflb.tn@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Message-ID: <12261687346.6.CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Please Post Please Distribute
The 1987 U. T. Year of Programming
with the generous support of the
U.S. Office of Naval Research
announces
THE INSTITUTE OF CONCURRENT PROGRAMMING
Scientific Director: C. A. R. Hoare
Austin, Texas 23 February - 6 March 1987
The Institute of Concurrent Programming is intended to advance the state of the
art in the specification, design, and implementation of concurrent computer
systems, including both hardware and software, by supplementing and
complementing the more traditional forms of scientific and educational
interchange.
Concurrent programming has been selected as a field of study which is
approaching sufficient maturity that the results of its research can begin to
be put into practice, and that practical experience can suggest future
directions for fundamental investigation.
The aims of the Institute are
1. To identify those branches of science that can presently be applied to
practical problems, and to study them more deeply.
2. To emphasize the issues that arise in the design of mixed systems, including
both hardware and software.
3. To concentrate on techniques that aid in specification, design, and
planning--in particular, the breakdown of a complex product into simpler
parts, or the breakdown of a large project into shorter phases, with clearly
defined interfaces between them.
The Institute is made up of four parts; applications are invited for all
combinations of the first three.
1. Monday 23 February. Programming of Parallel Processors.
Lectures on the design of concurrent systems using the Inmos Transputer(TM)
and the occam(TM) programming notation; demonstrations of multi-Transputer
systems. The course is organised and presented by Inmos Corporation, and is
free of charge.
2. Tuesday-Friday 24-27 February. Communicating Sequential Processes.
A study of the basic ideas of concurrent programming of communicating
systems, based on Hoare's book of the same title. The material taught will
be illustrated by exercises drawn from a range of applications. The course
will be a suitable introduction to the following Research Seminar for those
less familiar with the field and with its theoretical background.
Instructors: Jim Woodcock (Oxford), C. A. R. Hoare (Texas), He Jifeng
(Oxford).
3. Monday-Wednesday 2-4 March. Research Seminar.
The seminar will include reports of practical experience using a combina-
tion of formal and informal methods, with some emphasis on recent results
in CSP. Newer promising directions of research will also be explored.
Topics will include computer architecture, protocol design and
standardisation, distributed system design, fair iterated assignments,
self-timed circuits, and silicon compilation. Speakers include C. A. R.
Hoare, Leslie Lamport (DEC), Jayadev Misra (Texas), David May (Inmos),
K. Mani Chandy (Texas), Jim Woodcock, and Amir Pnueli (Weizmann).
4. Thursday-Friday 5-6 March. Workshop.
The aim of the workshop is to discuss the structure of the discipline and
the most promising directions for application and for future research.
Attendance is by invitation only.
The Institute on Concurrent Programming is the first of a series of Programming
Institutes comprising the 1987 U. T. Year of Programming, which is underwritten
principally by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, with supplementary funding
from the University of Texas, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, and other
sponsors. Other Institutes now being organized include
Encapsulation, Modularization, and Reusability (April) D. Gries (Cornell)
Type, Domain, and Category Theories in Programming (June) G. Huet (INRIA)
Formal Specification and Verification of Hardware (July) M.J.C. Gordon
(Cambridge)
Declarative Programming (August) D.A. Turner (Kent)
Specification and Design (September) J.R. Abrial (Paris)
Formal Development of Programs and Proofs (autumn) E.W. Dijkstra (Texas)
FURTHER INFORMATION
To receive mailings of announcements of individual Programming Institutes and
application forms for tutorials and lecture series, please contact the Year of
Programming Office at one of the following addresses:
U. T. Year of Programming INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124 telephone: 512-471-9526
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
Prerequisites
The typical applicant should have a degree in a technical discipline, such as
mathematics or computing science, and at least two years of experience in
programming.
Admission
Places in the Institute's tutorials and research seminar are necessarily
limited in number. Should the applicants outnumber the places, they will be
admitted on the basis of their qualifications as described in their answers to
the questionnaire below, whose purpose is to enable the Year of Programming
staff to select those applicants who will derive the greatest benefits from the
Institute and who will be the most likely to disseminate the benefits further.
Fees and Expenses
The Concurrent Programming Institute includes three separate events to which
admittance is limited (its other events are either open to the public or by
invitation only).
Event dates tuition
1. occam course 23 Feb (no charge)
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500*
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000*
*includes a copy of C. A. R. Hoare's Communicating Sequential
Processes, which will be sent to each participant upon receipt
of tuition payment
Discounts are available for academic participants. Faculty members are charged
50% of the standard rate; students and postdoctoral fellows are charged 25%. A
few tuition scholarships are available for qualified applicants who could not
otherwise attend.
Living expenses, including lodging, meals, and local transportation, are
estimated at $100/day.
Accommodations
Participants are strongly encouraged to lodge in the same hotel with the
lecturers and their fellow participants. Unless we are advised to the
contrary, we will reserve a single room for each participant for
1. the night preceding the first event the participant will attend,
2. the night following the last event the participant will attend, and
3. all intervening nights
Detailed information on accommodations, schedule, weather to be expected, and
other routine matters will accompany notices of acceptance.
Selection and Notification
The selection process will begin on 19 January, and the YoP Office will
consider, in the order of their arrival, all applications that it has received
by that date. Applicants will be notified by express mail as soon as they have
been accepted either for immediate admission or for the waiting list.
Applications received after 19 January will be considered to the extent that
places remain open. The selection process will continue until all places have
been filled, and a waiting list will be maintained for all qualified applicants
who are not admitted immediately.
Invoices will be sent to accepted applicants by express mail. An accepted
applicant will be expected to remit his or her tuition payment within 10 days
of notification or by 23 February, whichever is earlier. An applicant whose
payment is not received in time may lose his or her place to someone on the
waiting list.
Withdrawals
An accepted applicant may withdraw at any time before 23 February. Any fees
that have been paid will be refunded provided that the YoP office can find a
replacement (the earlier we are advised of a withdrawal, the more likely we are
to find a replacement).
APPLICATION FOR ENROLLMENT
Concurrent Programming Institute
University of Texas at Austin
23 February - 6 March 1987
You may either fill in a paper copy of this application and the following
questionnaire and send it by ordinary mail, or edit your replies into the
document and send it by net mail. Net-mailed applications and questionnaires
will be acknowledged by return mail.
name:
mailing address (in sufficient detail for Federal Express deliveries--e.g., no
P.O. box numbers):
telephone: office: home:
net address:
your current employer:
Tuition Fees
are you applying
Component dates tuition for admission?
1. occam course 23 Feb $0 yes/no
2. CSP course 24-27 Feb $1500 yes/no
3. research seminar 2-4 March $1000 yes/no
4. package (2 & 3) 24 Feb-4 March $2000 yes/no
Do you qualify for the faculty discount (50%)? (Y/N):
Do you qualify for the student discount (75%)? (Y/N):
Do you request scholarship assistance? (Y/N): (If Y, please attach a letter
of explanation.)
Do you understand that you are to pay separately for your lodging and meals?
(Y/N):
Please complete the following questionnaire; mail application and questionnaire
to
U. T. Year of Programming
Department of Computer Sciences
Taylor Hall 2.124
The University of Texas at Austin INTERNET: cs.ham@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Austin, Texas 78712-1188
QUESTIONNAIRE
(In your responses, please concentrate on material that is related to the
topics of the Institute.)
Your degrees (discipline, university, year received or expected; thesis topic
and supervisor where appropriate):
Your current position:
The technical journals you read regularly:
A technical book you have read recently:
Your publications:
Industrial applicants: please describe the sorts of problems on which you are
working. Faculty applicants: please describe the courses you are teaching,
the courses you plan to teach, and your research interests. Student and
postdoctoral applicants: please describe the research in which you are engaged
and include a brief statement from your research supervisor attesting to your
qualifications.
Please describe your expectations from the Institute and how they relate to
your preceding answer.
[end of questionnaire]
-------
∂10-Dec-86 0955 BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (lack of) staff at Ventura
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 09:55:20 PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 09:46:35-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: (lack of) staff at Ventura
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Ingrid, Leslie, Trudy, Joyce, and Suzi are all home sick today and Tom
Y. is fading fast. Jamie is on vacation. Please let me know about
things you need urgently that one of them would have done for you.
I can rearrange priorities with the remaining staff to handle
what is needed in the next few days.
Thanks,
Betsy
-------
∂10-Dec-86 1228 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU LOTS TO EAT TODAY!
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 12:28:19 PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 12:15:59-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: LOTS TO EAT TODAY!
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
There is a surplus of food so, forget those holiday diets!
come on over to Ventura Hall now! and indulge in Chicken legs,
Sandwiches, Salads , Fruit, Juices etc!
all comparably priced!
and hey kids, Ed Babar WILL MAKE YOU deals after 1:00 pm!
Half PRICE early today!
See you there! B. Y. O. A. (bring your own appetite.)
-------
∂10-Dec-86 1542 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU seminar this Friday
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 15:42:04 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Dec 86 15:06:20-PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 12:54:19-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: seminar this Friday
To: aflb.all@Score.Stanford.EDU, paco@Navajo.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12261751797.11.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Who: Ehud Shapiro
What: Access Time Complexity
When: Friday, December 12, at 1:15pm
Where: MJH252
Why: paco seminar
We develop a parallel complexity theory based on two
assumptions: a bit of information occupies some finite amount
of space; information transfer cannot be faster than the speed of light.
These assumptions are intuitively valid, physically sound and technologically
relevant. The theory is proposed as an alternative to the PRAM model of
execution and its associated complexity theory. We feel an alternative theory
is needed, since that model abstracts away the most fundamental aspect
of parallelism -- communication.
The main implications of our assumptions are that three
dimensional mesh connected networks are universal,
and that the ability of processors to
move in space has a fundamental effect on their computational power.
We define (sequential and parallel) stationary computers, and show that:
1. A parallel non-stationary computer can solve problems that no parallel
stationary computer can solve.
2. A sequential non-stationary computer (e.g. a Turing machine) can be more
efficient than a sequential stationary computer (e.g. a von Neumann
machine).
3. A parallel stationary computer can attain more than linear speedup
over a sequential stationary computer.
4. Three dimensional mesh connected networks can simulate any stationary
parallel network with the same volume loosing only a constant factor of
speed.
In addition, we define scalable networks, and show that networks with
less than $\Theta(n↑{1\over 3})$ diameter (e.g. complete binary
tree, hypercube, shuffle) are not scalable.
We define a notion of problem locality, use it to obtain lower bounds,
and show that nonlocal problems cannot be solved in constant time,
even with arbitrarily many processors, in contrast to what has been shown
for a CRCW PRAM.
Yosee Feldman and Ehud Shapiro
Department of Computer Science
Weizmann Institute of Science
-------
∂10-Dec-86 1801 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 18:01:39 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 10 Dec 86 17:29:51 PST
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 86 17:29:51 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"The Postgres Papers"
M. Stonebraker and L. A. Rowe, UCB/ERL M86/85, Berkeley
The papers included discuss the use of procedures as values in a DBMS
and the use of the lock mechanism to implement some aspects of logic.
"Minimalism, Justification, and Non-Monotonicity in Deductive Databases"
N. Bidiot and R. Hull (USC).
---jdu
∂10-Dec-86 1826 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, December 11, No. 10
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 18:26:03 PST
Date: Wed 10 Dec 86 16:58:14-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, December 11, No. 10
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
_____________________________________________________________________________
December 11, 1986 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 10
_____________________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, December 11, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Reading: Differences in Rule Type and their
Conference Room Structural Basis
by Stephen R. Anderson
Discussion led by Donald Churma
(Churma@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall Persistence, Intention, and Commitment
Room G-19 Phil Cohen
(pcohen@sri-warbucks.arpa)
Abstract in this Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THURSDAY, JANUARY, 8, 1987
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Resurrection of Metaphors -- A Tool for
Conference Room Transdisciplinary Migration
Discussion led by Egon Loebner
(Loebner%hp-thor@hplabs.hp.com)
Abstract in this Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall No Seminar
Room G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
There will be no TINLunch, Seminar, or Calendar on December 18, 25 and
on January 1 because of the University break. TINLunch and the
Calendar will resume on January 8 and the Seminar on January 15.
--------------
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: Differences in Rule Type and their Structural Basis
Discussion led by Donald Churma
December 11
Anderson is arguing, in somewhat programmatic fashion, for what is in
effect a fairly highly modularized view of phonology (although he
doesn't use this term). Essentially, he views phonology as having
three modules, one in which the metrical formalism is appropriate (in
which apparently only stress and syllabification belong), one where
things are done autosegmentally (tone, nasality, etc.), and one that
contains only `Garden-Variety' phonological rules (dissimilation,
funky morphophonemic rules, (controversially) vowel harmony). The
argument is basically the standard Chomsky/Pullum/Zwicky one that
modularization allows for a more constrained theory. Curiously, this
paper has had little or no effect on subsequent phonological practice.
Why?
--------------
THIS WEEK'S SEMINAR
Persistence, Intention, and Commitment
Phil Cohen
December 11
This talk, presenting joint work with Hector Levesque (University of
Toronto), establishes basic principles governing the rational balance
among an agent's beliefs, actions, and intentions. Such principles
provide specifications for artificial agents, and approximate a theory
of human action (as philosophers use the term). By making explicit
the conditions under which an agent can drop his goals, i.e., by
specifying how the agent is `committed' to his goals, the
formalism captures a number of important properties of intention.
Specifically, the formalism provides analyses for Bratman's three
characteristic functional roles played by intentions, and shows how
agents can avoid intending all the foreseen side-effects of what they
actually intend. Finally, the analysis shows how intentions can be
adopted relative to a background of relevant beliefs and other
intentions or goals. By relativizing one agent's intentions in terms
of beliefs about another agent's intentions (or beliefs), we derive a
preliminary account of interpersonal commitments.
--------------
MORPHOLOGY/SYNTAX/DISCOURSE INTERACTIONS GROUP
Diachronic Processes in the Evolution of Reflexives
Suzanne Kemmer
Kemmer@csli.stanford.edu
12:30, Monday, December 15, Ventura Conference Room
The historical development of reflexive morphemes into middle voice
markers (roughly, markers of subject-affectedness) is well-attested in
a wide range of languages. This talk concentrates on what I call
`two-form systems', i.e., languages which apparently have two
reflexive markers, a full and a reduced form (e.g., Icelandic,
Russian, Djola). I discuss some ways in which cross-linguistic
generalizations about these languages bear on issues of
representation.
Despite the similarity of these systems from a synchronic
perspective, it turns out that they can develop via two distinct
diachronic processes. In one, an original reflexive splits into two
formally and functionally distinct forms; in the other the reflexive
function is renewed by a new marker while the old reflexive becomes a
middle marker. The typological and diachronic evidence, taken
together, present a coherent picture of the relation between reflexive
and non-reflexive middle semantics.
--------------
NEXT TINLUNCH
Resurrection of Metaphors
A Tool for Transdisciplinary Migration
Egon E. Loebner
System Performance Center
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
January 8, 1987
It is proposed that some techniques which can accelerate entry into a
second scientific professional practice are analogous to the well
established deductive techniques by which many adults approach the
acquisition of a second language in a deliberate fashion. A
successful migration from one language community to another relies on
the transference of linguistic, cognitive and societal skills of
individuals from one system to a different system, which nevertheless
shares many linguistic and cultural universals with the former system.
The claim put forward here is that the very same skills are
transferred during transdisciplinary migration.
Language acquisition data, collected on four continents, strongly
suggest that "being bilingual can have tremendous advantages not only
in terms of language competencies but also in terms of cognitive and
social development" (W. E. Lambert, 1981, NYAS, Vol. 379, pp. 9-22).
I believe that becoming multidisciplinary can lead to similar
advantages in terms of professional and scientific competencies and
can induce an expanded metadisciplinary development of cognitive and
communicative skills.
The talk concentrates on the role that can be played by a
remarkable analogy, invented 131 years ago, by the world's master
builder of theory construction, James Clerk Maxwell. He defined it as
"that partial similarity between the laws of one science and those of
another which makes each of them illustrate the other". I plan to
show how such partial similarities can be extracted using textual
analyses of now dead metaphors which, while alive, aided theory
construction by, in the words of T. S. Kuhn, "calling forth a network
of similarities which help to determine the way in which (scientific)
language attaches to the world". Buttressing my argument through
reference to recent findings of linguists, philosophers,
psychologists, and educators on the role of metaphor in theory
construction and reconstruction, I plan to argue that dead metaphors
in unrelated fields are relatable if their metaphoricity had a common
origin and that these interrelations constitute a transformational
grammar that can assist in interpreting concepts of one field in terms
of the other field.
Finally I wish to suggest that the transdisciplinary migration
technique can not only enhance new discipline acquisition but can also
provide the metascientific means to integrate and unify practices and
theories in different branches of science, even in those that appear
to be quite remote at this point in history.
-------
∂10-Dec-86 1900 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Dec 86 19:00:20 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 10 Dec 86 18:51:10-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 10 Dec 86 17:51:06 PST
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 86 18:00:43 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 86 11:48:43 EST
From: selman%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@csnet-relay.arpa
Message_id: <C027.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 10 Dec 1986 10:01:57-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
A Day of Structure in Complexity Theory
Friday, January 23, 1987
Join us for a day of talks given by members of the Program Com-
mittee of the Second Annual Structure in Complexity Theory
Conference.
Schedule of Events
10:00 a.m. Shafi Goldwasser
M.I.T.
11:00 a.m. Uwe Schoning
EWH Koblenz
12:00 noon Lunch Break
1:30 p.m. Stephen Mahaney
AT&T Bell Laboratories
2:30 p.m. Neil Immerman
Yale University
All talks will take place at 356 Ell Center on the Northeastern
University campus. If you will be driving, for information about
visitor parking and maps of campus, please contact:
Mrs. Gerry Hayes
College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
360 Huntington Ave.
Boston, MA 02115
(617) 437-2462
For other information please contact Alan Selman, (617)437-8688,
selman@corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu.
The Second Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference will
be held June 16 -18, 1987, at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, and
is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on
Foundations of Computer Science, Cornell University, and
Northeastern University.
∂11-Dec-86 0014 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU NCube Computer Needs a Home
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Dec 86 00:11:47 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 11 Dec 86 00:07:57-PST
Date: 10 Dec 86 2358 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: NCube Computer Needs a Home
To: su-computers@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, combuyn@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, BillW@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
A new 64 processor "hypercube" computer made by NCube was recently donated
to Stanford and is currently running experimentally in Jacks Hall, Room 020.
It comes with free maintenance of hardware and software for a substantial
period, but so far no group has taken responsibility for its long-term
care and feeding. This note reviews alternative ways of providing it a
home and invites interested groups to speak up.
(Incidentally, we propose to call this machine "Braque," after a famous
cubist painter. "Picasso" would also be good, but is already taken.)
While hypercube computers such as Braque can provide very high performance
on certain kinds of problems that decompose nicely and that do not require
much communication between distant processors, they cannot substitute
directly for conventional timesharing systems. Anyone who does not
already know about hypercube architectures probably should not bother
reading further -- they probably are not for you.
FEATURES. Braque uses a Unix-like operating system that allows "space-
sharing" of computers, with each user operating some power-of-two number
of processors (i.e. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, or 64). There are compilers for
Fortran and C as well as an assembler. Ethernet software is not yet
available but is promised in January.
COST-POOL. Given that only interfacing and direct operating costs need be
covered, the cost of running Braque should be quite low. The most
economical approach would be for one or more interested groups to work out
an agreement to share its use and its operating costs, for example on a
fixed allocation basis. The principal cost would be providing a part-time
systems programmer to keep it up-to-date and provide some hand-holding for
users. This is the so-called "cost-pool" approach. In fact, the simplest
version would be to have a single group adopt the machine.
COST CENTER. If a substantial number of groups are interested in using
Braque or if there are other barriers to forming a simple cost-pool
agreement, an alternative approach is to form a "cost center." This would
require a modest investment in accounting software (on the order of a
person-month) and would also incur ongoing administrative costs for
billing. Users would pay for whatever resources they consume on a
month-by-month basis. This will be considered only if there are enough
prospective users to ensure that the start-up costs will be recovered.
TRY IT OUT. Braque is currently available for experimental use via two
TTY ports connected to an ethertip. Unfortunately, there is no flow
control on these connections, so there are problems in receiving large
amounts of output. If you or any of your associates would like to use the
system on a no-cost experimental basis, contact Bill Westfield
(BillW@Score or Ext. 3-1407) to get a trial account. System documentation
is available for loan from Jutta McCormick (Jacks Hall Room 313 or
Jutta@Score or Ext. 3-0572).
REGISTER SOON. Those who conclude that this machine would likely be
useful in their work are asked to confirm their interest to Les Earnest
(Les@Sail) and to state their preferance for a cost-pool or a cost center
arrangement not later than January 2, 1987. The decision on how (or
whether) it will be operated on an ongoing basis should be made by
January 15.
Les Earnest
∂11-Dec-86 1459 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU LOTS-LEFT_OVER Sale
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Dec 86 14:59:00 PST
Date: Thu 11 Dec 86 14:35:33-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: LOTS-LEFT_OVER Sale
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Hey!
what's the problem? not hungry today? or were you just too busy to come
and eat lunch today?
Well, we've got a ton of sandwiches, and some delicious salads, left-over!
All right, kids, Ed Barbar will make you DEALS on these LEFT-OVERS! Half
price! Now, you can't beat that!(it's not an egg! get it?!!?)
That means I'll let you have a big half sandwich for only .60 cents!
and we'll include a ten speed bike with each purchase! Salads---.35 cents!
bike included!
so,COME ON DOWN AND CHOW!
Merry Christmas!
bye, kids!
-------
∂12-Dec-86 1053 BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Temporary home needed
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Dec 86 10:53:47 PST
Date: Fri 12 Dec 86 10:41:58-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Temporary home needed
To: Folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: BBoard@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
My family and I need someplace to live from mid January to mid
February. There are four of us. It would be simpler if it were
furnished, but we could also maanage with someplace that was
unfurnished. Suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
-------
∂12-Dec-86 1208 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Dec 86 12:08:43 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 12 Dec 86 11:41:10-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Fri, 12 Dec 86 11:33:19 PST
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 86 11:43:16 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing
Date: 11 Dec 1986 12:32:26-EST (Thursday)
From: Barbara Simons <simons@ibm.com>
Subject: Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing
Message_id: <C028.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 11 Dec 1986 12:37:38-EST (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Call for Papers
DIRECTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF ADVANCED COMPUTING
Seattle, Washington July 12, 1987
The adoption of current computing technology, and of technologies that
seem likely to emerge in the near future, will have a significant impact
on the military, on financial affairs, on privacy and civil liberty, on
the medical and educational professions, and on commerce and business.
The aim of the symposium is to consider these influences in a social and
political context as well as a technical one. The social implications of
current computing technology, particularly in artificial intelligence, are
such that attempts to separate science and policy are unrealistic. We
therefore solicit papers that directly address the wide range of ethical
and moral questions that lie at the junction of science and policy.
Within this broad context, we request papers that address the following
particular topics. The scope of the topics includes, but is not limited
to, the sub-topics listed.
RESEARCH FUNDING
- Sources of Research Funding
- Effects of Research Funding
- Funding Alternatives
DEFENSE APPLICATIONS
- Machine Autonomy and the Conduct of War
- Practical Limits to the Automation of War
- Can An Automated Defense System Make War Obsolete?
COMPUTING IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY
- Community Access
- Computerized Voting
- Civil Liberties
- Computing and the Future of Work
- Risks of the New Technology
COMPUTERS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
- Computing Access for Handicapped People
- Resource Modeling
- Arbitration and Conflict Resolution
- Educational, Medical and Legal Software
Submissions will be read by members of the program committee, with the
assistance of outside referees. Tentative program committee includes
Andrew Black (U. WA), Alan Borning (U. WA), Jonathan Jacky (U. WA),
Nancy Leveson (UCI), Abbe Mowshowitz (CCNY) and Terry Winograd (Stanford).
Complete papers, not exceeding 6000 words, should include an abstract,
and a heading indicating to which topic it relates. Papers related to
AI and/or in-progress work will be favored. Submissions will be judged
on clarity, insight, significance, and originality. Papers (3 copies)
are due by April 1, 1987. Notices of acceptance or rejection will be
mailed by May 1, 1987. Camera ready copy will be due by June 1, 1987.
Proceedings will be distributed at the Symposium, and will be on sale
during the 1987 AAAI conference.
For further information contact Jonathan Jacky (206-548-4117) or Doug
Schuler (206-783-0145).
Sponsored by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
P.O. Box 85481
Seattle, WA 98105
∂12-Dec-86 1220 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu Int'l Workshop on Par. Alg. and Arch. (2nd announcement)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Dec 86 12:18:18 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Forsythe.Stanford.EDU.#Internet) by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Fri 12 Dec 86 11:28:38-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Fri, 12 Dec 86 11:20:36 PST
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 86 11:28:18 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: Int'l Workshop on Par. Alg. and Arch. (2nd announcement)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 86 13:31:57 CST
From: Clark Thomborson <clark%umnd-cs-luke%umn-duluth.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Int'l Workshop on Par. Alg. and Arch. (2nd announcement)
Message_id: <C029.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 11 Dec 1986 12:38:52-EST (Thursday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Second Announcement
International Workshop
on Parallel Algorithms
and Architectures
to be held in Suhl from May 25 till 30, 1987
Chairpersons:
Andreas Albrecht, Humboldt University
Hermann Jung, Humboldt University
Topics:
Models of parallel computations;
Relations among complexity classes, especially simultaneous
resource bounds;
New algorithms for individual problems, e.g. from graph theory,
logic programming, combinatorics and computational geometry;
Hardware algorithms, parallel architectures.
Invited lectures:
J. Herath (Yokohama) N.N. Mirenko (Novosibirsk)
R. Kannan (Pittsburgh) B. Monien (Paderborn)
E. Koerner (Ilmenau, Tokyo) W. Paul (Saarbr\"{u}cken)
A. Konagaya (Tokyo) F.P. Preparata (Urbana)
K. Mehlhorn (Saarbr\"{u}cken) C.D. Thompson (Duluth)
J. Miklosko (Bratislava) C.K. Yap (New York)
Program committee:
A. Albrecht (Berlin) K. Mehlhorn (Saarbr\"{u}cken)
von zur Gathen (Toronto) B. Monien (Paderborn)
H. Jung (Berlin) W. Paul (Saarbr\"{u}cken)
R. Kannan (Pittsburgh) H. Thiele (Berlin)
A. Konogaya (Tokyo) C.D. Thompson (Duluth)
V. Kotov (Novosibirsk) G. Wechsung (Jena)
T. Leighton (Cambridge) C.K. Yap (New York)
Conference fee:
350.00 DM (including meals, excursion, banquet), proceedings)
Lodging:
single room, 50.00 DM per night
double room, 80.00 DM per night
Address for application forms and further information:
Thomas Zeugmann
Dept. of Mathematics
Humboldt University Berlin
P.O. Box 1297
Berlin 1086
German Democratic Republic
Please note that EUROCAL '87 (sponsored by ACM, SIGSAM) is to be held
June 2-5 in Leipzig. Leipzig can be reached from Suhl by train in
about 2 hours.
∂12-Dec-86 1900 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU Dallas meeting
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Dec 86 18:55:23 PST
Date: 12 Dec 1986 18:25-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: Dallas meeting
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]12-Dec-86 18:25:14.MATHIS>
Thanks to everyone. I think we had a very productive meeting.
We have a lot of work to do in preparation for the March 16-18,
1987, meeting in Palo Alto. Let's keep the communication going.
Watch this space and help fill it. -- Bob Mathis
∂13-Dec-86 1234 LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU FOOD TO EAT NOW>>>
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Dec 86 12:34:37 PST
Date: Sat 13 Dec 86 12:31:02-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: FOOD TO EAT NOW>>>
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
There is left-over food in the "Lunch" refrigerator from last night's
Holiday Party. Please help yourself to some honey baked ham and round
table pizza. There are some desserts around also(though THESE probably
won't be there when you read this.) Bread and condiments for ham
sandwiches are in that frig. , too.
Enjoy!
Lunch, Inc.
-------
∂14-Dec-86 2315 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger -- 11am
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Dec 86 23:15:49 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Sun, 14 Dec 86 23:11:45-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA07164; Sun,
14 Dec 86 23:15:08 PST
Date: Sun 14 Dec 86 23:15:01-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: REMINDER: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH -- Richard Waldinger -- 11am
To: planlunch_reminder@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 14-Dec-86 23:15:01.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THEORY OF IMPERATIVE LISP
Richard Waldinger (WALDINGER@SRI-AI)
Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, December 15
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
Imperative LISP is LISP with destructive operations, such as rplaca
and setq, which can alter data structures. We present a theory, based
on situational logic, intended for the specification and automatic
synthesis of imperative LISP programs. Hand derivations of programs
for destructive reverse and append have been conducted within this
theory.
-------
∂15-Dec-86 0055 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #83
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 00:50:59 PST
Date: Sun 14 Dec 1986 15:59-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #83
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 15 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 83
Today's Topics:
Query - Bratko text,
Programming - Comment Style,
LP Library - Technical Reports from UT & Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 December 86 09:37-EDT
From: ATSWAF%UOFT01.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: Bratko text
Has anyone looked over the chapter in, Prolog Programming for
Artificial Intelligence by Ivan Bratko; called "Expert Systems". In
there is a expert system shell. But after typing it in I find that two
clauses are missing, one called 'wastold', and the other called
'end_answers'. Does anyone have copies of these or know what they
should be?
Thank you.
-- Wendy Fraker
------------------------------
Date: 7 Dec 86 19:37:05 GMT
From: John Dowding <sdcrdcf!burdvax!bigburd!dowding@hplabs.hp.com>
Subject: Comment Style
A standard way (at least, in Edinburgh) of denoting the status
of arguments to a Prolog predicate is to include a comment
line before the body of the before the clause, in which arguments
expected to be instantiated are prefixed by '+',
uninstantiated arguments by a '-', and arguments where it
doesn't matter (or where either can be used) by '?'.
For example,
%% Append(+L1, +L2, -L3)
indicates the status of the arguments to the usual use of the
standard 'append' clause. To illustrate further uses, further
comments could be added, viz:
%% Append(+L1, -L2, +L3) is the calling pattern for finding if
L1 is a member of L3. (?L2 would also be acceptable).
In use, I've found that this notation makes Prolog code much
easier to read and understand, which given some of what is possible
in Prolog is a very desirable attribute. What say anyone else?
-- Rick Innis.
I have found this notation a little bit misleading because it is
unclear whether, for instance, when '+' is used, if the programmer
intended the argument to be fully instantiated (i.e., ground), or
simply non-variable.
Also, it does not allow certain kinds of important distinctions to be
made. For instance, a predicate might have a modeing foo(?,?) because
the programmer intends it to be used with either the first or second
argument instantiated, however, may not intend that it be called with
both arguments uninstantiated. To express this, the programmer would
have to write something like: foo(+,-) | foo(-,+) | foo(+,+).
To me this seems kind of awkward.
I dont have a better notation in mind. Any suggestions?
-- John Dowding
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 86 22:59:24 CST
From: Vipin Kumar <kumar@sally.utexas.edu>
Subject: Technical Reports on Intelligent Backtracking and Parallelism
The following Reports are available from The AI Lab at the University
of Texas. For a copy please write to
Chrissie Sawyer Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Computer Science
Department University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712 Arpanet:
ai.chrissie@r20.UTEXAS.EDU
"An Intelligent Backtracking Scheme for Prolog" by Vipin Kumar and
Yow-jian Lin, AI TR86- Artificial Intelligence Laboratory,University
of Texas at Austin, December 1986
"A Framework for Intelligent Backtracking in Logic programs" by Vipin
Kumar and Yow-jian Lin, AI TR86-36 Artificial Intelligence
Laboratory,University of Texas at Austin, October 1986
"An Execution Model for Exploiting AND-parallelism in Logic programs"
by Yow-Jian Lin and Vipin Kumar, AI TR86-34 Artificial Intelligence
Laboratory,University of Texas at Austin, September 1986
"A Parallel Execution Scheme for Exploiting AND-parallelism of Logic
Programs" by Yow-Jian Lin and Vipin Kumar, AI TR86-23 Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory,University of Texas at Austin, March 1986
(Also appeared in 1986 Int'l Parallel processing Conf. proc.)
"An Intelligent Backtracking Algorithm for Parallel Execution of Logic
Programs" by Yowjian Lin, Vipin Kumar and Clement Leung, Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory,University of Texas at Austin, March 1986, AI
TR 86-22 (Also appeared in 1986 Int'l Logic Programming Conf. proc.)
------------------------------
Date: Sun 14 Dec 86 15:51:21-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Update
[cwr]
I'll be re-posting section A, B, C, E, G, and K of Smith's Declarative
Language Bibliography. My apologies to those that will be seeing
these for at least the second time - a number of people have
complained these sections didn't make it through.
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂15-Dec-86 0808 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Curriculum vitaes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 08:08:07 PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 86 08:05:03-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Curriculum vitaes
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12263009857.16.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am still accepting updated curriculum vitaes!
-------
∂15-Dec-86 0905 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Gray Tuesday Reminder
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 09:05:17 PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 86 09:01:46-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Reminder
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12263020183.18.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Remember that Gray Tuesday is tomorrow from 2:30-5:00 pm, in Jacks
146. If you aren't planning to attend the meeting, please let me
know how your advisees are doing. If you feel they aren't making
reasonable progress, also state what you'd like accomplished, either by
Black Friday or before (as it will be almost 6 months before the Black
Friday meeting).
Victoria
-------
∂15-Dec-86 1116 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Winter TAs
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 11:16:22 PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 86 11:12:14-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Winter TAs
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12263043935.35.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils would like to balance the budget, so he has asked me to be more careful
about TA expenditures starting in Winter quarter. One of the reasons that we
spend so much money on TAs is that we guess the enrollment and often over-
estimate. This year I plan to assign a minimal set of TAs on the basis of
last year's enrollment using the following formula:
Type Formula
-------------------------------------------
non-lab 25% TA for each 25 students
lab 25% TA for each 20 students
Notes: A lab course is defined as one that requires at least 6 hours
per week of programming. For fractions, round up (somewhat
generously). Adjust the allocation for a course of more than 3 units
(e.g., a 4-unit course gets 4/3 the allocation).
In addition to assigning the number of TAs predicted by this formula, I will
designate some "wait list TAs" who will be appointed after the quarter begins
if the enrollment warrants an increase.
One other way in which the department can save money on TAs is to make more use
of the distinction between Course Assistant (CA) and Teaching Assistant (TA).
A TA is normally doing very high-level work for the course, including
discussion sections, preparation of sample solutions, and office hours. A CA
normally provides grading assistance and some office hours. TAs cost more than
CAs, so we can save money by switching some of our TA appointments to CA
appointments. Typically you would identify one or more TAs as high-level
people and have one or more CAs work for them as the grading support for the
class. If you think you can switch some of your TA support in Winter to CA
support, please send a message to Claire Stager (STAGER@SCORE) to let her know
what percentage of your support should be switched.
-------
∂15-Dec-86 1217 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Re: Winter TAs
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 12:17:28 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Dec 86 11:49:40-PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 86 11:49:00-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Winter TAs
To: REGES@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Is there any adjustment to this formula for TV courses? --t
∂15-Dec-86 1227 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Winter TAs
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 12:27:09 PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 86 12:05:45-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Winter TAs
To: WINOGRAD@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
cc: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 15 Dec 86 11:54:44-PST
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12263053676.35.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The formula is already fairly complex, but it could be adjusted to deal with
TV. TV students generate enrollments, so you do get allocation for them along
with other students (for NCOs and HCPs). I could add a special adjustment for
a class being taught on TV, but I'm not sure how much that should be. An extra
25% TA for administrative hassle? Or should it be something like a 20%
increase on the basic allocation? Or isn't it worth making the distinction,
since most CS classes are taught on TV?
I don't think this nees to be discussed on the whole faculty list. Send me
your opinions and I'll discuss it with Nils to make a decision.
-------
∂15-Dec-86 1630 RPG Contents of the X3J13 mailing list
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Here they are:
rpg
#msg.msg[jnk,jmc]
hst
"uwmcsd1!marque!maxiv"@UNIX.MACC.WISC.EDU
coffee@AEROSPACE.ARPA
cugini@ICST-ECF
dabrowski@ICST-ECF
"J.Dalton%uk.ac.edinburgh"@CS.UCL.AC.UK
ffitch@RAND-UNIX
padget@RAND-UNIX
NGALL@BBNG.ARPA
"barmar%bco"@HI-MULTICS.ARPA
hadden@HI-MULTICS.ARPA
hemphill@NRL-AIC.ARPA
"uwmcsd1!marque!gregj"@RSCH.WISC.EDU
"fkunze%franz.uucp"@UCBVAX.Berkeley.EDU
"jkf%franz.uucp"@UCBVAX.Berkeley.EDU
"smh%franz.uucp"@UCBVAX.Berkeley.EDU
Baggins@IBM.COM
Brandon@IBM.COM
"marick%mycroft"@GSWD-VMS.ARPA
dougr@MIT-EDDIE.ARPA
"primerd!barryn"@MIT-EDDIE.ARPA
"mcvax!inria!chaillou"@seismo.CSS.GOV
"mcvax!inria!crcge1!neidl"@seismo.CSS.GOV
peck@SPAM.ISTC.SRI.COM
scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL
squires@VAX.DARPA.MIL
gls@ZARATHUSTRA.THINK.COM
Wegman@IBM.COM
antonisse@MITRE.ARPA
jjohnson@MITRE.ARPA
Wieland@MITRE.ARPA
Yonke@USC-ECL.ARPA
Ohlander@ISI.EDU
balzer@A.ISI.EDU
Mathis@A.ISI.EDU
berman@VAXA.ISI.EDU
masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
Adler.pa@XEROX.COM
Bobrow.pa@XEROX.COM
pavel.pa@XEROX.COM
daniels.pa@XEROX.COM
gregor.pa@XEROX.COM
Ricci.pa@XEROX.COM
Sye.pasa@XEROX.COM
vittal.pasa@XEROX.COM
"JerryB%OZ"@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
"willc%tekchips@tek.csnet"@RELAY.CS.NET
"sridhar%tekchips@tek.csnet"@RELAY.CS.NET
"angela%gmdtub.uucp@Germany.csnet"@RELAY.CS.NET
"Bartley%TI-CSL"@RELAY.CS.NET
"Bate%TI-CSL"@RELAY.CS.NET
"Dussud%AUSOME%TI-CSL"@RELAY.CS.NET
"ida%utokyo-relay.csnet"@RELAY.CS.NET
"Waldrum%TI-CSL"@RELAY.CS.NET
"TURBA%sperry-csd.csnet"@RELAY.CS.NET
bawden@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
RG@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
"mike%acorn"@LIVE-OAK.LCS.MIT.EDU
"RSG%OZ"@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
JAR@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Soley@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
"edsel!eb"@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
"edsel!jonl"@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
"edsel!jlz"@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
RAM@C.CS.CMU.EDU
sgadol@Sun.COM
Muchnick@Sun.COM
CPerdue@Sun.COM
"quintus!gehrig!bak"@Sun.COM
Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
KMP@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
DLW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
Goldstein@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
ACW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
chaowatkins@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
griss@HPLABS.HP.COM
"DCM%HPFCLP"@HPLABS.HP.COM
chapin@hplabs.hp.com
Krall@MCC.COM
Loeffler@MCC.COM
"Brown%Bach.Dec.Com"@DECWRL.DEC.COM
slater@umbc2.umd.edu
∂15-Dec-86 2114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Upcomming Absense
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 21:14:09 PST
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Dec 86 21:09:54-PST
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-AIM.ARPA>
To: ksl-lispm@Sumex-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Upcomming Absense
Date: 15-Dec-86 21:11:10
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2744082669@KSL-EXP-1>
Folks,
I will be gone this Thursday, Dec 18, through Sunday, Jan 4, and
Michael will be gone the 22'nd through the 4'th. I will try to read my
mail over that time, but if an emergency should arise, please contact
James Rice (Rice@Sumex), who has graciously agreed to watch the store
while we're gone. He knows who to call for "normal" emergencies, and
how to get hold of me for more esoteric catastophies. Hopfully, you
will all be so busy having a nice holiday, you won't notice if your
machines break!
Speaking of broken machines, we're still trying to fix S10, but it
isn't being very cooperative, so it's likely to be flaky while we're
gone, but we haven't forgotten it, or Ludicrous.
-- Rich
∂15-Dec-86 2114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:Acuff@KSL-EXP-1 Upcomming Absense
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Dec 86 21:14:09 PST
Received: from KSL-EXP-1 by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Dec 86 21:09:54-PST
From: Rich Acuff <Acuff@Sumex-AIM.ARPA>
To: ksl-lispm@Sumex-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Upcomming Absense
Date: 15-Dec-86 21:11:10
Sender: Acuff@KSL-EXP-1
Message-Id: <Acuff.2744082669@KSL-EXP-1>
Folks,
I will be gone this Thursday, Dec 18, through Sunday, Jan 4, and
Michael will be gone the 22'nd through the 4'th. I will try to read my
mail over that time, but if an emergency should arise, please contact
James Rice (Rice@Sumex), who has graciously agreed to watch the store
while we're gone. He knows who to call for "normal" emergencies, and
how to get hold of me for more esoteric catastophies. Hopfully, you
will all be so busy having a nice holiday, you won't notice if your
machines break!
Speaking of broken machines, we're still trying to fix S10, but it
isn't being very cooperative, so it's likely to be flaky while we're
gone, but we haven't forgotten it, or Ludicrous.
-- Rich
∂16-Dec-86 0152 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #84
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 01:52:28 PST
Date: Mon 15 Dec 1986 07:52-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #84
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 16 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 84
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part A,
& Bratko text
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 86 9:18:43 EST
From: Paul Broome <broome@BRL.ARPA>
Subject: Bratko text
I haven't tried the program on pages 336-338 but from reading the
program it seems that 'wastold' (was told) and 'end_answers' are
intended to be undefined when the program begins. They are facts
learned by querying the user.
Both 'wastold' (was told) and 'end_answers' are asserted to the
database in 'process' at the bottom of page 337. The clause 'ask'
queries the user about an 'Answer' to 'Goal' which is recorded in
'wastold'.
-- Paul Broome
------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 86 09:32:11 GMT
From: Andy Cheese <mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!abc@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Part A
ABDA76a Abdali S.K. An Abstraction Algorithm for Combinatory Logic
Journal of Symbolic Logic Vol 41, Number 1, March 1976
ABEL85a * Abelson H. & Sussman G.J. with Sussman J. Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs MIT Press 1985
ABEL? Abelson H. & Sussman G.J. Computation: An Introduction to
Engineering Design Massachusetts Institute of technology, U.S.A.
ABEL? Abelson H. & Sussman G.J. Scheme Demonstration Programs for
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, U.S.A.
ABRA82a Abramsky S. SECD-M - A Virtual Machine for Applicative
Multiprogramming Computer Systems Lab, Queen Mary College, Nov 82
ABRA82b Abramson H. Unification-Based Conditional Binding Constructs
TR 82-7, Department of Computer Science, Univ of British Columbia,
Canada August 1982
ABRA83a Abramsky S. On Semantic Foundations For Applicative
Multiprogramming Computer Systems Lab, Queen Mary College, 1983
ABRA83b Abramson H. A Prological Definition of HASL a Purely
Functional Language With Unification Based Conditional Binding
Expressions TR 83-8, Department of Computer Science, Univ of British
Columbia, Canada July 26, 1983
ABRA86a * Abramson H. A Prological Definition of HASL, a Purely
Functional Language With Unification- Based Conditional Binding
Expressions in DEGR86a, pp 73-130 1986
ABRI85a Abrial J.R. Programming as a Mathematical Exercise in HOA85a
1985
ACKE79a Ackerman W.B. & Dennis J.B. VAL - Preliminary Reference
Manual MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Technical report TR-218
June 1979
ACKE79b Ackerman W.B. Data Flow Languages AFIPS Proceedings, pp
1087-1095 June 1979
ACKE82a * Ackerman W.B. Dataflow Languages IEEE Computer, pp 15-25
February 1982
ADDA85a Adams G.B & Brown R.L. & Denning Report on an Evaluation Study
of Data Flow Computation RIACS-TR85 2, Ames Research Group April 1985
AGRA85a * Agrawal V.K. & Patnaik L.M. & Goel P.S. Towards Formal
Specification of a Distributed Computing System International Journal
of Computer and Information Sciences, Vol 14, No 5 pp 277-306 1985
AIDA84a Aida H. & Moto-oka T. Performance Measurement of Parallel
Logic Programming System "Paralog" Dept. of Electrical Eng.,
University of Tokyo
AIDA85a * Aida H. The Logic Programming Conference '85 Conference
Report New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 3, pp 334-335 1985
ALEX85a * Alexandridis N.A. & Bilalis N.A. & Tsanakas P.D. Using
Functional Programming For Hierarchical Structures in Image Processing
in Digital Techniques in Simulation, Communication and Control (IMACS)
(ed Tzafestas S.G. ) pp 175-181 North Holland 1985
AILIST85a * AIList Digest Volume 3 : Issue 171 Monday 18th November
1985
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 11 Wednesday 22 January 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 12 Thursday 23 January 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 13 Thursday 23 January 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 14 Friday 24 January 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 15 Friday 24 January 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 20 Friday 7th February 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 36 Wednesday 26 February
1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 37 Thursday 27 February 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 38 Thursday 27 February 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 39 Thursday 27 February 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 40 Friday 28 February 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 41 Friday 28 Febrauary 1986
AILIST86 * AIList Digest Volume 4 : Issue 45 Thursday 6th March 1986
ALLI85a * Allison L. Programming Denotational Semantics II Computer
Journal, Vol 28, no 5, pp 480-486 1985
ALVEY83a * Alvey News Issue Number 1 September 1983
ALVEY83b * Alvey News Issue Number 2 December 1983
ALVEY83c * Alvey Software Engineering - A Strategy Overview November
1983
ALVEY83d * Alvey VLSI And CAD Strategy December 1983
ALVEY84a * Alvey News Issue Number 3 February 1984
ALVEY84b * Alvey News Issue Number 4 April 1984
AlVEY84c * Alvey News Issue Number 5 June 1984
ALVEY84d * Alvey News Issue Number 6 August 1984
ALVEY84e * Alvey News Issue Number 7 October 1984
ALVEY84f * Alvey News Issue Number 8 December 1984
ALVEY84g * Alvey Directorate Infrastructure Policy September 1984
ALVEY84h * Software Reliability And Metrics Programme Overview Alvey
Directorate April 1984
ALVEY84i * Software Engineering/IKBS Strategy For Knowledge Based IPSE
Development Alvey Directorate August 1984
ALVEY84j * Report To The Alvey Directorate On A Short Survey Of Expert
Systems In UK Business Submitted by Alex d'Agapeyeff Supplement To
Alvey News Issue Number 4 April 1984
ALVEY84k * Alvey Man-Machine Interface Strategy August 1984
ALVEY84l * Alvey Communications Study September 1984
ALVEY84m * Alvey IKBS Research Theme Inference Workshop Report No. 1
Imperial College, London 19-20 September 1984
ALVEY84n * Alvey IKBS Special Interest Group Architectures For large
Knowledge Based Systems Proceedings of First Workshop Manchester
University 22-24 May 1984
ALVEY84o * Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Architectures For
Large Knowledge Bases Sponsored by the Alvey Directorate Manchester
University 9-11 July 1984
ALVEY85a * Alvey News Issue Number 9 February 1985
ALVEY85b * Alvey News Issue Number 10 April 1985
ALVEY85c * Alvey News Issue Number 11 June 1985
ALVEY85d * Alvey News Issue Number 12 August 1985
ALVEY85e * Alvey News Issue Number 14 December 1985
ALVEY85f * Alvey Architecture Strategy April 1985
ALVEY85g * Alvey Programme Annual Report 1985 November 1985
ALVEY85h * Alvey Programme Annual Report 1985 Poster Supplement
November 1985
ALVEY86a * Alvey News Issue Number 15 February 1986
ALVEY86b * Alvey News Issue Number 16 April 1986
ALVEY86c * Alvey News Issue Number 17 June 1986
ALVEY86d * Alvey News Issue Number 18 August 1986
ALVEY86e * Alvey Programme Annual report 1986 October 1986
ALVEY86f * Alvey Programme Annual Report 1986 Poster Supplement
October 1986
ALVEY86g * Alvey News Issue Number 19 October 1986
ALVEY86h * Alvey Conference Report 1986
AMAM82a Amamiya M. & Takahashi N. & Naruse T. & Yoshida M. A Data
Flow Processor Array System for Solving Partial Differential Equations
Int. Symp. on Applied Mathematics and Information Science March 1982
AMAM85a * Amamiya M. Report on US-Japan Seminar - Knowledge Systems :
Cooperation through Competition Conference Report New Generation
Computing, Vol 3, No 3, pp 331-333 1985
ANDE83a * Anderson S. Analysing A Restricted Class Of Functional
Programs Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London
pp 66-97 11-13th April 1983
ANDE85a * Anderson J. & Cohen S. & Davis A. & Robison S. & Stevens K.
FAIM1 User Interface IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Architecture, UMIST, Manchester July 15-18 1985
ANDR80a Principles of Firmware Engineering in Microprogram Control
ISBN 0 914894 63 3 Blackwell Scientific Pubs. 1980
AOYA85a * Aoyagi T. & Fujita M. & Moto-oka T. Temporal Logic
Programming Language Tokio - Programming in Tokio in WADA86a, pp
128-137 1985
APT80a * Apt K.R. & Francez N. & Roever W. P. De A Proof System for
Communicating Sequential Processes ACM Transactions on Programming
Languages and Systems, Vol 2, No 3 pp 359-385 July 1980
APT81a * Apt K.R. Ten Years of Hoare's Logic : A Survey - Part 1 ACM
Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 3, No 4 pp
431-483 October 1981
APT82a * Apt K.R. & Van Emden M.H. Contributions To The Theory Of
Logic Programming Journal of ACM, Vol 29, No 3, pp 841-862 July 1982
APT83a * Apt K.R. & Olderog E.R. Proof Rules And Transformations
Dealing With Fairness Science of Computer Programming, 3, pp 65-100
1983
APT86a * Apt K.R. & Kozen D.C. Limits For Automatic Verification of
Finite-State Concurrent Systems Information Processing Letters, 22, pp
307-309 30 May 1986
ARBI75a Arbib M.A. & Manes E.G. Arrows, Structures and Functors : The
Categorical Imperative Academic Press 1975
ARNO80a * Arnold A. & Nivat M. Metric Interpretations Of Infinite
Trees And Semantics Of Non Deterministic Recursive Programs
Theoretical Computer Science, 11, pp 181-205 1980
ARSA82a * Arsac J. & Kodratoff Y. Some Techniques for Recursion
Removal from Recursive Functions ACM Transactions on Programming
Languages and Systems, Vol 4, No 2 pp 295-322 April 1982
ARVI78a Arvind & Gostelow K.P. & Plouffe W. An Asynchronous
Programming Language and Computing Machine Dept. of Information and
Computer Science, Tech Rep 114A University of California Irvine,
December 1978
ARVI83a Arvind & Dertouzos M.L. & Iannucci R.A. A Multiprocessor
Emulation Facility MIT Lab for Computer Science Technical Report 302
October 1983
ARVI84a * Arvind & Brock J.D. Resource Managers in Functional
Programming Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 1, pp 5-21
1984
ARVI84b Arvind & Kathail V. & Pingali K. Sharing of Computation in
Functional Language Implementations Lab for Computer Science Tech Rep
??? (sic), 24 July 1984
ARVI85a * Arvind Managing Resources in a Parallel Machine (Extended
Abstract) IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer
Architecture, UMIST, Manchester July 15-18 1985
ASHC76a * Ashcroft E.A. & Wadge W. Lucid - A Formal System For
Writing and Proving Programs SIAM J on Computing Vol 5 no 3, 1976 pp
336-354 1976
ASHC77a Ashcroft E.A. & Wadge W.W. LUCID, a Non-Procedural Language
with Iteration CACM Vol 20 No 7 p519-526 July 1977
ASHC82a * Ashcroft E.A. & Wadge W.W. R for Semantics ACM TOPLAS, Vol
4, No 2, pp 283-294 April 1982
ASHC83a Ashcroft E.A. Proposal for a Demand-Driven Tagged Dataflow
Machine SRI Document Sept 1983
ASH85a Ashcroft E.A. Eazyflow Architecture SRI Technical Report
CSL-147, April 1985
ASH85b Ashcroft E.A. Ferds--Massive Parallelism in Lucid Document
1985
ASH85c Ashcroft E.A. & Wadge W.W. The Syntax and Semantics of Lucid
SRI Technical Report CSL-147 April 1985
ASHC85d * Ashcroft E.A. & Jagannathan R. Operator Nets IFIP TC-10
Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture, UMIST,
Manchester July 15-18 1985
ASO84a Aso M. Simulator of XP's ICOT Research Center, Technical
Report TR-041 January 1984
ATKI83a * Atkinson M.P & Bailey P.J. & Chisholm K.J. & Cockshott P.W.
& Morrison R. "An Approach to Persistent Programming" The Computer
Journal,Vol.26,No.4, pp 360-365 1983
ATKI85a * Atkinson M.P. & Morrison R. Procedures as Persistent Data
Objects ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 7,
No 4, pp 539-559 October 1985
AUGU84a * Augustsson L. A Compiler for Lazy ML Proceedings of 1984
ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, Austin, Texas pp
218-227 August 1984
AZAR85a * Azari H. & Veler Y. Functional Language Directed Data
Driven machine Microprocessing and Microprogramming 16, pp 127-132
September/October 1985
-- Andy Cheese
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂16-Dec-86 0842 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Grade Sheets
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 08:42:51 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 08:39:29-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Grade Sheets
To: Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, TAs@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12263278271.31.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There seems to be some confusion as to what to do with completed grade
sheets:
Please return them to me in CS TAC; I will forward them on to the Registrar
after removing our departmental copy. I must have all completed sheets by
noon December 22 in order to process and deliver them to the Registrar's
Office by the December 23 deadline.
Thank you all for your cooperation!
-------
∂16-Dec-86 0953 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Reminder: Gray Tuesday meeting today at 2:30 downstairs
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 09:53:47 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 16 Dec 86 09:48:39-PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 09:41:00-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Reminder: Gray Tuesday meeting today at 2:30 downstairs
To: Faculty@score
If everyone comes prepared (review your students' records before the
meeting) this will not take the full scheduled time (until 5). I
anticipate finishing by 4 with your cooperation. Thanks. --t.
∂16-Dec-86 1140 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Mary Donoghue's replacement
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 11:40:28 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 11:38:42-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Mary Donoghue's replacement
To: AC@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12263310896.16.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am pleased to announce that Sharon Bergman has assumed the sponsored
research administrative responsibilities of Mary Donoghue. Since Sharon
has worked in that office for more than two years, both independently and
with Mary during the last year and a half, she is quite familiar with the
job requirements and responsibilities. The Accounting Assistant III position
which Sharon is vacating will be posted with Personnel this week. The person
hired for this position will work under Sharon's direction.
Betty
-------
∂16-Dec-86 1142 JOHN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Seminar Announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 11:42:03 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 11:35:07-PST
From: John Perry <JOHN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Seminar Announcement
To: Folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Seminar: PHILOSOPHY 396: Topics in Logical Theory: Mental States and Action
Time: Monday 7:30-9:30, Winter Quarter
Place: Ventura Seminar Room
Who: David Israel with the assistance of John Perry
Units: By arrangement
We will attempt to show why a coherent architecture for situated
agents {must, should, might, can} include the capacity for belief in
propositions that do not have the agent as a constituent. Potential
participants who would like to know what this might mean can consult
the following:
Israel, David: The role of propositional objects of
belief in action. Available from author.
Perry, John: Circumstantial attitudes and benevolent
cognition. CSLI Report #53. Also in
Jeremy Butterfield (ed.) Language,
Mind and Logic, Cambridge U. Press, 1986.
-------
∂16-Dec-86 1204 HAILPERIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU ncube
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 12:04:43 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 12:00:38-PST
From: Max Hailperin <HAILPERIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: ncube
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12263314890.73.HAILPERIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
I read the ncube documentation (which was fairly helpful aside from having
practically zero performance paramenters), and will summarize if anyone wants
me to.
-------
∂16-Dec-86 1232 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU More on grade sheets
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 12:32:49 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 86 12:04:10-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: More on grade sheets
To: Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, Sec@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12263315531.48.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
One more note on the grade sheets:
When they are completed, the easiest way to return them to me would
probably be to put them in the CS TAC box at MJH (if your office is on that
side of campus). Otherwise, bring them by our CSD TAC office at Tresidder.
Thanks again.
Claire
-------
∂16-Dec-86 2222 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu PODS Advance Program
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 22:22:04 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 16 Dec 86 22:02:38 PST
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 22:02:38 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: PODS Advance Program
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Sixth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium
on
PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE SYSTEMS
March 22-25, 1987
San Diego, California
INFORMATION
LOCATION
The technical sessions, business meeting, Sunday evening recep-
tion, and lunches will all be at the Bahia Resort Hotel, situated
on San Diego's Mission Bay. The Bahia is within walking distance
of the beach, recreational facilities (sailing, tennis courts,
pool), Sea World, and relaxed boardwalk shops and cafes. Checkout
time is 1pm; checkin time is 4pm, or earlier subject to room
availability. A block of rooms has been reserved until March 1,
1987. Please reserve a room by using the form provided or by cal-
ling 800-821-3619 (800-542-6010 within California). First night's
deposit is required. Room rates and availability are not
guaranteed past March 1.
REGISTRATION
Advanced registration is requested using the form provided.
Registration rates go up markedly after March 9. A registration
desk will be open Sunday night from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and
during the day on Monday (8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Registrants,
other than students, receive admission to the technical sessions,
one copy of the proceedings, reception, lunches, and a dinner
cruise on Tuesday evening. Student registration, available to
full-time students only, includes the technical sessions and one
copy of the proceedings. Additional copies of the proceedings
will be available for sale at the registration desk.
TRANSPORTATION
There are three choices for ground transportation from the air-
port to the hotel. Courtesy airport transportation is provided by
the hotel. The Bahia Hotel van leaves the airport every two
hours, starting at 7:30am and ending at 9:30pm. The van can also
be called outside scheduled times using the free telephone marked
"Bahia Hotel" at the hotel reservation desk in the airport ar-
rival lounge. Additionally, a regular limousine van is available
for $5 (direction Mission Bay). Taxi fare to the hotel is about
$10.
For participants driving to San Diego on I-5, take I-8 West, then
exit at West Mission Bay Drive. The hotel is located on the North
side of Mission Bay Drive.
CLIMATE
The average temperature in March is 60 degrees. Rain is unlikely,
but cannot be ruled out.
EVENT LOCATION
All technical sessions and the business meeting are in the Mis-
sion Room. The exhibit program is in the Mission Lounge. Sunday
night registration and the reception are in the Del Mar Room. On
Tuesday night there will be a dinner cruise with live music
around the San Diego Harbor, between 6:30pm and 9pm. Transporta-
tion to the harbor will be provided. Buses will leave the hotel
at 6pm.
TECHNICAL PROGRAM
SUNDAY, MARCH 22, 1987
Reception 8:30 pm - 11 pm, Del Mar Room
MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1986
Note: All talks will take place in the Mission Room
SESSION 1 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: M.Y. Vardi (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Invited Talk: Database Theory - Past and Future, J.D. Ullman
(Stanford University)
Logic Programming with Sets, G.M. Kuper (IBM T.J. Watson Research
Center)
Sets and Negation in a Logic Database Language (LDL1), C. Beeri
(Hebrew University), S. Naqvi (MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University
of Texas at Austin and MCC), O. Shmueli, and S. Tsur (MCC)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 2 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: A.K. Chandra (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center)
Logical Design of Relational Database Schemes, L.Y. Yuan (Univer-
sity of Southern Louisiana) and Z.M. Ozsoyoglu (Case Western
Reserve University)
On Designing Database Schemes Bounded or Constant-Time Maintain-
able with Respect to Functional Dependencies, E.P.F. Chan and
H.J. Hernandez (University of Alberta)
Computing Covers for Embedded Functional Dependencies, G. Gottlob
(CNR, Italy)
SESSION 3 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: R. Fagin (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Dynamic Query Interpretation in Relational Databases, A. D'Atri
(Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma), P. Di Felice (Universita
dell'Aquila), and M. Moscarini (CNR, Italy)
A New Basis for the Weak Instance Model, P. Atzeni (CNR, Italy)
and M.C. De Bernardis (Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma)
Answering Queries in Categorical Databases, F.M. Malvestuto
(Italian Energy Commision)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 4 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: U. Dayal (CCA)
Nested Transactions and Read-Write Locking, A. Fekete (Harvard
University), N. Lynch (MIT), M. Merrit (AT&T Bell Laboratories),
and W. Weihl (MIT)
Transaction Commitment at Minimal Communication Cost, A. Segall
and O. Wolfson (Technion)
The Precedence-Assignment Model for Distributed Databases Con-
currency Control Algorithms, C.P. Wang and V.O.K. Li (University
of Southern California)
A Knowledge-Theoretic Analysis of Atomic Commitment Protocols, V.
Hadzilacos (University of Toronto)
Business Meeting: 8:30 pm - 10:00 pm, Mission Room
TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1986
Note: There will be exhibits in the Mission Lounge
SESSION 5 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: T. Imielinski (Rutgers University)
Invited Talk: Perspectives in Deductive Databases, J. Minker
(University of Maryland)
Maintenance of Stratified Databases Viewed as a Belief Revision
System, K. Apt (Ecole Normal Superieure and Universite Paris 7)
and J.M. Pugin (BULL Research Center)
Specification and Implementation of Programs for Updating Incom-
plete Information Databases, S. Hegner (University of Vermont)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 6 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: H. Korth (University of Texas at Austin)
Operation Specific Locking on B-Trees, A. Billiris (Boston
University)
Concurrency Control in Database Structures with Relaxed Balance,
O. Nurmi, E. Soisalon-Soininen (Universitat Karlsruhe), and D.
Wood (University of Waterloo)
Performance Results on Multiversion Timestamping Concurrency Con-
trol with Predeclared Writesets, R. Sun (Iona College) and G.
Thomas (Clarkson University)
SESSION 7 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: V. Vianu (University of California at San Diego)
Decomposing an N-ary Relation into a Tree of Binary Relations, R.
Dechter (Hughes Aircarft Company and University of California at
Los Angeles)
Formal Bounds on Automatic Generation and Maintenance of Integri-
ty Constraints, J.P. Delgrande (Simon Fraser University)
Relative Knowledge in a Distributed Database, T. Imielinski
(Rutgers University)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 8 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: M. Yannakakis (AT&T Bell Laboratories)
The Parallel Complexity of Simple Chain Queries, F. Afrati (Na-
tional Technical University of Athens) and C. Papadimitriou
(Stanford University and National Technical University of Athens)
Bounds on the Propagation of Selection into Logic Programs, C.
Beeri (Hebrew University), P. Kanellakis (Brown University), F.
Bancilhon (INRIA and MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University of Texas
at Austin and MCC)
A Decidable Class of Bounded Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford
University) and Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
Decidability and Expressiveness Aspects of Logic Queries, O.
Shmueli (Technion and MCC)
Dinner Cruise: 6:30 pm - 9:00 pm
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1986
SESSION 9 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: P.A. Larson (University of Waterloo)
Invited talk: Chickens and Eggs - The Interrelationship of Sys-
tems and Theory, P. Selinger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Axiomatization and Simplification Rules for Relational Transac-
tions, A. Karabeg, D. Karabeg, K. Papakonstantinu, and V. Vianu
(University of California at San Diego)
A Transaction Language Complete for Database Update and Specifi-
cation, S. Abiteboul (INRIA) and V. Vianu (University of Califor-
nia at San Diego)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 10 - 11:00 am - 12:15pm
Chair: Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
On the Power of Magic, C. Beeri (Hebrew University) and R. Ramak-
rishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC)
Efficient Evaluation for a Subset of Recursive Queries, G. Grahne
(University of Helsinki), S. Sippu (University of Jyvaskyla), and
E. Soisalon-Soininen (University of Helsinki)
Worst-Case Complexity Analysis of Methods for Logic Query Imple-
mentation, A. Marchetti-Spaccamella, A. Pelaggi (Universita "La
Sapienza" di Roma), and D. Sacca (CRAI, Italy)
SESSION 11 - 2:00 pm - 4:35pm
Chair: P. Kanellakis (Brown University)
On the Expressive Power of the Extended Relational Algebra for
the Unnormalized Relational Model, D. Van Gucht (Indiana Univer-
sity)
Safety and Correct Translation of Relational Calculus Formulas,
A. Van Gelder (Stanford University) and R. Topor (University of
Melbourne)
Safety of Recursive Horn Clauses with Infinite Relations, R.
Ramakrishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC), F. Ban-
cilhon (INRIA and MCC), and A. Silberschatz (University of Texas
at Austin)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 am
One-Sided Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford University)
Optimizing Datalog Programs, Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
_________________________________________________________________
CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION
Sponsors: SIGACT, SIGMOD, and SIGART.
Executive Committee: A.K. Chandra, S. Ginsburg, A. Silberschatz,
J.D. Ullman, and M.Y. Vardi.
Chairman: Ashok K. Chandra, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
P.O.Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, (914) 945-1752,
ashok@ibm.com, ashok@yktvmv.bitnet
Program Chairman: Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM Almaden Research Center,
650 Harry Rd., San Jose, CA 95120-6099, (408) 927-1784,
vardi@ibm.com, vardi@almvma.bitnet
Local Arrangements: Victor Vianu, Dept. of Electrical Engineer-
ing and Computer Science MC-014, University of California at San
Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, (619) 534-6227, vianu@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Program Committee: U. Dayal, T. Imielinski, P.K. Kanellakis, H.
Korth, P.A. Larson, K.J. Raiha, Y. Sagiv, M.Y. Vardi, M. Yan-
nakakis.
_________________________________________________________________
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please send this form or a facsimile along with a money order or
check (payable to 6th ACM SYMPOSIUM ON PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE
SYSTEMS) to:
ACM-PODS Registration
c/o Victor Vianu
EECS Department, MC-014
Univ. of California at San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(Before Mar. 9) (After)
ACM and SIG member $165 $225
ACM member only $175 $235
SIG member only $175 $235
Nonmember: $205 $275
Student: $50 $60
Requests for refunds will be honored until March 9, 1987.
Name___________________________________________________________
Affiliation____________________________________________________
Address________________________________________________________
City_________State________Zip__________________________________
Country_________Telephone______________________________________
Net Address____________________________________________________
Check here if confirmation of registration is required.
Dietary restrictions: Kosher Vegetarian
Special meals can be guaranteed only for those who register in
advance.
_________________________________________________________________
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please mail this form or a facsimile (being sure to mention the
ACM-PODS Conference) by March 1, 1987 to:
Bahia Resort Hotel
998 W. Mission Bay Dr.
San Diego, CA 92109
Tel: (619) 488-0551
Accommodations desired:
Single $68 Double (1 bed) $72
Twin (2 beds) $72 Triple $76
Quad $80
Children under 12 stay free when occupying same rooms as parents.
Accomodation prices do not include 7% city hotel tax.
Arrival date_______________________Time_____________________________
Departure date_____________________Time_____________________________
Name________________________________________________________________
Sharing room with___________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________________
City__________State_______Zip_______________________________________
Country____________________________Telephone________________________
First night deposit is required.
First night's deposit enclosed: $_________________________________
Credit card: VISA, Mastercard, Amer. Express
Other credit card: ________________________________________________
Credit card number_________________________________________________
Exp. Date__________________________________________________
Signature__________________________________________________
∂16-Dec-86 2223 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu PODS Advance Program
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Dec 86 22:23:51 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 16 Dec 86 22:05:01 PST
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 22:05:01 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: PODS Advance Program
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
Please post the program on local bboards.
Moshe
∂17-Dec-86 0237 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #85
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 02:36:53 PST
Date: Tue 16 Dec 1986 05:57-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #85
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 17 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 85
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part B
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 86 09:33:12 GMT
From: Andy Cheese <mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!abc@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: references - B
BACKH84a *
Backhouse R.
Algorithm Development in Martin-Lof's Type Theory
CSM-69
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
July 1984
BACKH84b *
Backhouse R.C.
A Note on Subtype in Martin-Lof's Theory of Types
CSM-70
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
November 1984
BACKH84c *
Backhouse R.C.
The While-Rule in Martin-Lof's Theory of Types
CSM-71
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
December 1984
BACKH85a *
Backhouse R.C.
Equality Rules in Type Theory
CSM-76
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
April 1985
BACKH85b *
Backhouse R.C.
Notes on Martin-Lof's Theory of Types
Section 2
CSM-80
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
December 1985
BACKH85c *
Backhouse R.C.
Notes on Martin-Lof's Theory of Types
Section 1 (Revised)
CSM-81
Department of Computer Science, University of Essex
February 1986
BACKU74a *
Backus J.
Programming Language Semantics and Closed Applicative Languages
ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, 1974
pp 71-86
1974
BACKU78a *
Backus J.
Can Programming be liberated from the von-Neumann Style?
CACM Vol 21 No 8 p613-641 Aug 1978
BACKU79a
Backus J.W.
On Extending The Concept Of Program And Solving Linear Functional Equations
Draft Paper Distributed at Summer Workshop on Programming Methodology,
University of California at Santa Cruz, August 1979
BACKU81a
Backus J.W.
The Algebra of Functional Programs: Function Level Reasoning, Linear
Equations, and Extended Definitions
In "Formalization of Programming Concepts", LNCS 107
Springer Verlag
April 1981
BADE86a *
Baden S.
Berkeley FP User's Manual, Rev. 4.1.
May 10, 1986
BAIL85a *
Bailey D.
Prolog for Real Programs
PS/48
University of Salford
5 pages
25 June 1985
BAIL86a *
Bailey D.
Catch and Throw - An Introduction
Salford University
PS/136
September 1986
BAKE78a
Baker, Henry B., Jr.
List Processing in Real Time on a Serial Computer
CACM 21 no 4, pp 280-294, 1978
BAKE78b
Baker H.G.
Actor Systems for Real Time Computation
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT/LCS/TR-197, March 1978
BAKK76a *
Bakker J.W. De
Semantics and Termination of Nondeterministic Recursive Programs
Proceedings 3rd International Colloquium on Automata Languages and Programming
pp 435-477
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
BAKK79a *
Bakker J.W. De & Zucker J.I.
Derivatives of Programs
mathematisch centrum iw 116/79
1979
BAKK80a
Bakker J.De
Mathematical Theory of Program Correctness
Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science, 1980
BALB85a *
Balbin I. & Lecot K.
Logic Programming : A Classified Bibliography
Wildgrass Books Pty Ltd, Australia
ISBN 0 908069 15 4
1985
BALB86a *
Balbin I. & Ramamohanarao K.
A Differential Approach to Query Optimisation in Recursive Deductive
Databases
Department of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
Technical Report 86/7
to appear in Journal of Logic Programming
1986
BALL83a *
Ballieu G.
A Virtual Machine To Implement Prolog
Logic Programming Workshop '83
pp 40 - 52
26 June 1983
BAND86a *
Bandes R.G.
Constraining-Unification and the Programming Language Unicorn
in DEGR86a, pp 397-410
1986
BANDL83a *
Bandler W.
Some Esomathematical Uses Of Category Theory
Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London
pp 218-224
11-13th April 1983
BARA85a *
Barahona P. & Gurd J.R.
Processor Allocation in a Multi-Ring Dataflow Machine
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester, Technical Report UMCS-85-10-3
1985
BARBA86a *
Barbara D. & Garcia-Molina H.
Mutual Exclusion in Partitioned Distributed Systems
Distibuted Computing, Vol 1, No 2, pp 119-132
1986
BARBU84a *
Barbuti R. & Bellia M. & Levi G. & Martelli M.
On the Integration of Logic Programming and Functional Programming
IEEE 1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming, pp 160-167
6 February 1984
BARBU86a *
Barbuti R. & Bellia M. & Levi G. & Martelli M.
LEAF : A Language Which Integrates Logic, Equations and Functions
in DEGR86a, pp 201-238
1986
BARE81a
Barendregt H.P.
The Lambda Calculus, Its Syntax and Semantics
North Holland 1981
BARE86a *
Barendregt H.P. & Kennaway JR. & Klop J.W. & Sleep M.R.
Needed Reduction and Spine Strategies for the Lambda Calculus
Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica. Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science
Computer Science / Department of Software Technology
Report CS-R8621
May 1986
BARE86b *
Barendregt H. & van Eekelen M.C.J.D. & Glauert J.R.W. & Kennaway J.R. &
Plasmeijer M.J. & Sleep M.R.
Term Graph Rewriting
October 20 1986
BARRE86a *
Barrett N.K. & Brailsford D.F. & Duckworth R.J.
A Simulator Program for Evaluating and Improving the Nottingham Muse
Architecture
Department of Computer Science, University of Nottingham
June 3, 1986
BARRI85a *
Barringer H.
Up and Down the Temporal Way
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester, Technical Report UMCS-85-9-3
September 4, 1985
BARRI86a *
Barringer H. & Mearns I.
A Proof System for Ada Tasks
Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 5, pp 404-415
October 1986
BCS86a *
British Computer Society Reading Branch Parallel Processing Seminar,
Proceedings
Tuesday 21st January 1986
BELLE86a *
Bellegarde F.
Rewriting Systems On FP Sequences To Reduce The Number Of Sequences Yielded
Science Of Computer Programming, 6, pp 11-34
January 1986
BELLI80a *
Bellia M. & Degano P. & Levi G.
A Functional Plus Predicate Logic Programming Language
Proceedings of the Logic Programming Workshop, 14 July 1980
pp 334-347
1980
BELLI83a *
Bellia M. & Levi G. & Martelli M.
On Compiling Prolog Programs on Demand Driven Architectures
Proceedings of Logic Programming Workshop '83
Praia Da Falesia, Algarve, Portugal, pp 518-535
26 June - 1 July 1983
BEND80a *
Bendl J. & Koves P. & Szeredi P.
The MPROLOG System
Proceedings of "Logic Programming Workshop", Debrecen, Hungary,
14-16 July 1980
also in MPROLOG Collection of Papers on Logic Programming,
pp 201-209, November 1984
1980
BERG79a *
Bergstra J.A. & Tucker J.V.
Algebraic Specifications of Computable and Semi-Computable Data Structures
mathematisch centrum iw 115/79
1979
BERG79b *
Bergstra J.A. & Tiuryn J. & Tucker J.V.
Correctness Theories and Program Equivalence
mathematisch centrum iw 119/79
1979
BERG79c *
Bergstra J.A. & Tucker J.V.
A Characterisation of Computable Data Types By Means of a Finite, Equational
Specification Method
mathematisch centrum iw 124/79
1979
BERG81a *
Bergstra J.A. & Tucker J.V.
Hoare's Logic and Peano's Arithmetic
Mathematisch Centrum iw 160/81
1981
BERK75a *
Berkling K.
Reduction Languages For Reduction Machines
Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. on Comp. Arch., pp 133-140
also available as an extended version as GMD Tech Rep ISF-76-8
14 September 1976
1975
BERK76a *
Berkling K.J.
A Symmetric Complement To The Lambda Calculus
GMD Tech Rep ISF-76-7
14 September 1976
BERK82a *
Berkling K.J.
A Consistent Extension of the Lambda-Calculus as a Base for Functional
Programming Languages
Information and Control, vol 55, nos 1-3 oct/nov/dec 1982, pp 89-101
Academic Press
1982
BERK85a *
Berkling K.
Epsilon-Reduction : Another View of Unification
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
BERL84a
Berliner H. & Goetsch G.
A Quantative Study of Search Methods and the Effect of
Constraint Satisfaction
CMU-CS-84-147
Dept of Comp Sci, Carnegie-Mellon Univ.
July 1984
BERN80a *
Bernstein A.J.
Output Guards and Nondeterminism in Communicating Sequential Processes
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 2, No 2,
pp 234 - 238
April 1980
BERR77a *
Berry G. & Levy J-J.
Minimal and Optimal Computations of Recursive Programs
4th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages
pp 215-226
1977
BERT84a
ed. Bertolazzi P
VLSI: Algorithms and Architectures
North Holland 1984
BERZ86a *
Berzins V. & Gray M. & Naumann D.
Abstraction-Based Software Development
CACM, Vol 29, No 5, pp 402 - 415
May 1986
BETZ85a *
Betz D.
XLISP: An Experimental Object Oriented Language Version 1.4
January 1, 1985
BETZ86a *
Betz D.
XLISP conferencing in article on best of bix, pp 376-380
Byte, volume 11, number 3
March 1986
BEYN85a *
Benyon W.M. & Buckle J.F.
Computational Equivalence and Replaceability in Finite Algebras
Theory of Computation Report No 72
Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick
August 1985
BIC85a *
Bic L.
Processing of Semantic Nets on Dataflow Architectures
Artificial Intelligence 27
pp 219 - 227
1985
BIRD76a
Bird R.S.
Programs & Machines- An Introduction to the Theory of Computation
Wiley 1976
BIRD83a
Bird R.S.
Some Notational Suggestions for Transformational Programming
Tech Rep no 153, Univ. of Reading, 1983
BIRD84a
Bird R.S.
Using Circular Programs to Eliminate Multiple Traversals of Data
Acta Informatica Vol21 Fasc 3 1984 p239-250
BIRD84b *
Bird R.S.
The Promotion and Accumulation Strategies in Transformational Programming
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 6, No 4
pp 487-504
October 1984
BISH77a
Bishop P.B.
Computer Systems with a Very Large Address Space and Garbage Collection
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT/LCS/TR-178, May 1977
BLOM86a *
Blomberg G.
S046 : Background Notes
Should Prolog have a Lisp-like Syntax ?
PS/149
September 1986
BOBR80a *
Bobrow D.G.
Managing Reentrant Structures Using Reference Counts
ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 2, no 3, pp 269-273
1980
BOCC86a *
Bocca J. & Decker H. & Nicolas J.-M. & Vieille & Wallace M.
Some Steps Towards a DBMS Based KBMS
Proc. 10th World Computer Congress, IFIP, Dublin, Ireland
September 1986
BOCC86b *
Bocca J.
On the Evaluation Strategy of EDUCE
Proc 1986 ACM-SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data,
Washington D.C., U.S.A.
May 1986
BOCK86a *
Bockmayr A.
Conditional Rewriting and Narrowing as a Theoretical Framework for
Logic-Functional Programming : A Survey
Interner Bericht NR. 10/86
Institut Fur Informatik I, Universitat Karlsruhe, West Germany
BOHM81a *
Bohm A.P.W. & Leeuwen J. Van
A Basis for Dataflow Computing
Dept of Computer Science, Univ of Utrecht, Tech Rep RUU-CS-81-6
1981
BOHM85a *
Bohm A.P.W. & Gurd J.R. & Sargeant J.
Hardware and Software Enhancement of the Manchester Dataflow Machine
Document, Dept of Computer Science, Univ. of Manchester
BOLE85a *
Boley H. & Kammermeier F.
LISPLOG: Momentaufnahmen einer LISP/PROLOG-Vereinheitlichung
MEMO SEKI-85-03
Fachbereich Informatik, Universitat Kaiserlautern
August 1985
BOOM86a *
Boom H.
Issues in Program Transformation
522 MAL-1
9th October 1986
BOOM?? *
Boom H.J.
A Multidomain Abstracto
524 MAL-3
BOOM?? *
Boom H.
Transformo Discussion
543 MAL-22
BORG84a *
Borgwardt P.
Parallel PROLOG Using Stack Segments On Shared Memory Multiprocessors
1984 Int. Symp. on Logic Programming, pp 2-11
6 February 1984
BORN81a *
Borning A. & Bundy A.
Using Matching in Algebraic Equation Solving
Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Washington, Technical Report No. 81-05-01
May 1981
BORO85a *
Borovsky B.H. & Ilieva P.I.
A Reconfigurable Highly Parallel Architecture Based on Recirculative Network
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
BOSS84a *
Bossi A. & Ghezzi C.
Using FP As A Query Language For Relational Data-Bases
Computer Languages, Vol 9, No 1, pp 25-37
1984
BOUT?? *
Boute R.
The Beta Calculus : Variable Scoping and Formal (Structural) Transformation
in the Description of Systems with Bidirectional Information Flow
539 MAL-18
BOWE79a *
Bowen K.A.
Prolog
Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the ACM 1979
pp 14-23
1979
BOWE81a
Bowen D.L.
Implementation of Data Structures on a Data Flow Computer
PhD Thesis, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester, April 1981
BOWE81b *
Bowen K.A. & Kowalski R.A.
Amalgamating Language and Metalanguage in Logic Programming
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 81/30
June 1981
BOWE?? *
Bowen D.L. & Byrd L.M. & Clocksin W.F.
A Portable Prolog Compiler
D.A.I. Research Paper No. 195
Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh
also presented at the Logic Programming Workshop, Albufeira, Portugal,
June 27th - July 1st, 1983
BOWE85a
Bowen K.A.
Meta-Level Programming and Knowledge Representation
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 359-383
1985
BOYE75a
Boyer R.S. & Moore J.S.
Proving Theorems about LISP Functions
JACM Vol 22,No. 1, p129-144
BRAI83
Brain S.
The Transputer-"exploiting the opportunity of VLSI"
Electronic Product Design, December 1983
BRAI84a
Brain S.
Applying the Transputer
Electronic Product Design, January 1984
BRAI84b
Brain S.
Writing Parallel Programs in OCCAM
Electronic Product Design, Sept 1984
BRAM84a *
Bramer M. & Bramer D.
The Fifth Generation, An Annotated Bibliography
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1984
BROD80a *
Broda K.
The Relation Between Semantic Tableaux And Resolution Theorem Provers
Research Report DOC 80/20
Department of Computing, Imperial College
October 1980
BROD81a
Broda K.
B.SC I Mathematics of Computing Lecture Notes
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Lecture Notes 81/13
January 1981
BROD84a
Broda K. & Gregory S.
PARLOG For Discrete Event Simulation
Proceedings of the 2nd International Logic Programming Conference, Uppsala
( ed Tarnlund S-A ), pp 301-312
July 1984
BROD84b *
Broda K. & Gregory S.
Parlog For Discrete Event Simulation
Department Of Computing, Imperial College
Research Report DOC 84/5
March 1984
BROD85a *
Broda K. & Gabbay D.M. & Kriwaczek F.
A Goal Directed Theorem Prover for Preicate Logic Based on
Conjunctions and Implications
Draft
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
May 1985
BROO84a
Brookes S.D.
Reasoning About Synchronous Systems
CMU-CS-84-145
Dept of Comp Sci, Carnegie-Mellon Univ.
March 1984
BROO86a *
Brookes G.R. & Manson G.A. & Thompson J.A.
Lattice and Ring Array Topologies Using Transputers
Computyer Communications, Vol 9, No 3, pp 121-125
June 1986
BROU79a
Brough D.R.
Loop Trapping in Logic Programs
Department of Computing, Imperial College, TOC 79/9
1979
BROU83a *
Brough D.R. & Walker A.
Some Practical Properties of Logic Programming Interpreters
Research Report 83/34
Department of Computing, Imperial College
December 1983
BROU84a *
Brough D.R. & Parfitt N.
An Expert System for the Ageing of a Domestic Animal
Research Report DoC 84/13
Department of Computing, Imperial College
April 1984
BROW84a
Brownbridge D.
Recursive Structures in Computer Systems
PhD Thesis, Univ. of Newcastle upon Tyne, 1984
BROY82a
eds Broy M. & Schmidt G.
Proceedings of Nato Summer School on Theoretical Foundations of
Programming Methodology, Munich,
Dordrecht: Reidel, 1982
BROY82b
Broy M.
A Fixed Point Approach to Applicative Multiprogramming
in BROY82a, pp 565-624
1982
BROY83a
Broy M.
Applicative Real-Time Programming
Proc. 9th IFIP, Information Processing 1983, pp 259-264
North Holland 1983
BROY85a *
Broy M.
On The Herbrand-Kleene Universe For Nondeterministic Computations
Theoretical Computer Science, 36, pp 1 - 19
March 1985
BRUI72a *
Bruin N.G. De
Lambda-Calculus Notation With Nameless Dummies, a Tool for Automatic
Formula Manipulation
pp 381-392
Indag Math. 34
Proceedings of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie Van Wetenschappen
Series A Mathematical Sciences, Volume 75
North Holland Publishing Company
1972
BRUI81a *
Bruin A. De
On the Existence of Cook Semantics
Mathematisch Centrum iw 163/81
1981
BRUI85a *
Bruin A. De & Bohm W.
The Denotational Semantics of Dynamic Networks of Processes
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 7, No 4,
pp 656-679
October 1985
BRUY83a *
Bruynooghe M. & Pereira L.M.
Deduction revision by Intelligent Backtracking
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, report no UNL-10/83
July 1983
BRYA83a
Bryant R.
Proceedings of the Third Caltech Conference on Very Large Scale Integration
ISBN 0 914894 86 2
Blackwell Scientific Pubs.
1983
BRYA85a *
Bryant R.E.
Symbolic Verification of MOS Circuits
1985 Chapel Hill Conference on VLSI
pp 419-438
1985
BRYA86a *
Bryant R.
Tutorial Diagnosis Of Subtraction Errors
Research Report CS-96-09
Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
January 31 1986
BSI85a *
Draft Minutes of Prolog Standardization Meeting, 7 March 1985
PS/40
BSI85b *
How To Define a Language Using Prolog
PS/73
1985
BSI86a *
BSI Prolog Standardization
Papers From The Module Subcommittee
PS/102
1986
BSI86b *
Draft Minutes of Prolog Standardization Meeting 6th March 1986, BSI
PS/104
1986
BSI86c *
BSI Prolog Standard
Summary Of BIP Committee Work
PS/108
10 April 1986
BSI?? *
FILETAB For VME2900 (Declarative I/O - Model For Prolog?)
PS/111
BSI?? *
Can Users Define And Redefine Operators ?
Prolog Standardization Problem And Its Solution
S026
BSI?? *
How Do Users Define And Redefine Operators ?
Prolog Standardization Problem And Its Solution
S027
BSI?? *
Can Users Define And Redefine Functions ?
Prolog Standardization Problem And Its Solution
S028
BSI?? *
How Do Users Define And Redefine Functions ?
Prolog Standardization Problem And Its Solution
S029
BSI?? *
BSI Prolog Document PS/8-1
BSI86d *
Prolog Standard
Built-In Predicates (Logic, Sets, Debugging, Environment).
PS/105/1
J. W. Doores (ICL)
14 May 1986
BSI86e *
Agenda For Meeting At BSI, 5th June 1986
PS/114
BSI86f *
Minutes For Built-In Predicates Meeting, March 1986
PS/107
BSI?? *
AFNOR - Notes On Dif, Freeze, etc
PS/113
BSI86g *
Lazy Evaluation And Coroutining
S018
May 1986
BSI86h *
BSI PROLOG
Semantics Sub Group
Minutes of Meeting, May 6 1986
PS/119 Preprint
BSI?? *
Which Character Set Is Used For Standard Prolog ?
S030
BSI?? *
How Should Lists Be Represented In Standard Prolog ?
S031
BSI?? *
How Are Variables Represented In Standard Prolog ?
S032
BSI?? *
What Form Should Formatted I/O Take ?
S033
BSI86i *
Documents from AFNOR - F12, F13 and F14
PS/109
1986
BSI86j *
BSI Prolog, Semantics Sub-Group
Minutes of Meeting, May 6 1986
PS/119
1986
BSI86k *
Documents from AFNOR with Emphasis on Syntax - F15, F17
PS/120
1986
BSI86l *
BSI Prolog
Minutes of Built-In Predicates Sub-Group Meeting, 12th June 1986
PS/123
1986
BSI86m *
The Standardization of Prolog
Agenda for Meeting, 4th September 1986
PS/130
1986
BSI86n *
AFNOR Draft Proposition on Control Predicates
15 pages
PS/117
June 1986
BSI86o *
BSI Prolog - Semantics Sub Group
Minutes of Meeting July 8 1986
PS/126
1986
BSI86p *
Address List for BSI Prolog Standardization Panel
PS/122
September 1986
BSI86q *
Documents From AFNOR
PS/125
June/July 1986
BSI86r *
Draft Minutes of Meeting at BSI, 4th September 1986
PS/133
1986
BSI86s *
Modules in Prolog
Miscellaneous Papers
L.A. Wallen, M. Rubinstein, A.N. Davis & A. Schappo, M. Cutcher, D.S. Moffat
PS/116
June 1986
BSI86t *
BSI Prolog
Semantics Sub Group
Minutes of Meeting, September 30, 1986, held at System Designers Ltd
PS/155
1986
BSI86u *
Agenda for all day meeting on the standardization of prolog on 4th
December 1986
PS/157
1986
BSI86v *
Built-In Predicates Subcommittee
Minutes of Meeting 11 September 1986
PS/144
1986
BSI86w *
AFNOR Paers F22, F25 and F26 on Modules, Control Predicates and Minutes of
AFNOR Meeting (Sept 1986)
PS/147
October 1986
BSI?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
How Should Strings Be Handled ?
[S024-860310]
BSI?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
How Should Characters be Represented in Prolog ?
[S025-860310]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
What Editing Facilities Should Be Included in a Prolog Standard ?
[S011-850824]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Comments in Prolog
[S012-850824]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
User-Defined Operators
[S013-850606]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Where Can Arithmetic Expressions Be Evaluated ?
[S014-850606]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Sophistication of Syntax
[S015-850606]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
The Meaning of "Cut"
[S016-850820]
BSI ?? *
Fread
DRAFT
Formatted I/O
P161
BSI ?? *
Fwrite
Formatted I/O
DRAFT
P162
BSI ?? *
Length
Formatted I/O
DRAFT
p163
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
The Order of Characters
[S035-860701]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Should Bagof and Setof be Resatisfiable ?
[S036-860826]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Should Save/1 and Restore/1 be Included in the Standard ?
[S037-860701]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Do We Need Database References ?
[S040-860826]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Do We Need Internal Database Predicates ?
[S041-860701]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
In What Context are Expressions Evaluated ?
[S042-860826]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Do Predicates Treated as Functions Evaluate Their Arguments ?
[S043-860826]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
What Tokenisation Primitives Do We Need ?
[S044-860826]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Should Grammar Rules Be Part of Standard Prolog ?
[S045-860703]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
Should an Alternative (Common Lisp) Syntax be Standardized ?
[S046-860908]
BSI ?? *
Prolog Standardization Problem and its Solution
How Should '!' and not Interact ?
[S047-861024]
BUNDE85a *
Bunder M.W.
An Exension of Klop's Counterexample to the Church-Rosser Property to
Lambda-Calculus With Other Ordered Pair Combinators
Theoretical Computer Science 39, pp 337-342
North Holland
August 1983
BUNDE85b *
Bunder M.W.
Possible Forms Of Evaluation Or Reduction In Martin-Lof Type Theory
Theoretical Computer Science, 41, pp 113-120
1985
BUNDY85a *
Bundy A. & Sterling L.
Meta-Level Inference in Algebra
D.A.I. Research Paper No. 273
Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh
to be published in Proceedings of the Capri-85 Conference on A.I.,
North Holland
1985
BUNE82a
Buneman P. Frankel R.E. & Nikhil R.
An Implementation Technique for Database Query Languages
ACM TODS Vol 7 No. 2 p164-186 June 1982
BURG75a
Recursive Programming Techniques
Addison Wesley Publising Co., 1975
BURK83a *
Burkimsher P.C.
PRISM: A DSM Multiprocessor Reduction Machine For The Parallel
Implementation Of Applicative Languages
Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London
pp 189-202
11-13th April 1983
BURN85a *
Burn G.L. & Hankin C.L. & Abramsky S.
The Theory and Practise of Strictness Analysis for Higher Order Functions
Research Report DoC 85/6
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
April 1985
BURS69a
Burstall R.M.
Proving Properties of Programs by Structural Induction
Computer Journal 12, p41
1969
BURS77a
Burstall R.M. & Darlington J.
A Transformation System for Developing Recursive Programs
JACM Vol 24,No. 1,p44-67
BURS77b
Burstall R.M.
Design Considerations for a Functional Programming Language
pp 54-57
Proc. Infotech State of the Art Conference, Copenhagen, 1977
BURS80a *
Burstall R.M. & MacQueen D.B. & Sannella D.T.
HOPE: An Experimental Applicative Language
Proc of LISP Conference Aug 1980
(Also Edinburgh report CSR-62-80, 1981)
BURS82a *
Burstall R.M. & Goguen J.A.
Algebras, Theories and Freeness: An Introduction For Computer Scientists
in BROY82a, pp 329-348
also Internal Report CSR-101-82
Deparment of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
February 1982
1982
BURS84a *
Burstall R.M.
Programming with Modules as Typed Functional Programming
Proc. Int. Conf. on Fifth Gen. Computing Systems, Tokyo
November 1984
BURS86a *
Burstall R.M. & Rydeheard D.
Computing with Categories
LFCS Report Series, ECS-LFCS-86-9
Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Department of Computer
Science, University of Edinburgh
September 1986
BURS86b *
Burstall R.M.
Research in Interactive Theorem Proving at Edinburgh University
LFCS Report Series, ECS-LFCS-86-12
Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Department of Computer
Science, University of Edinburgh
October 1986
BURT83a *
Burton F.W. & Huntbach M.M. & McKeown G.P. & Rayward-Smith V.J.
Parallelism in Branch-and-Bound Algorithms
Internal Report CSA/3/1983
Mathematical Algorithms Group - 2
School of Computing Studies and Accountancy, University of East Anglia
October 1983
BURT84a
Burton F.W.
Annotations to Control Parallelism and Reduction Order in the Distributed
Evaluation of Functional Programs
ACM TOPLAS Vol 6 No. 2 April 1984 p159-174
1984
BURT85a *
Burton F.W. & Huntbach M.M. & Kollias J.G.
Multiple Generation Text Files Using Overlapping Tree Structures
Computer Journal, Vol 28, no 4, pp 414-416
1985
BURT85b
Burt A.
A PARLOG Operating System
MSc Thesis, Dept of Computing, Imperial College
1985
BUSH79a
Bush V.J.
A Data Flow Implementation of Lucid
Msc Dissertation, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester, October 1979
BYTE85a *
Byte Magazine, August 1985.
Special Issue on Declarative Languages
1985
--
Andy Cheese
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂17-Dec-86 1213 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice SPECIAL PRE-CHRISTMAS PLANLUNCH: Mark Fox
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 12:12:24 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Wed, 17 Dec 86 11:51:41-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA00582; Wed,
17 Dec 86 11:56:18 PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 86 11:56:13-PST
From: Amy Lansky <6 09:58:12-$PST
D$Ate: $W$ED 17 $D$EC 86 09:56:24-$PST
F$Rom: $G$EORGIA $N$AVARRO <$NAVARRO@SRI-STRIλλλλ@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: SPECIAL PRE-CHRISTMAS PLANLUNCH: Mark Fox
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 17-Dec-86 11:56:13.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
NOTE CHANGE IN DAY: THIS FRIDAY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ISIS PROJECT: AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Mark S. Fox (FOX@CMUA)
Intelligent Systems Laboratory
Robotics Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
11:00 AM, FRIDAY, December 19
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
ISIS is a knowledge-based system designed to provide intelligent
support in the domain of job shop production management and control.
Job-shop scheduling is an "uncooperative" multi-agent (i.e., each
order is to be "optimized" separately) planning problem in which
activities must be selected, sequenced, and assigned resources and
time of execution. Resource contention is high, hence closely
coupling decisions. Search is combinatorially explosive; for example,
85 orders moving through eight operations without alternatives, with a
single machine substitution for each and no machine idle time has over
10↑880 possible schedules. Many of which may be discarded given
knowledge of shop constraints. At the core of ISIS is an approach to
automatic scheduling that provides a framework for incorporating the
full range of real world constraints that typically influence the
decisions made by human schedulers. This results in an ability to
generate detailed schedules for production that accurately reflect the
current status of the shop floor, and distinguishes ISIS from
traditional scheduling systems based on more restrictive management
science models. ISIS is capable of incrementally scheduling orders as
they are received by the shop as well as reactively rescheduling
orders in response to unexpected events (e.g. machine breakdowns) that
might occur.
The construction of job shop schedules is a complex
constraint-directed activity influenced by such diverse factors as due
date requirements, cost restrictions, production levels, machine
capabilities and substitutability, alternative production processes,
order characteristics, resource requirements, and resource
availability. The problem is a prime candidate for application of AI
technology, as human schedulers are overburdened by its complexity and
existing computer-based approaches provide little more than a high
level predictive capability. It also raises some interesting research
issues. Given the conflicting nature of the domain's constraints, the
problem differs from typical constraint satisfaction problems. One
cannot rely solely on propagation techniques to arrive at an
acceptable solution. Rather, constraints must be selectively relaxed
in which case the problem solving strategy becomes one of finding a
solution that best satisfies the constraints. This implies that
constraints must serve to discriminate among alternative hypotheses as
well as to restrict the number of hypotheses generated. Thus, the
design of ISIS has focused on
o constructing a knowledge representation that captures the requisite
knowledge of the job shop environment and its constraints to support
constraint-directed search, and
o developing a search architecture capable of exploiting this
constraint knowledge to effectively control the combinatorics of
the underlying search space.
This presentation will provide an historical perspective on the development
of ISIS family of systems.
-------
∂17-Dec-86 1253 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Gray Tuesday
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 12:53:10 PST
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 17 Dec 86 12:49:37-PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 86 12:40:00-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Gray Tuesday
To: faculty@score,cheadle@score,bscott@score, pieper@sushi, hirsh@sumex
I want to thank everyone for their participation at the meeting, and
especially Victoria for all the work she did to track down the
information and organize it ahead of time. She anticipated a huge
number of the things we needed to know and had them ready, including
getting relevant information from some fairly hard-to-get-things-from
people. Thanks! Hopefully we'll be able to get some of John Reuling's
programming time to get the records into a form that eliminates some of
the glitches we noted in the meeting.
If you have questions about what is going out in the letters, check with
Victoria, or with me. You will receive (electronic) copies of all
letters to your advisees. Students will get electronic messages and
also signed hardcopies, sometime in January.
REMINDER: Under the new PhD policy, each student needs to meet with the
complete dissertation committee at least once a year. This should be
done BEFORE the Black Friday meeting in June. Students will be
reminded, but you should also mention it to your advisees, and cooperate
actively in the scheduling. --t
∂17-Dec-86 1433 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu CALL FOR PAPERS - FOCS
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 14:33:20 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 17 Dec 86 14:17:24-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 16 Dec 86 09:21:32 PST
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 09:18:58 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS - FOCS
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 86 12:30:29 est
From: Dave Bray <bray%clutx.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS - FOCS
Message_id: <C030.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 16 Dec 1986 09:09:31-EST (Tuesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
28th FOCS Symposium
The 28th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science will be
held at the Marina Beach Hotel in Los Angeles, California on October 12--14,
1987. The Symposium is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society's Technical
Committee on Mathematical Foundations of Computing in cooperation with the
University of Southern California.
Papers presenting original research on theoretical aspects of computer
science are being sought. Suggested topic areas include:
Algorithms and Data Structures
Computability and Complexity Theory
Cryptography
Data Bases
Formal Languages and Automata
Logic of Programs
Parallel and Distributed Computing
Robotics and Machine Learning
Semantics of Programming Languages
VLSI Computation and Design
Persons wishing to submit a paper should send 15 copies of a detailed
abstract by APRIL 6, 1987 to the Program Committee Chair:
Tom Leighton
Room 2-377
Department of Mathematics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA 02139
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by June 8, 1987. A
final copy of each accepted paper, typed on special forms for inclusion in the
Symposium Proceedings, will be due by July 27, 1987.
IMPORTANT. Because of the large number of submissions anticipated, authors
are advised to prepare their abstracts carefully and to submit them on time. In
order to be considered, an abstract must be airmail postmarked by April 6, 1987
or be received by April 13, 1987. THESE DEADLINES WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED.
Additions and/or revised abstracts received after these deadlines will not be
considered.
Submission Format. To facilitate reading by the program committee, it is
strongly recommended that each submission begin with a succinct statement of the
problems that are considered in the paper, the main results that are achieved,
and an explanation of the significance of the work as well as its relevance to
past research. This material should be readily understandable by non-
specialists. Technical development of the work, directed to the specialist,
should follow as appropriate. The entire extended abstract should not exceed
2,500 words (10 double-spaced pages). NOTE: Papers that deviate significantly
from these guidelines risk rejection without consideration of their merits.
Meeting Format. Authors of accepted papers will be expected to present
their work at the Symposium. The format of the meeting, including time
allocations for presentations and scheduling of sessions, will be determined by
the Program Committee. If submissions warrant, the committee will compose a
program of parallel sessions.
Machtey Award for Best Student Paper. This award of up to $400, to help
defray expenses for attending the Symposium, will be given for that paper which
the Program Committee judges to be the most outstanding paper written solely by
a student or students. To be considered for the award, an abstract must be
accompanied by a letter identifying all authors as full-time students at the
time of submission. At its discretion, the Committee may decline to make the
award or may split the award among two or more papers.
Program Committee Chair Program Committee
Tom Leighton Laszlo Babai Paris Kanellakis
Rm. 2-377 Michael Ben-Or Rao Kosaraju
Department of Mathematics Michael Fischer Michael Paterson
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Shafi Goldwasser Robert Tarjan
Cambridge, MA 02139 Leo Guibas Uzi Vishkin
Joseph Halpern
Conference Chair Local Arrangements Chairs
Ashok Chandra Seymour Ginsburg and Ming-Deh Huang
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Computer Science Department
P.O. Box 218 University of Southern California
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Los Angeles, CA 90089
∂17-Dec-86 1548 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu paper received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 15:45:54 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 17 Dec 86 15:37:54 PST
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 86 15:37:54 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"Undecidable Optimization Problems for Database Logic Programs"
H. Gaifman, H. Mairson, Y. SAgiv, and M. Vardi.
Shows boundedness and strong boundedness are undecidable, even in very simple
cases.
---jdu
∂17-Dec-86 1612 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU geminate affricates
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 16:12:20 PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 86 16:02:15-PST
From: Donald Churma <CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: geminate affricates
To: linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Does anyone know of any work on the phonological and/or phonetic
representation of geminate affricates (preferably in an autosegmental
framework)? How about geminate prenasals? Long diphthongs (as
distinct from a sequence of two consecutive short vowels)?
Also, I would like to get hold of a paper by Kaye, Lowenstamm, and
Vergnaud called ``Vowel Systems'', if I could, and one by K&V called
``Dominance and Complex Segments''. In fact, anything recent written
by some permutation of the Montreal folks might well be of interest to
me.
Don
-------
∂17-Dec-86 1625 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Name at Apple Needed
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 16:25:15 PST
Received: from navajo.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 17 Dec 86 15:55:34-PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Wed, 17 Dec 86 15:35:37 PST
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 86 15:35:37 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Name at Apple Needed
To: ac@score.stanford.edu, tajnai@score.stanford.edu
Does anyone have the name of a good person at Apple to approach
regarding a donation??
---jeff
∂17-Dec-86 1700 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Name at Apple Needed
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 17:00:44 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 17 Dec 86 16:58:50-PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 86 16:57:09-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Name at Apple Needed
To: ullman@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ac@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, tajnai@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>" of Wed 17 Dec 86 16:22:24-PST
Message-ID: <12263631013.67.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Larry tesler has been my contact. Gio
-------
∂17-Dec-86 2045 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU lost book
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Dec 86 20:45:44 PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 86 20:41:53-PST
From: Donald Churma <CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: lost book
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
I think I left a copy of Phonology Yearbook 2 on top of one of the
towel dispensers in the trailer restrooms. Has anybody seen it? If
so, please leave it with Suzi (sp?), or give it to me (or Bill Poser,
who is actually the owner of this now-orphaned volume).
Don
-------
∂18-Dec-86 0203 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #86
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Dec 86 02:03:40 PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 1986 09:52-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #86
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 18 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 86
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part C
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 86 09:34:17 GMT
From: Andy Cheese <mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!abc@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: Part C
CAMP84a *
ed. Campbell J.A.
Implementations of Prolog
Ellis Horwood Series Artificial Intelligence
Ellis Horwood 1984
CAMP86a *
Campbell J.A.
On Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence Review, 1, pp 3-9
1986
CARD?? *
Cardelli L.
A Semantics of Multiple Inheritance
CARD84a *
Cardelli L.
Compiling a Functional Language
Proceedings of 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional Programming,
Austin, Texas
pp 208-217
August 1984
CARD85a *
Cardelli L.
Amber
Proceedings of the Treizieme Ecole de Printemps d'Informatique Theorique,
Le Val D'Ajol, Vosges, France
May 1985
CARD??
Cardelli L.
The Amber Machine
CARR85a *
Carr H. & Kessler R.R.
A FORTH-Based Object File Format and Relocating Loader used to Bootstrap
Portable Standard Lisp
Utah Portable AI Support Systems Project
Opnote-85-02
Dept of Computer Science, University of Utah
May 20 1985
CART79a *
Cartwright R. & McCarthy J.
First Order Programming Logic
Proceedings ACM 6th Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages
pp 68-80
1979
CART83a *
Cartwright R. & Donahue J.
The Semantics of Lazy (and Industrious) Evaluation
CSL-83-9 , Xerox PARC 1983
CATT80a
Catto A.J. & Gurd J.R.
Nondeterministic Dataflow Graphs
Proceeedings of 8th World Computer Congress, IFIP 80, pp 251-256
October 1980
CATT81a
Catto A.J.
Nondeterministic Programming in a Dataflow Environment
PhD thesis, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester, June 1981
CATT81b
Catto A.J. & Gurd J.R.
Resource Management in Dataflow
Proc ACM Conf on Functional Languages and Computer Architecture
pp 77-84
October 1981
CERI86a *
Ceri S. & Gottlob G.
Normalization Of Relations And Prolog
CACM, Vol 29, No 6, pp 524 - 544
June 1986
CHAL83a *
Overview Of The Programming Methodology Group At Chalmers University
Of Technology
Declarative Programming Workshop, University College London
pp 203-212
11-13th April 1983
CHAM84a *
eds. Chambers F.B. & Duce D.A. & Jones G.P.
Distributed Computing
Apic Studies in Data Processing no 20
Academic Press, 1984
CHAN73a
Chan C-L. & Lee RC-T.
Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving
Academic Press
1973
CHAN85a *
Chan Y.G. & Lasserre C. & Roussel P.
Minutes of the AFNOR Meetings on Prolog Standardisation
December 5th 1985
PS/80, 6 pages
summary of the four AFNOR meetings in Oct and Nov 1985
December 1985
CHAN85b *
Chan Y.C.
Error Handling in Prolog - Proposition of Evaluable Predicate
PS/88, 4 pages
25 October 1985
CHAND85a *
Chandrasekaran N. & Lakshaman V.S. & Iyengar S.S. & Venimadhavan C.E. &
Chen P.S.
A Denotational Semantics For The Generalized Entity Relationship Model
And A Simple ER Model
Technical Report No 85-018
Department of Computer Science, Louisianna State University
March 15 1985
CHAND85b *
Chandra A.K. & Harel D.
Horn Clause Queries and Optimizations
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 2, No 1, pp 1-16
April 1985
CHANG84a
Chang J.H. & DeGroot D.
AND-Parallelism of Logic Programs Based on Static Data Dependency Analysis
Dept. of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci, Univ. of California,Berkely,Sept 1984
CHAN85a *
Chang J.-H. & Despain A.M.
Semi-Intelligent Backtracking of Prolog Based on Static Data
Dependency Analysis
1985 IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming
pp 10-21
1985
CHAU85a
Chau Y.N.
PARLOG For Expert Systems
MSc Thesis, Dept of Computing, Imperial College
1985
CHEE85a *
Cheese A.B.
The Applicability of SKI(BC) Combinators in a Parallel Rewrite Rule Environment
Msc Thesis
Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester
October 1985
CHEE86a *
Cheese A.B.
Report on Visit to Department of Computer Science, University of Utah, U.S.A.
1st to 8th June, 1986
Declarative Languages Note No. ABC-86-02
Department of Computer Science, University of Nottingham
also in Alvey IKBS Mailshot, IKBS/MS 9/86 3.1, September 1986
1986
CHEN84a *
Chen W. & Sitharama Iyengar S.
Design and Implementation of A Complete Binary Tree System for the Activation
of Concurrent Processes
Technical Report No 84-33
Department of Computer Science, Louisiana State University
1984
CHEN84b *
Chen T.Y. & Lassez J-L. & Port G.S.
Maximal Unifiable Subsets And Minimal Non-unifiable Subsets
Technical Report 84/16
Department of Computer Science, University of Melbourne
1984
CHENG?? *
Chengzheng S. & Yungui T.
PSOF : A Process Model Based on the Or-Forest Description
Department of Computer Science, Changsha Institute of Technology, China
CHENG86a *
Cheng M.H.M. & Yukawa K.
AP : An Assertional Programming System
Research Report CS-86-11
Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
April 1986
CHES80a *
Chester D.
HCPRVR: An Interpreter for Logic Programs
Proc 1st Annual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence
pp 93-95
1980
CHEW80a *
Chew P.
An Improved Algorithm for Computing with Equations
IEEE 21st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
pp 108-117
1980
CHEW81a *
Chew P.
Unique Normal Forms in Term Rewriting Systems with Repeated Variables
13th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)
pp 7-18
1981
CHIK83a
Chikayama T.
ESP as Preliminary Kernel Language of Fifth Generation Computers
( Also in New Generation Computing, Vol 1, No 1, 1983 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-005
1983
CHIK84a *
Chikayama T.
Unique Features of ESP
( Also in "Proceedings of FGCS 84", Tokyo, 1984 )
ICOT Research Center, Technical Memorandum TM-0055
April 1984
CHOI85a *
Choi J.M. & Song M.S. & Jeong K.J. & Kwon H.C. & Han S.Y. & Kim Y.T.
A Prolog-Based Korean-English Machine Translation System and its
Efficient Method of Dictionary Management
in WADA86a, pp 236-245
1985
CHRI86a *
Christ N.H. & Terrang A.E.
A Micro-Based Supercomputer
pp 145-160
Byte, Vol 11, no 4, Special Issue on Number Crunching
April 1986
CHUN84a *
Chung P.W.H.
Con-current Logo : A language for Teaching Control Applications
D.A.I. Research Paper No. 243
Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh
paper presented at British Logo Users Group 84 Conference
to be published in LOGO Almanack, Vol. 1, Part 2
October 1984
CHUN85a *
Chung P.
A Standard for Formatted Input and Output in Prolog
DRAFT
University of Edinburgh, AI Applications Institute
Programming Systems Group Note 43
AIAI/PSG43/85
PS/64, 6 pages
20 August 1985
CHUN85b *
Chung P.
A Standard for Formatted Input and Output in Prolog (Revised)
University of Edinburgh, AI Applications Institute
Programming Systems Group Note 43
AIAI/PSG43/85
PS/89, 6 pages
9th December 1985
CHUR41a
Church A.
The Calculi of Lambda-Conversion
Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1941
CIE83a *
Ciepielewski A. & Haridi S.
A Formal Model For Or-Parallel Execution Of Logic Programs
Information Processing 1983, pp 299-305
1983
CIEP84a *
Ciepielewski A.
Towards A Computer Architecture For Or-Parallel Execution Of Logic Programs
TRITA-CS-8401
Part I
Academic Dissertation
Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Computer Systems,
Stockholm, Sweden
May 17 1984
CIEP84b *
Ciepielewski A.
Towards A Computer Architecture For Or-Parallel Execution Of Logic Programs
TRITA-CS-8401
Part II
Academic Dissertation
Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Computer Systems,
Stockholm, Sweden
May 17 1984
CIEP85a *
Ciepielewski A. & Haridi S. & Hausman B.
Initial Evaluation of a Virtual Machine for OR-Parallel Execution of
Logic Programs
DRAFT
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
CLAC85a *
Clack C. & Peyton-Jones S.
Strictness Analysis - A Practical Approach
in Proc. IFIP Conf. on Functional Programming Languages and
Computer Architecture, Sept 16-19 '85, Nancy, France
1985
CLAC86a *
Clack C. & Peyton-Jones S. L.
The Four-Stroke Reduction Engine
Internal Note 1902, Internal Working Paper
Department of Computer Science, University College London
also presented at ACM Conference on Lisp and Functional Programming,
Boston, August 1986
1986
CLARE86a *
Clare A.R. & Souza J. de
Experience of Using Prolog to Implement a Medium Sized Program for a
Real Application
Internal Report SYS-C86-08
School of Information Systems, University of East Anglia
September 22 1986
CLARE86b *
Clare A.R. & Sleep M.R.
Assessing the Performance of Declarative Language Implmentations
Declarative Systems Project
School of Information Systems, University of East Anglia
October 29 1986
CLARE86c *
Clare A.R. & Sleep M.R.
A Naive Comparison of Three Declarative Languages
DRAFT
School of Information Systems, University of East Anglia
June 13 1986
CLARK77a
Clark K.L. & Sickel
Predicate Logic: A Calculus For Deriving Programs
Proc. 5th Int. Joint Conf. on Artif. Intell., Cambridge, Mass 1977
CLARK77b *
Clark K.L. & Tarnlund S. -A.
A First Order Theory of Data and Programs
Proc. IFIP 1977, pp 939-944
Amsterdam: North Holland
CLARK78a
Clark K.L.
Negation As Failiure
In "Logic and Databases", pp 293-322
New York: Plenum Press, 1978
CLARK78b *
Clark D.W. & Green C.C.
A Note On Shared List Structure In Lisp
Information Processing Letters, Vol 7, No 6
pp 312-314
October 1978
CLARK79a
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.
The Control Facilities of IC-Prolog
Internal Report, Dept of Computing, Imperial College
1979
CLARK79b
Clark D.W.
Measurements of Dynamic List Structure Use in LISP
IEEE TOSE Vol SE-5 No 1, Jan 1979
CLARK79c
Clark K.L.
Consequence Verification of Flowcharts
Department of Computing, Imperial College, TOC 79/8
1979
CLARK79d *
Clark K.L.
Predicate Logic As A Computational Formalism
Department of Computing, Imperial College, TOC 79/59
December 1979
CLARK79e *
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.G.
The Control Facilities Of IC-Prolog
in "Expert Systems In The Micro-Electronic Age" (ed. Michie D.)
pp 122-149
Edinburgh University Press
1979
CLARK80a
Clark K.L. & Darlington J.
Algorithm Classification Through Synthesis
Computer Journal, 61-65, 1980
CLARK80b *
Clarke J.W. & Gladstone P.J.S. & Maclean C.D. & Norman A.C.
SKIM - S,K,I Reduction Machine
Proceedings LISP Conference, Stanford, 1980
CLARK80c *
Clark J.H.
Structuring A VLSI System Architecture
Lambda, second quarter, 1980 , pp25-30
1980
CLARK80d *
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.G.
IC-PROLOG: Aspects of its Implementation
Proceedings of Logic Programming Workshop, Debrecen
1980
CLARK80e
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.G.
Prolog: A Language For Implementing Expert Systems
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Technical Report 80/21
November 1980
also
Machine Intelligence 10, Ellis Horowood
1982
CLARK81a
Clark D.W. & Lampson B.W. & McDaniel G.A. & Ornstein S.M.
The Memory System of a High-Performance Personal Computer
CSL-81-1 , Xerox PARC, Jan 1981
CLARK81b *
Clark K.L.
An Introduction To Logic Programming
Department of Computing, Imperial College, A Tutorial 81/14
April 1981
see Introductory Readings in Expert Systems, (ed Michie, Gordon & Breach )
1981
CLARK81c
Clark K.L. & Gregory S.
A Relational Language For Parallel Programming
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research report 81/16
July 1981
see Functional Languages and Computer Architecture Conference,
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
October 1981
CLARK81d
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.G. & Gregory S.
IC-Prolog Language Features
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 81/31
October 1981
CLARK81e *
Clark K.L.
The Synthesis And Verification Of Logic Programs
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 81/36
September 1981
CLARK82a *
Clark K.L. & Tarnlund S. -A.
Logic Programming
London: Academic Press, 1982
CLARK82b *
Clark T.S.
S-K Reduction Engine For An Applicative Language
Dept of Comp Sci, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Report no UIUCDCS-R-82-1119, UILU-ENG 82 1741
December 1982
CLARK82c
Clark K.L. & McKeeman W.M. & Sickel S.
Logic Program Specification of Numerical Integration
Research Report 82/3
Department of Computing, Imperial College
(see Logic Programming (eds Clark K.L. & Tarnlund S.A.) Academic Press,
London, 1982)
March 1982
CLARK83a *
Clark K. & Gregory S.
PARLOG: A Parallel Logic Programming Language (Draft)
Research Report DOC 83/5, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College
CLARK84a *
Clark K. & Gregory S.
PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic
Research Report DOC 84/4, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College
CLARK84b
Clark K.L. & McCabe F.G.
Micro-Prolog: Programming in Logic
Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science
January 1984
CLARK84c *
Clark K.L. & Gregory S.
Notes on Systems Programming in PARLOG
Research Report DOC 84/15
Department of Computing, Imperial College
also in Proceedings of the International Conference on Fifth Generation
Computer Systems, Tokyo, November 1984
(ed Aiso H. )
Elsevier, North Holland
pp 299-306
July 1984
CLARK84d *
Clark K.L. & Gregory S.
Notes on the Implementation of Parlog
Research Report DOC 84/16
Department of Computing, Imperial College
October 1984
also in
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture,
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
CLARK84e *
Clark K. & Darlington J. & Kowalski R. & Ennals R.
Research Plan
Declarative Systems Research Group, Department of Computing
Imperial College of Science and Technology
November 1984
CLARK85a
Clarke E.M. Jr.
The Characterization Problem For Hoare Logics
in HOA85a
1985
CLARK85b *
Clark K. & Gregory S.
Notes on the Implementation of Parlog
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 2, No 1, pp 17-42
April 1985
CLAY84a
Clayton B.D.
ART Programming Primer
Inference Corporation, 1984
CLEL86a *
ed. Cleland G.
LFCS Newsletter No. 0
October 1986
CLOC81a *
Clocksin W.F. & Mellish C.S.
Programming in PROLOG
Springer Verlag 1981 (2nd Edition 1984)
CLOC83a *
Clocksin W.F.
Hortus Logico-Calculus
Notes for Tutorial Session on Declarative Languages and Architectures 1983
CLOC83b *
Clocksin W.F.
The ZIP Virtual Machine
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
January 1983
CLOC83c *
Clocksin W.F.
Executing Prolog at Ten Times DEC-10 Speed
28 November 1983
CLOC84a
Clocksin W.F.
Memory Representation Issues for Prolog Implementation
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
CLOC84b *
Clocksin W.F.
Notes on FlexiFlow
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge Jan. 1984
CLOC84c *
Clocksin W.F.
On a Declarative Constraint Language
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge Jan. 1984
CLOC84d *
Clocksin W.F.
What is Prolog-X?
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
CLOC85a *
Clocksin W.F.
Implementation Techniques for Prolog Databases.
Software - Practise and Experience Vol 15(7), pp 669-675
July 1985
CLOC85b *
Clocksin W.F.
Logic Programming and the Specification of Circuits
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Technical Report no 72
1985
CLOC85c *
Clocksin W.F.
Design And Simulation Of A Sequential Prolog Machine
New Generation Computing, 3, pp 101-120
1985
CLOC86a *
Clocksin W.F.
A Method For Efficiently Executing Horn Clause Programs Using Multiple
Processors
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
27 May 1986
CLOC86b *
Clocksin W.F.
Reference Summary of Prolog-X
1986
CODI85a
Codish M. & Shapiro E.
Compiling OR-Parallelism into AND-Parallelism
Technical Report CS85-18, Dept Applied Maths, Weizmann Inst
1985
COEL83a *
Coelho H.
Prolog: A Programming Tool For Logical Domain Modelling
in Processes and Tools for Decision Suport
(ed Sol H.G.), pp 37-45
North Holland
1983
COHE81a
Cohen J.
Garbage Collection of Linked Data Structures
ACM Computing Surveys Vol 13 No.3 Sept 1981, pp 341-367
COHE86a *
Cohen S.
The APPLOG Language
in DEGR86a, pp 239-278
1986
COHN86a *
Cohn A.G.
On The Solution Of Schubert's Steamroller In Many Sorted Logic
Dept of Computer Science, University of Warwick
9 April 1986
COLL60a
Collins G.E.
A Method For Overlapping and Erasure of Lists
CACM 3, no 12, pp 655-657
1960
COLM73a
Colmerauer A. & Kanoui H. & Pasero R. & Roussel P.
Un Systeme de Communication Homme-machine en Francais
Group Intelligence Artificielle
Universite d,Aix Marseille, Luminy, 1973
COLM81a *
Colmerauer A. & Kanoui H. & Canegham M. Van
Last Steps Towards An Ultimate Prolog
Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial
pp 947-948
Intelligence, Vancouver
1981
CONE83a
Conery J.S.
The AND/OR Process Model for Parallel Execution of Logic Programs
Phd Dissertation, Univ of California, Irvine,
Tech rep 204, Information and computer science
1983
CONE83b *
Conery J.S. & Kibler D.F.
AND Parallelism In Logic Programs
IJCAI 83, pp 539-543
1983
CONE85a *
Conery J.S. & Kibler D.F.
AND Parallelism and Nondeterminism in Logic Programs
New Generation Computing, 3, pp 43-70
1985
CONS83a *
Constable R.L.
Programs as Proofs: A Synopsis
Information Processing Letters, 16, pp 105-112
1983
CONS84a *
Constable R.L. & Zlatin D.R.
The Type Theory of PL/CV3
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 6, No 1, pp 94-117
January 1984
COOM84a *
ed. Coombs M.J.
Developments in Expert Systems
Academic Press 1984
CORE86a *
Core P.W. & Foster J.M.
TEN15 : An Overview
542 MAL-21
September 1986
CORN79a *
Cornish M. et al
The TI Data Flow Architectures: The Power of Concurrency For Avionics
Proc. 3rd Digital Avionics Systems Conf., pp 19-25
November 1979
CORY84a
Cory H.T. & Hammond P. & Kowalski R.A. & Kriwaczek F. & Sadri F.
& Sergot M.
The British Nationality Act As A Logic Program
Dept of Computing, Imperial College, London
1984
CORY85a *
Cory H.T. & Moss C.D.S.
The Implementation of Prolog
Department of Computing, Imperial College
PS/49, 28 pages
June 1985
COST84a *
Costa G.
A Metric Characterization of Fair Computations in CCS
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Internal Report CSR-169-84
October 1984
COST85a *
Costa G. & Stirling C.
Weak and Strong Fairness in CCS
Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh
Internal Report CSR-167-85
January 1985
COVI85a *
Covington M.A.
Eliminating Unwanted Loops In Prolog
ACM SIGPLAN Notices 20, 1, pp 20-26
January 1985
COVI85b *
Covington M.A.
A Further Note on Looping in Prolog
ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Vol 20, No 8, pp 28-31
August 1985
COX83a
Cox Brad J.
Object Oriented Programming in C
Unix review, October/Novemeber 1983 Page 67
COX84a
Cox Brad J.
Object Oriented Programming in C
Unix Review, February/March 1984 Page 56
COX84b *
Cox P.T. & Pietrzykowski T.
A Complete Nonredundant Algorithm for Reversed Skolemization
Theoretical Computer Science, 28, pp 239-261
1984
COUR82a
Courcelle B.
Fundamental Properties of Infinite Trees
in BROY82a, pp 417-470
1982
COUR83a *
Courcelle B.
Fundamental Properties of Infinite Trees
Theoretical Computer Science, 25, pp 95-169
1983
COUR84a
ed. Courcelle B.
Ninth Colloquium on Trees in Algebra and Programming
CUP 1984
COUS85a
Cousineau G. & Curien P. -L. & Mauny M.
The Categorical Abstract Machine
CNRS-Universite Paris VII LITP
85-8
January 1985
CRAI86a *
Craig I.D.
The Ariadne-1 Blackboard System
Computer Journal, Vol 29, No 3, pp 235-240
1986
CRAM84a *
Crammond J.A. & Miller C.D.F.
An Architecture For Parallel Logic Languages
Proceedings of 2nd International Logic Programming Conference
Uppsala
pp 183-194
July 1984
CRAM85a *
Crammond J.A.
A Comparative Study of Unification Algorithms for OR_Parallel Execution of
Logic Languages
IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol c-34, no 10, pp 911-917
October 1985
CRAM86a *
Crammond J.
An Execution Model For Committed-Choice Non-Deterministic Languages
Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University
To be presented at Third Symposium on Logic Programming 1986
CRIP83a *
Cripps M.D. & Field A.J.
The MARCH HARE Network Switching Device
Research Report DOC 83/30
Department of Computing, Imperial College
March 1983
CRIP86a *
Cripps M.D. & Field A.J. & Reeve M.J.
The Design and Implementation of ALICE : A Parallel Graph Reduction Machine
Department of Computing, Imperial College
to be published in "Functional Programming Languages, Tools and Architectures"
ed. S. Eisenbach, by Ellis Horwood, 1986
also printed for special seminar on "The Fifth Generation" held during the
European Control Data Users Association (ECODU) meeting in London on
April 21st 1986
1986
CSIR81a *
Csirmaz L.
Programs and Program Verifications in a General Setting
Theoretical Computer Science, 16, pp 199-210
1981
CSLI86a *
CSLI Monthly
Vol 1, No 1
Center For The Study of Language and Information
Stanford University
March 1986
CUNN80a
Cunningham R.J.
An Applicative Model For Imperative Programming Languages: A Framework For
Verification And Synthesis
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 80/9
November 1980
CUNN81a *
Cunningham R.J. & Salih A.A.
The Use of Verification-Oriented Software Specification in Telecommunication
Engineering
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 81/4
February 1981
also
Fourth International Conference on Software Engineering for Telecommunication
Switching Systems, University of Warwick
July 1981
CUNN82a *
Cunningham R.J. & Zappacosta-Amboldi S.
Software Tools For First Order Logic
Research Report 82/19
Department of Computing, Imperial College
1982
CUNN86a *
Cunnington K.
Prolog Standardization Working Paper - The Use of Integer Indexes in Clauses
PS/137
9th September 1986
CURI85a
Curien P. -L.
Typed Categorical Combinatory Logic
CNRS-Universite Paris VII LITP
85-15
February 1985
CURI85b
Curien P. -L.
Categorical Combinators, Sequentials Algorithms and Functional Programming
CNRS-Universite Paris VII LITP
85-26
March 1985
CURI86a
Curien P.L.
Categorical Combinators, Sequential Algorithms And Functional Programming
ISBN 0-470-20290-4
Research Notes in Theoretical Computer Science series
John Wiley & Sons Inc.
1986
CURR58a
Curry H.B. & Feys R.
Combinatory Logic, Vol 1
North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1958
CURR72a
Curry H.B & Hindley J.R. & Seldin J.P.
Combinatory Logic, Vol II
North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1972
CUTC86a *
Cutcher M.
BSI Modules in Prolog - Discussion Note
ICL Reading
in BSI86s
1986
--
Andy Cheese
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂18-Dec-86 0833 YAMARONE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU THE bike...you know which one!
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Dec 86 08:33:41 PST
Date: Thu 18 Dec 86 08:29:01-PST
From: Tom Yamarone <YAMARONE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: THE bike...you know which one!
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: bb@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
We are trying to locate the owner of the dark grey "Phoenix"-brand
bike that has been chained to the deck railing now for a few months.
The one with no rear wheel....(Actually, we're hoping no one will
respond to this message, so that we can claim the bike for one of
our own..so ignore this if you don't want to deal with removing your
bike.) If you DO want it, please respond and we won't go ahead with
our removal plans next week.....and if you need help transporting it
somewhere, we'd be glad to help...so, until Monday!
C.S.L.I.(the Center for the Storage of Long-forgotten Items.)
-------
∂18-Dec-86 1134 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Combinatorics Seminar
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Dec 86 11:34:16 PST
Date: Thu 18 Dec 86 11:25:59-PST
From: Anil R. Gangolli <GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Combinatorics Seminar
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12263832869.35.GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Announcing
A SEMINAR ON COMBINATORICS
Wednesdays, 7:00pm
First Meeting: Wed. Jan 7, Sequoia Hall 114
We aim to start a series of expository lectures and discussion on
topics in combinatorics, hoping to bring together interested parties
in mathematics, computer science, statistics, and operations research.
We will meet Wednesday evenings at 7:00pm in Room 114, Sequoia Hall.
The meetings will be informal, encouraging interaction and exchange of
ideas, rather than only presentations of completed work. Coffee, etc.
will be provided after the meetings.
Tentatively, the topics for Winter Quarter will be loosely structured
about the combinatorial aspects of Young tableaux (with applications to
probability, computer science, and statistics), and algebraic graph
theory. The seminar may also treat other topics of joint interest to
the participants, as time and enthusiasm permits. Below is a list of
topics and speakers for the first three meetings:
Jan. 7 An Introduction to Young Tableaux, Persi Diaconis.
Jan. 14 Applications of Young Tableaux to Sorting and
Non-Parametric Statistics, Persi Diaconis.
Jan. 21 Young Tableaux in the Olden Days, Don Knuth.
Persi Diaconis
Don Knuth
Anil Gangolli
Questions should be directed to Anil Gangolli, CS Dept., Stanford,
(phone: 723-3605; net-mail: gangolli@sushi.stanford.edu).
-------
∂18-Dec-86 1404 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU CACM Special Issue on Parallelism
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Dec 86 14:04:22 PST
Date: Thu 18 Dec 86 13:59:20-PST
From: John R Delaney <DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CACM Special Issue on Parallelism
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: delaney@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12263860785.31.DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The December 1986 CACM is a special issue on Parallelism. The TOC is
Introduction:
Karen A. Frenkel
Data Parallel Algorithms:
W. Daniel Hillis and Guy L. Steele, Jr.
Advanced Compiler Optimizations for Supercomputers:
David A. Padua and Michael J. Wolfe
Contention is No Obstacle to Shared-Memory Multiprocessing:
Randall Rettberg and Robert Thomas
Toward Memory-Based Reasoning:
Craig Stanfill and David Waltz
Parallel Free-Text Seach on the Connection Machine System:
Craig Stanfill and Brewster Kahle
Please note that I have not read any of these articles yet, so I can
offer no more pointers than the above to which might be of special
interest to our project.
John
-------
∂18-Dec-86 1529 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU plain old geminates
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Dec 86 15:29:27 PST
Date: Thu 18 Dec 86 15:20:28-PST
From: Donald Churma <CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: plain old geminates
To: linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Anybody know of work on why geminates can (sort of) violate
syllable-structure constraints (e.g., Japanese can have a
syllable-final oral C only if it's part of a geminate)? It's possible
to state constraints like this in autosegmental terms, but it's pretty
messy, and doesn't seem to really capture what's going on.
Don
-------
∂19-Dec-86 0200 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #87
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 02:00:38 PST
Date: Wed 17 Dec 1986 19:56-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #87
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 19 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 87
Today's Topics:
Programming - Comment Style,
Announcement - ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 17:51:09 CST
From: Uday S. Reddy <reddy@a.cs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #83
John Dowding posed an interesting problem about how to comment Prolog
predicates to specify their permitted calling patterns. The problem
is that writing something like
%% append(+L1, +L2, -L3)
says that L1 and L2 should be instantiated, but doesn't say howmuch
instantiated. Should L1 be any non-variable term, a ground term, or
something in-between?
One solution is to combine the instantiation information with type
information. To specify the type of append, one can write
%% type list(t) = [] + [t|list(t)]
%% append(list(t), list(t), list(t))
which means that all the three arguments to append should be lists
over the same element type "t". See the paper by Mycroft and O'Keefe
in Artificial Intelligence, on how to define and use such
"polymorphic" types. Their paper also describes a type-checking
system based on such declarations.
One can be more flexible when one is using types only as comments. For
example,
%% append(list(t), list(u), list(t+u))
Here, the three arguments are not required to be lists ranging over
the same element type. Or, one can be more precise:
%% type lin(t,tail) = tail + [t|lin(t,tail)]
%% append(list(t), u, lin(t,u))
The type lin(t,tail) denotes "linear" pair structures which have heads
of type t at all levels, but the tail of the last pair is of type
"tail". Now, the second argument of append can be of any type u, but
the then the last tail of the third argument would be of the same type
u.
Coming back to describing instantiation patterns, an annotation such
as
%% append(+list(?t), +list(?t), -list(?t))
means that the first two arguments should be instantiated to lists,
but their elements need not be. The third argument should be
uninstantiated in the call, but it will be instantiated to a list when
append succeeds. Here is a more complex annotation:
%% append(+list(?t), ?list(t), -lin(?t, ?list(t)))
This means that the first argument should be instantiated to a list,
but the second argument need not be. When the call succeeds, the
third argument would be instantiated to a linear structure with the
successive heads of type ?t, and the last tail of type ?list(t). I
don't propose that it is a particularly useful or readable annotation,
but it shows the power of the notation.
We are working on automating type checking and type inference with
such instantiation types.
-- Uday Reddy
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 22:06:22 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems - Advance Program
Sixth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium
on
PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE SYSTEMS
March 22-25, 1987
San Diego, California
INFORMATION
LOCATION
The technical sessions, business meeting, Sunday evening recep-
tion, and lunches will all be at the Bahia Resort Hotel, situated
on San Diego's Mission Bay. The Bahia is within walking distance
of the beach, recreational facilities (sailing, tennis courts,
pool), Sea World, and relaxed boardwalk shops and cafes. Checkout
time is 1pm; checkin time is 4pm, or earlier subject to room
availability. A block of rooms has been reserved until March 1,
1987. Please reserve a room by using the form provided or by cal-
ling 800-821-3619 (800-542-6010 within California). First night's
deposit is required. Room rates and availability are not
guaranteed past March 1.
REGISTRATION
Advanced registration is requested using the form provided.
Registration rates go up markedly after March 9. A registration
desk will be open Sunday night from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and
during the day on Monday (8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Registrants,
other than students, receive admission to the technical sessions,
one copy of the proceedings, reception, lunches, and a dinner
cruise on Tuesday evening. Student registration, available to
full-time students only, includes the technical sessions and one
copy of the proceedings. Additional copies of the proceedings
will be available for sale at the registration desk.
TRANSPORTATION
There are three choices for ground transportation from the air-
port to the hotel. Courtesy airport transportation is provided by
the hotel. The Bahia Hotel van leaves the airport every two
hours, starting at 7:30am and ending at 9:30pm. The van can also
be called outside scheduled times using the free telephone marked
"Bahia Hotel" at the hotel reservation desk in the airport ar-
rival lounge. Additionally, a regular limousine van is available
for $5 (direction Mission Bay). Taxi fare to the hotel is about
$10.
For participants driving to San Diego on I-5, take I-8 West, then
exit at West Mission Bay Drive. The hotel is located on the North
side of Mission Bay Drive.
CLIMATE
The average temperature in March is 60 degrees. Rain is unlikely,
but cannot be ruled out.
EVENT LOCATION
All technical sessions and the business meeting are in the Mis-
sion Room. The exhibit program is in the Mission Lounge. Sunday
night registration and the reception are in the Del Mar Room. On
Tuesday night there will be a dinner cruise with live music
around the San Diego Harbor, between 6:30pm and 9pm. Transporta-
tion to the harbor will be provided. Buses will leave the hotel
at 6pm.
TECHNICAL PROGRAM
SUNDAY, MARCH 22, 1987
Reception 8:30 pm - 11 pm, Del Mar Room
MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1986
Note: All talks will take place in the Mission Room
SESSION 1 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: M.Y. Vardi (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Invited Talk: Database Theory - Past and Future, J.D. Ullman
(Stanford University)
Logic Programming with Sets, G.M. Kuper (IBM T.J. Watson Research
Center)
Sets and Negation in a Logic Database Language (LDL1), C. Beeri
(Hebrew University), S. Naqvi (MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University
of Texas at Austin and MCC), O. Shmueli, and S. Tsur (MCC)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 2 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: A.K. Chandra (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center)
Logical Design of Relational Database Schemes, L.Y. Yuan (Univer-
sity of Southern Louisiana) and Z.M. Ozsoyoglu (Case Western
Reserve University)
On Designing Database Schemes Bounded or Constant-Time Maintain-
able with Respect to Functional Dependencies, E.P.F. Chan and
H.J. Hernandez (University of Alberta)
Computing Covers for Embedded Functional Dependencies, G. Gottlob
(CNR, Italy)
SESSION 3 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: R. Fagin (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Dynamic Query Interpretation in Relational Databases, A. D'Atri
(Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma), P. Di Felice (Universita
dell'Aquila), and M. Moscarini (CNR, Italy)
A New Basis for the Weak Instance Model, P. Atzeni (CNR, Italy)
and M.C. De Bernardis (Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma)
Answering Queries in Categorical Databases, F.M. Malvestuto
(Italian Energy Commision)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 4 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: U. Dayal (CCA)
Nested Transactions and Read-Write Locking, A. Fekete (Harvard
University), N. Lynch (MIT), M. Merrit (AT&T Bell Laboratories),
and W. Weihl (MIT)
Transaction Commitment at Minimal Communication Cost, A. Segall
and O. Wolfson (Technion)
The Precedence-Assignment Model for Distributed Databases Con-
currency Control Algorithms, C.P. Wang and V.O.K. Li (University
of Southern California)
A Knowledge-Theoretic Analysis of Atomic Commitment Protocols, V.
Hadzilacos (University of Toronto)
Business Meeting: 8:30 pm - 10:00 pm, Mission Room
TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1986
Note: There will be exhibits in the Mission Lounge
SESSION 5 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: T. Imielinski (Rutgers University)
Invited Talk: Perspectives in Deductive Databases, J. Minker
(University of Maryland)
Maintenance of Stratified Databases Viewed as a Belief Revision
System, K. Apt (Ecole Normal Superieure and Universite Paris 7)
and J.M. Pugin (BULL Research Center)
Specification and Implementation of Programs for Updating Incom-
plete Information Databases, S. Hegner (University of Vermont)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 6 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: H. Korth (University of Texas at Austin)
Operation Specific Locking on B-Trees, A. Billiris (Boston
University)
Concurrency Control in Database Structures with Relaxed Balance,
O. Nurmi, E. Soisalon-Soininen (Universitat Karlsruhe), and D.
Wood (University of Waterloo)
Performance Results on Multiversion Timestamping Concurrency Con-
trol with Predeclared Writesets, R. Sun (Iona College) and G.
Thomas (Clarkson University)
SESSION 7 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: V. Vianu (University of California at San Diego)
Decomposing an N-ary Relation into a Tree of Binary Relations, R.
Dechter (Hughes Aircarft Company and University of California at
Los Angeles)
Formal Bounds on Automatic Generation and Maintenance of Integri-
ty Constraints, J.P. Delgrande (Simon Fraser University)
Relative Knowledge in a Distributed Database, T. Imielinski
(Rutgers University)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 8 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: M. Yannakakis (AT&T Bell Laboratories)
The Parallel Complexity of Simple Chain Queries, F. Afrati (Na-
tional Technical University of Athens) and C. Papadimitriou
(Stanford University and National Technical University of Athens)
Bounds on the Propagation of Selection into Logic Programs, C.
Beeri (Hebrew University), P. Kanellakis (Brown University), F.
Bancilhon (INRIA and MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University of Texas
at Austin and MCC)
A Decidable Class of Bounded Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford
University) and Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
Decidability and Expressiveness Aspects of Logic Queries, O.
Shmueli (Technion and MCC)
Dinner Cruise: 6:30 pm - 9:00 pm
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1986
SESSION 9 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: P.A. Larson (University of Waterloo)
Invited talk: Chickens and Eggs - The Interrelationship of Sys-
tems and Theory, P. Selinger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Axiomatization and Simplification Rules for Relational Transac-
tions, A. Karabeg, D. Karabeg, K. Papakonstantinu, and V. Vianu
(University of California at San Diego)
A Transaction Language Complete for Database Update and Specifi-
cation, S. Abiteboul (INRIA) and V. Vianu (University of Califor-
nia at San Diego)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 10 - 11:00 am - 12:15pm
Chair: Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
On the Power of Magic, C. Beeri (Hebrew University) and R. Ramak-
rishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC)
Efficient Evaluation for a Subset of Recursive Queries, G. Grahne
(University of Helsinki), S. Sippu (University of Jyvaskyla), and
E. Soisalon-Soininen (University of Helsinki)
Worst-Case Complexity Analysis of Methods for Logic Query Imple-
mentation, A. Marchetti-Spaccamella, A. Pelaggi (Universita "La
Sapienza" di Roma), and D. Sacca (CRAI, Italy)
SESSION 11 - 2:00 pm - 4:35pm
Chair: P. Kanellakis (Brown University)
On the Expressive Power of the Extended Relational Algebra for
the Unnormalized Relational Model, D. Van Gucht (Indiana Univer-
sity)
Safety and Correct Translation of Relational Calculus Formulas,
A. Van Gelder (Stanford University) and R. Topor (University of
Melbourne)
Safety of Recursive Horn Clauses with Infinite Relations, R.
Ramakrishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC), F. Ban-
cilhon (INRIA and MCC), and A. Silberschatz (University of Texas
at Austin)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 am
One-Sided Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford University)
Optimizing Datalog Programs, Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
_________________________________________________________________
CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION
Sponsors: SIGACT, SIGMOD, and SIGART.
Executive Committee: A.K. Chandra, S. Ginsburg, A. Silberschatz,
J.D. Ullman, and M.Y. Vardi.
Chairman: Ashok K. Chandra, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
P.O.Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, (914) 945-1752,
ashok@ibm.com, ashok@yktvmv.bitnet
Program Chairman: Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM Almaden Research Center,
650 Harry Rd., San Jose, CA 95120-6099, (408) 927-1784,
vardi@ibm.com, vardi@almvma.bitnet
Local Arrangements: Victor Vianu, Dept. of Electrical Engineer-
ing and Computer Science MC-014, University of California at San
Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, (619) 534-6227, vianu@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Program Committee: U. Dayal, T. Imielinski, P.K. Kanellakis, H.
Korth, P.A. Larson, K.J. Raiha, Y. Sagiv, M.Y. Vardi, M. Yan-
nakakis.
_________________________________________________________________
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please send this form or a facsimile along with a money order or
check (payable to 6th ACM SYMPOSIUM ON PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE
SYSTEMS) to:
ACM-PODS Registration
c/o Victor Vianu
EECS Department, MC-014
Univ. of California at San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(Before Mar. 9) (After)
ACM and SIG member $165 $225
ACM member only $175 $235
SIG member only $175 $235
Nonmember: $205 $275
Student: $50 $60
Requests for refunds will be honored until March 9, 1987.
Name___________________________________________________________
Affiliation____________________________________________________
Address________________________________________________________
City_________State________Zip__________________________________
Country_________Telephone______________________________________
Net Address____________________________________________________
Check here if confirmation of registration is required.
Dietary restrictions: Kosher Vegetarian
Special meals can be guaranteed only for those who register in
advance.
_________________________________________________________________
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please mail this form or a facsimile (being sure to mention the
ACM-PODS Conference) by March 1, 1987 to:
Bahia Resort Hotel
998 W. Mission Bay Dr.
San Diego, CA 92109
Tel: (619) 488-0551
Accommodations desired:
Single $68 Double (1 bed) $72
Twin (2 beds) $72 Triple $76
Quad $80
Children under 12 stay free when occupying same rooms as parents.
Accomodation prices do not include 7% city hotel tax.
Arrival date_______________________Time_____________________________
Departure date_____________________Time_____________________________
Name________________________________________________________________
Sharing room with___________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________________
City__________State_______Zip_______________________________________
Country____________________________Telephone________________________
First night deposit is required.
First night's deposit enclosed: $_________________________________
Credit card: VISA, Mastercard, Amer. Express
Other credit card: ________________________________________________
Credit card number_________________________________________________
Exp. Date__________________________________________________
Signature__________________________________________________
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂19-Dec-86 0608 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU proposed purposes
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 06:07:38 PST
Date: 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: proposed purposes
Subject: [Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>: [gls@Think.COM: X3J13 charter ...]
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]19-Dec-86 05:46:27.MATHIS>
sigh, sigh! Guy got this done, but to me on a day I was off the
net. He has inserted some sight additions. We should discuss
this on the net so that we can make a clean copy with clearly
specified alternate wordings so that we could vote on it point by
point at the next meeting. In Dallas I got the feeling that if
we had a clean text, it would probably be passed unanimously.
This is the chance for all of you (particularly those who could
not be in Dallas) to participate in the discussion. -- Bob
Mathis
Begin forwarded message
Received: FROM GODOT.THINK.COM BY USC-ISIF.ARPA WITH TCP ; 16 Dec 86 09:46:39 PST
from boethius by Godot.Think.COM via CHAOS; Tue, 16 Dec 86 12:45:00 EST
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 86 12:46 EST
From: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>
To: mathis@ada20.isi.edu
Cc: gls@AQUINAS
Subject: [gls@Think.COM: X3J13 charter (proposed)]
Return-Path: <gls@Think.COM>
Message-ID: <861216124628.6.GLS@BOETHIUS.THINK.COM>
Sigh. I mailed this Friday evening, but to the wrong address.
--Guy
----------------------------------------------------------------
Purposes of X3J13 Committee (Proposed)
1. X3J13 is chartered to produce an American National
Standard for Common Lisp. It will codify existing practice,
provide extensions to facilitate portability of code among
diverse implementations, and establish normative Common Lisp
programming practice.
2. The committee will begin with the language described in
{\it Common Lisp: The Language} by Guy L. Steele Jr. (Digital
Press, 1984), which is the current {\it de facto} standard for
Common Lisp. Whenever there is a proposal for the standard to
differ from {\it Common Lisp: The Language}, the committee
shall weigh both future costs of adopting (or not adopting) a
change and costs of conversion of existing code. Aesthetic
criteria shall be a subordinate consideration.
3. The committee will address at least the following topics
in the course of producing the standard, in each case either
incorporating specific features or explaining why no action
was taken:
(a) Repairing mistakes, ambiguities, and minor ommissions
in {\it Common Lisp: The Language}
(b) Error handling and condition signalling
(c) Semantics of compilation
(d) Object-oriented programming
(e) Iteration constructs
(f) Multiprocessing
(g) Graphics
(h) Windows
(i) Validation
(j) One versus two namespaces for functions and variables
Topics (a)-(c) concern deficiencies in {\it Common Lisp: The
Language} that require resolution. Topics (d) and (e) are not
addressed by {\it Common Lisp: The Language} but appear to be
well-understood and ready for standardization. Topics (f)-(i)
concern areas where standardization is desirable but not
crucial to production of a standard. Topic (j) is an area of
current controversy within the Lisp community. Other topics
may be considered if specific proposals are received.
4. The committee recognizes that Lisp programming practice
will continue to evolve and anticipates the need for future
revisions and extensions to the standard. This may include a
family of Lisps and/or a layered Lisp model.
5. X3J13 is committed to work with ISO toward an international
Lisp standard.
[Possible amendment: change the word "extensions" in the first
paragraph to "additional features".]
--------------------
End forwarded message
∂19-Dec-86 0608 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU minutes of Dallas meeting
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 06:07:53 PST
Date: 19 Dec 1986 05:51-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: minutes of Dallas meeting
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]19-Dec-86 05:51:46.MATHIS>
Gary Brown has already sent me the draft minutes of the Dallas
meeting. They seem very good, but he and I are still double
checking each other. If you want to see the preliminary version,
I will forward it to you; if you would rather wait, they will
come in about ten days. -- Bob Mathis
∂19-Dec-86 0727 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU proposed purposes
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 07:27:45 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 19 Dec 86 10:26:34-EST
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1986 10:26 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12264051413.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Cc: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: proposed purposes
In-reply-to: Msg of 19 Dec 1986 08:46-EST from MATHIS at ADA20.ISI.EDU
Looks excellent to me.
The proposed ammendment (extensions -> additional features), seems like
a useful clarification.
-- Scott
∂19-Dec-86 0831 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM Re: proposed purposes
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 08:31:04 PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 19 DEC 86 08:31:11 PST
Date: 19 Dec 86 08:30 PST
Sender: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
From: Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM>
Subject: Re: proposed purposes
In-reply-to: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU's message of 19 Dec 86 05:46 PST
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
cc: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <861219-083111-7132@Xerox>
I like this very much -- with the suggested change:
extensions --> additional features
It captures both the need for resolving the current set of issues
relatively quicly for the current community, and also possible futures
that could involve more work, but provide great benefit.
danny
∂19-Dec-86 0936 ohlander@venera.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes
Received: from VENERA.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 09:35:49 PST
Posted-Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 09:35:29-PST
Received: by venera.isi.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA22770; Fri, 19 Dec 86 09:35:30 PST
Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 09:35:29-PST
From: Ron Ohlander <OHLANDER@venera.isi.edu>
Subject: Re: proposed purposes
To: MATHIS@ada20.isi.edu
Cc: X3J13@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 19-Dec-86 09:35:29.VENERA.ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Message from "MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU" of 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST
Looks good. I vote for the document with the change of "additional
features" to "extensions".
Ron
-------
∂19-Dec-86 0958 ohlander@venera.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes
Received: from VENERA.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 09:58:18 PST
Posted-Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 09:43:35-PST
Received: by venera.isi.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA22910; Fri, 19 Dec 86 09:43:36 PST
Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 09:43:35-PST
From: Ron Ohlander <OHLANDER@venera.isi.edu>
Subject: Re: proposed purposes
To: MATHIS@ada20.isi.edu
Cc: X3J13@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 19-Dec-86 09:43:35.VENERA.ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Message from "MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU" of 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST
Looks good. I vote for the document with the change of "extensions"
to "additional features."
Ron
-------
∂19-Dec-86 1155 berman@vaxa.isi.edu Re: proposed purposes,
Received: from VAXA.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 11:55:25 PST
Received: by vaxa.isi.edu (4.12/4.7)
id AA17572; Fri, 19 Dec 86 11:55:23 pst
From: berman@vaxa.isi.edu (Richard Berman)
Message-Id: <8612191955.AA17572@vaxa.isi.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 1986 1155-PST (Friday)
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Cc: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: proposed purposes,
[Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>: [gls@Think.COM: X3J13 charter ...]
In-Reply-To: Your message of 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST.
<[ADA20.ISI.EDU]19-Dec-86 05:46:27.MATHIS>
Me Like. Ugh.
RB.
∂19-Dec-86 1323 DLW@ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM proposed purposes
Received: from [192.10.41.109] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 13:19:50 PST
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 32441; Fri 19-Dec-86 15:52:55 EST
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 86 15:54 EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: proposed purposes
[Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>: [gls@Think.COM: X3J13 charter ...]
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU, x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]19-Dec-86 05:46:27.MATHIS>
Message-ID: <861219155422.5.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
This looks fine. The spelling of "ommissions" should omit one of the
m's. I agree that "extensions" should be changed to "additional
features".
∂19-Dec-86 1344 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Final reminder on grade sheets
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 13:43:03 PST
Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 13:39:47-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Final reminder on grade sheets
To: Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU, TAs@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Sec@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12264119369.20.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Completed grade sheets are due in my office noon, December 22. If you haven't
received your sheets yet, think you won't be able to meet the deadline, or
are having any other problem with the process, please contact me! Please
don't return the sheets to the Registrar yourselves. I need to collect a copy
for our departmental records, as well as account for each sheet that left my
office. Thanks again for all your help.
Claire
-------
∂19-Dec-86 1643 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU S8 is a bit flakey.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 16:42:50 PST
Date: Fri 19 Dec 86 16:40:53-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: S8 is a bit flakey.
To: KSL-LispM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12264152339.59.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
We have spotted a few Fatal disk errors on S8.
It still boots and appears to run ok so you can
still use it but you would be well advised to
save your work frequently. It is unlikely that
any work will be done to fix this state of affairs
until early January.
Sorry all you Symbolics Kee users out there.
Rice.
-------
∂19-Dec-86 2017 Moon@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM proposed purposes
Received: from SCRC-RIVERSIDE.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Dec 86 20:17:13 PST
Received: from EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by RIVERSIDE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 87742; Fri 19-Dec-86 23:15:26 EST
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 86 23:15 EST
From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: proposed purposes
[Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>: [gls@Think.COM: X3J13 charter ...]
To: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
cc: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU]19-Dec-86 05:46:27.MATHIS>
Message-ID: <861219231549.7.MOON@EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I think this is an excellent charter for X3J13. I approve of the
wording and especially of the attitude about what is important and the
choice to finish Common Lisp rather than embarking on a new experiment.
One comment on "establish normative Common Lisp programming practice":
I doubt it's actually possible to get such a large group of Lisp programmers
to agree in any meaningful way on issues of programming style. If this
goal is achieved, it will be a monumental accomplishment. My preference
would be to leave it to the professors and the authors of textbooks, but
I have no real objection. After all, some of the lettered items will be
fairly difficult to bring to closure too.
∂20-Dec-86 0049 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #88
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Dec 86 00:48:59 PST
Date: Fri 19 Dec 1986 15:10-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #88
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Saturday, 20 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 88
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part E
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 86 09:35:14 GMT
From: Andy Cheese <mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!abc@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: references - E
EGAN79a
Egan G.K.
A Study of Data Flow: Its Applications to Decentralised Control
PhD Thesis, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester, 1979
EGAN80a
Egan G.K.
A Decentralised Computing System Based on Dataflow
Proc IEEE Industrial Control and Instrumentation Conference
March 1980
EHRI82a *
Ehrig H. & Kreowski H.-J. & Mahr B. & Padawitz P.
Algebraic Implementation of Abstract Data Types
Theoretical Computer Science, 20, pp 209-263
1982
EISI81a *
Eisinger N. & Kasif S. & Minker J.
Logic Programming : A Parallel Approach
TR-1124
Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland
December 1981
ELIT84a
eds. Elithorn A. & Banerji R.
Artificial and Human Intelligence: Symposium
North Holland 1984
ENNA81a
Ennals J.R.
Logic As A Computer Language For Children: A One Year Course
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Teaching Materials 81/6
October 1981
ENNA81b
Ennals J.R.
Children Program In Prolog
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Children's Programs 81/8
April 1981
ENNA81c
Ennals J.R.
History and Computing: A Collection of Papers 1979-1981
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Papers 81/22
September 1981
ENNA82a
Ennals J.R.
Beginning Micro-Prolog
Ellis Horwood Series Artificial Intelligence
Ellis Horwood Ltd., 1982
ENOM84a
Enomoto H. & Yonezaki N. & Saeki M. & Chiba K. & Takizuka T. & Yokoi T.
Natural Language Based System Development System TELL
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-067
June 1986
ENOM84b
Enomoto H. & Yonezaki N. & Saeki M.
Formal Specification and Verification for Concurrent Systems by TELL
ICOT Research Center, Technical Report TR-068
June 1986
ESHG85a *
Eshgi K.
Meta-Language and Self-Reference in Horn-Clause Programming
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
December 1985
ESTE85a *
Estenfeld K.
A Module Conception For ECRC-Prolog
PS/110
29 July 1985
EXET86a *
Artificial Intelligence Research
Department of Computer Science, University of Exeter
IKBS/MS 7/86 3.5, distributed with Alvey IKBS mailshot, July 1986
1986
--
Andy Cheese
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂22-Dec-86 1135 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #89
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Dec 86 11:35:33 PST
Date: Sun 21 Dec 1986 06:14-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #89
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 22 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 89
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography, Part G
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Dec 86 13:01:40 GMT
From: Andy Cheese <mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!nott-cs!abc@seismo.css.gov>
Subject: references, G
GABB84a *
Gabbay D.M. & Reyle U.
N-Prolog : An Extension of Prolog with Hypothetical Implications. I.
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 4, pp 319-355
Decmeber 1984
GABB?? *
Gabbay D.M.
Intuitionistic Basis For Non-Monotonic Logic
Project Rohrer
University of Stuttgart & Bar-llan University
GABB85a *
Gabbay D.M.
Towards a Better Logic Programming Language (Theoretical Discussion
of Subprojects)
Draft
Department of Computing, Imperial College
March 1985
GABB85b *
Gabbay D.M.
Temporal Logic and Computer Science
Draft
Department of Computing, Imperial College
to be published in D. Reidel, Synthese-Library
May 1985
GALI86a *
Gallimore R. & Coleman D.
Rigorous Program Development Using OBJ
RMG/SIGFM/0
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GALLA82a *
Gallaire H. & Lasserre C.
Metalevel Control for Logic Programs
in Logic Programming, Academic Press, pp 173-185
(eds Clark K.L. & Tarnlund S.-A.), APIC Studies in Data Processing No 16
PS/84
1982
GALLI84a *
Gallier J.H. & Raatz S.
Graph-Based Logic Programming Interpreters
Dept of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania,
MS-C15-84-61
November 1984
GANZ83a *
Ganzinger H.
Parameterized Specifications : Parameter Passing and Implementation
with Respect to Observability
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 5, No 3
pp 318-354
July 1983
GANZ85a *
Ganzinger H. & Hanus M.
Modular Logic Programming of Compilers
1985 IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, July 15-18, 1985
Boston, Massachusetts
pp 242-253
1985
GEHL86a *
Gehlot V. & Srikant Y.N.
An Interpreter for Slips - An Applicative Language Based on Lambda Calculus
Computer Languages, Vol 11, No 1, pp 1-13
Pergamon Press Ltd
1986
GELE84a *
Gelernter D.
A Note on Systems Programming in Concurrent Prolog
Proceedings 1984 IEEE International Logic Programming Conference
pp 76-82
1984
GERR86a *
Gerrard C.P.
Experience With OBJ In The Specification Of A Configuration Management
System
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GERR86b *
Gerrard C.P.
Experience With OBJ In The Design Of A Configuration Management
System
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GIAN84a *
Giannesini F. & Cohen J.
Parser Generation And Grammar Manipulation Using Prolog's Infinite Trees
Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 3, pp 253-266
October 1984
GIER80a
Gierz G. & Hofmann K.H. & Keimel K. & Lawson J.D. & Mislove M. & Scott D.S.
A Compendium of Continuous Lattices
Springer Verlag
1980
GILB86a *
Gilbert N.G. & Alexander I.
Alvey IKBS Expert Systems Theme
'Explanation' Report of a Workshop
20-21 March 1986, University of Surrey
IKBS/MS 5/86 3.2, distributed with Alvey IKBS Mailshot, May 1986
April 1986
GILO85a *
Giloi W. & Beer J.
The German Parallel Prolog Machine Development Project
IFIP TC-10 Working Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Architecture
UMIST, Manchester
July 15-18 1985
GLAS84a *
Glaser H. & Hankin C. & Till D.
Principles of Functional Programming
Prentice Hall International, 1984
GLAS85a *
Glasgow J.I. & Jenkins M.A. & McCrosky C.D.
User Defined Parallel Control Strategies in Nial
1985 IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, Boston, Massachusetts
pp 22-28
July 15-18 1985
GLAU78a
Glauert J.R.W.
A Single-Assignment Language for Data Flow Computing
MSc Dissertation, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ. of Manchester, January 1978
GLAU85a *
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Sleep M.R.
An Active Term Rewrite Model for Parallel Computation
Document, Alvey DACTL group, March 1985
GLAU85b *
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Sleep M.R.
DACTL Report 3/5
Document, Alvey DACTL group, March 1985
GLAU85c *
Glauert J.R.W. & Holt N.P. & Kennaway J.R. & Reeve M.J. &
Sleep M.R. & Watson I.
DACTL0: A Computational Model and an Associated Compiler Target Language
University of East Anglia
May 1985
GOEB85a
Goebel R.
The Design and Implementation of DLOG, a Prolog-Based Knowledge Representation
System
New Generation Computing, Vol 3, No 4, pp 385-401
1985
GOEB86a *
Goebel R.
A Logic Data Model For The Machine Representation Of Knowledge
Technical Report CS-86-07
Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
June 1985
GOGU67a
Goguen J.A.
L-Fuzzy Sets
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications
Vol 18 no 1, pp 145-174
1967
GOGU68a
Goguen J.A.
Categories of Fuzzy Sets
Phd Dissertation
Dept. of mathematics, Univ. of california, berkeley
1968
GOGU68b
Goguen J.A.
The Logic of Inexact Concepts
Synthese, Vol 19, pp 325-373
1968-69
GOGU69a
Goguen J.A.
Categories of V-Sets
Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society,
Vol 75, no 3, pp 622-624
1969
GOGU71a
Mathematical Representation of Hierarchically organised Systems
in "Global Systems Dynamics"
(ed. Attinger E. & Karger S.)
Basel, Switzerland
pp 112-128
1971
GOGU72a
Goguen J.A.
Systems and Minimal Realisation
Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control,
Miami Beach, Florida
pp 42-46
1972
GOGU72b
Goguen J.A.
Minimal Realisation of Machines in Closed Categories
Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society
Vol 78, no 5, pp 777-783
1972
GOGU72c
Goguen J.A.
Hierarchical Inexact Data structures in Artificial Intelligence Problems
Proc. 5th Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences
Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 345-347
1972
GOGU72d
Goguen J.A. & Yacobellis R.H.
The Myhill Functor, Input-Reduced Machines, and Generalised
Krohn-Rhodes Theory
Proc. 5th Princeton Conf. on Information Sciences and Systems
Princeton, New Jersey
pp 574-578
1972
GOGU72e
Goguen J.A.
On Homomorphisms, Simulation, Correctness and Subroutines for
programs and Program schemes
Proc. 13th IEEE Symp. on Switching and Automata Theory
College Park, Maryland
pp 52-60
1972
GOGU73a
Goguen J.A.
Realisation is Universal
mathematical System Theory
Vol 6, no 4, pp 359-374
1973
GOGU73b
Goguen J.A.
System theory concepts in Computer Science
Proc. 6th Hawaii Int. Conf. on Systems Sciences
Honolulu, Hawaii, pp 77-80
1973
GOGU73c
Goguen J.A.
The Fuzzy Tychonoff Theorem
Journal of mathematical Analysis and applications
vol 43, pp 734-742
1973
GOGU73d
Goguen J.A.
Categorical Foundations for general Systems Theory
in "Advances in Cybernetics and Systems research"
(ed. Pichler F. & Trappl R.)
Transcripta Books, London
pp 121-130
1973
GOGU74a
Goguen J.A.
Semantics of Computation
Proc. 1st Int. Symp. on Category Theory Applied to Computation and Control
(1974 American Association for the Advancement of Science, San francisco)
Univ. of massachusetts at Amherst, 1974, pp 234-249
also published in LNCS vol 25, pp 151-163, springer-verlag
1975
GOGU74b
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W.
Initial Algebra Semantics
proc. 15th IEEE Symp. on Switching and Automata
pp 63-77
1974
GOGU74c
Goguen J.A.
Concept Representation in Natural and Artificial languages: Axioms,
extensions and Applications for Fuzzy sets"
Int. Journal of man-Machine Studies
vol 6, pp 513-561
1974
reprinted in "Fuzzy Reasoning and its Applications"
(ed. Mamdani E.H. & Gaines B.R.)
pp 67-115
Academic Press
1981
GOGU74d
Goguen J.A.
On Homomorphisms, Correctness, termination, Unfoldments and
Equivalence of Flow Diagram Programs"
Journal of Computer and System Sciences,
vol 8, no 3, pp 333-365
1974
GOGU74e
Goguen J.A.
Some Comments on Applying Mathematical System Theory
in "Systems Approaches and Environmental Problems"
(ed. Gottinger H.W. & Vandenhoeck & Rupert)
pp 47-67
(Gottingen, Germany)
1974
GOGU75a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Factorisation, Congruences, and the Decomposition of Automata and
Systems
in "Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science"
LNCS Vol 28, pp 33-45, Springer-Verlag
1975
GOGU75b
Goguen J.A.
Objects
International Journal of general systems, vol 1, no 4,
pp 237-243
1975
GOGU75c
Goguen J.A.
Discrete-Time Machines in Closed Monoidal Categories, I,
Journal of Computer and System sciences, Vol 10, No 1, February,
pp 1-43
1975
GOGU75c
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Abstract Data types as Initial algebras and the Correctness of
Data Representations
Proc. Conf. on Computer Graphics, Pattern recognition, and Data Structure
(Beverly Hills, California), pp 89-93
1975
GOGU75d
Goguen J.A. & Carlson L.
Axioms for Discrimination Information
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Sept '75
pp 572-574
1975
GOGU75e
Goguen J.A.
On Fuzzy Robot Planning
in "Fuzzy Sets and Their Applications to Cognitive and Decision Processes
(ed. Zadeh L.A. & Fu K.S. & Tanaka K. & Shimura M.)
pp 429-448
Academic Press
1975
GOGU75f
Goguen J.A.
Robust Programming Languages and the Principle of Maximum
Meaningfulness
Proc. Milwaukee Symp. on Automatic Computation and Control
(Milwaukee, Wisconsin)
pp 87-90
1975
GOGU75g
Goguen J.A.
Complexity of Hierarchically Organised Systems and the Structure of
Musical Experiences
Int. Journal of General Systems, vol 3, no 4, 1975, pp 237-251
originally in UCLA Comp. Sci. Dept. Quarterly, October 1975, pp 51-88
1975
GOGU76a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Some Fundamentals of Order-Algebraic Semantics
Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Sciences
(Gdansk, Poland, 1976)
LNCS vol 46, 1976, pp153-168, Springer-Verlag
1976
GOGU76b
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.W. & Wright J.B.
Parallel Realisation of Systems, Using Factorisations and Quotients in
Categories
Journal of Franklin Institute, vol 301, no6, June '76, pp 547-558
1976
GOGU76c
Goguen J.A.
Correctness and Equivalence of Data Types
Proc Symp. on Mathematical Systems Theory (Udine, Italy)
Springer Verlag Lecture Notes
(ed. Marchesini G.)
pp 352-358
1976
GOGU76d
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Rational Algebraic Theories and Fixed-point Solutions
Proc. IEEE 17th Symp on Foundations of Computer Science
(Houston, Texas), 1976, pp 147-158
1976
GOGU77a
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G. & Wright J.B.
Initial Algebra Semantics and Continuous Algebras
JACM, vol 24, no 1, January 1977, pp 68-95
1977
GOGU77b
Goguen J.A.
Abstract Errors for Abstract Data Types
in "Formal Descriptions of Programming Concepts"
(ed. E.Neuhold)
North-Holland, 1978, pp 491-522
also in
Proc. IFIP Working Conf. on Formal Description of Programming
Concepts
(ed. Dennis J.)
MIT Press, 1977, pp 21.1-21.32
1977
GOGU77c *
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Putting Theories Together to Make Specifications
Proc. 5th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence
(MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts), 1977, pp 1045-1058
1977
GOGU77d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Correctness of Recursive Flow Diagram Programs
Proc. Conf. on Mathematical Foundations of Comp. Sci.
(Tatranska Lomnica, Czechoslovakia)
pp 580-595
1977
GOGU77e
Goguen J.A.
Algebraic Specification Techniques
UCLA Comp. Sci. Dept. Quarterly
Vol 5, no 4
pp 53-58
1977
GOGU78a
Goguen J.A. & Varela F.
The Arithmetic of Closure
Journal of Cybernetics, Vol 8, 1978
also in "Progress in Cybernetics and Systems research, vol 3"
(ed. Trappl R. & Klir G.J. & Ricciardi L.)
Hemisphere Pub Co. (Washington D.C.)
1978
GOGU78b
Goguen J.A. & Ginali S.
A Categorical Approach to General Systems
in "Applied General Systems research"
(ed. Klir G.)
Plenum Press
pp 257-270
1978
GOGU78c
Goguen J.A. & Thatcher J.W. & Wagner E.G.
An Initial Algebra Approach to the Specification, Correctness and
Implementation of Abstract data Types
in "Current Trends in Programming, vol 4, Data Structuring"
pp 80-149
(ed. Yeh R.)
Prentice Hall
1978
GOGU78d
Goguen J.A.
Some Design Principles and Theory for OBJ-0, a Language for Expressing
and Executing Algebraic Specifications of Programs
Proc. Int. Conf. on Mathematical Studies of Information Processing
(Kyoto, Japan)
pp 429-475
1978
GOGU78e
Goguen J.A. & Linde C.
Structure of Planning Discourse
Journal of Social and Biological Structures, Vol 1
pp 219-251
1978
GOGU79a
Goguen J.A. & Shaket E.
Fuzzy Sets at UCLA
Kybernetes, vol 8
pp 65-66
1979
GOGU79b
Goguen J.A. & Varela F.
Systems and Distinctions; Duality and Complementarity
International Journal of General Systems, vol 5
pp 31-43
1979
GOGU79c
Goguen J.A. & Tardo J.J.
An Introduction to OBJ: A Language for writing and Testing formal
algebraic specifications
Reliable Software Conf. Proc. (ed. Yeh R.)
(Cambridge, Massachusetts)
pp 170-189
Prentice Hall
1979
GOGU79d
Goguen J.A.
Algebraic Specification
in "Research Directions in Software Technology"
(ed. Wegner P.)
pp 370-376
MIT Press
1979
GOGU79e
Goguen J.A.
Some Ideas in Algebraic Semantics
Proc. 3rd IBM Symp on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science
(Kobe, Japan)
53 pages
1979
GOGU79f
Goguen J.A.
Fuzzy Sets and the Social Nature of Truth
in "Advances in Fuzzy Set Theory and Applications"
(eds. Gupta M.M. & Yager R.)
pp 49-68
North-Holland Press
1979
GOGU79g
Goguen J.A. & Tardo J. & Williamson N. & Zamfir M.
A Practical Method for Testing Algebraic Specifications
UCLA Computer Science Quarterly, Vol 7, no 1
pp 59-80
1979
GOGU80a
Goguen J.A.
Thoughts on Specification, Design and Verification
Software Engineering Notes, Vol 5, no 3
pp 29-33
1980
GOGU80b
How to Prove Algebraic Inductive Hypotheses Without Induction: with
Applications to the Correctness of Data Type Implementation
Proc. 5th Conf. on Automated Deduction, (Les Arcs, France)
(eds. Bibel W. & Kowalski R.)
LNCS, vol 87
pp 356-373
Springer Verlag
1980
GOGU80c
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
The Semantics of CLEAR, a Specification Language
in "Abstract Software Specification"
(eds Bjorner D.)
(Proc. 1979 Copenhagen Winter School)
LNCS, vol 86
pp294-332
1980
GOGU80d
Goguen J.A. & Linde C.
On the Independence of Discourse Structure and Semantic Domain
Proc. 18th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational
Linguistics, Parasession on Topics in Interactive Discourse
(Univ. of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
pp 35-37
1980
GOGU81a
Goguen J.A. & Parsaye-Ghomi K.
Algebraic Denotational Semantics Using Parameterised Abstract Modules
Proc. Int. Conf on Formalising Concepts
(Peniscola, Spain)
(ed. Diaz J. & Ramos I.)
LNCS, vol 107
pp 292-309
Springer verlag
1981
GOGU81b
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
An Informal Introduction to CLEAR, a Specification Language
in "The Correctness Problem in Computer Science"
(eds. Boyer R. & Moore J.)
pp 185-213
Academic Press
1981
GOGU81c
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Completeness of Many-Sorted Equational Logic
SIGPLAN Notes, Vol 16, no 7, pp 24-32, 1981
also in SIGPLAN Notes, vol 17, no 1, pp 9-17, 1982
extended version as Tech Rep CSLI-84-15, Center for the Study of
Language and Information, Standford Univ.,
September 1984
GOGU82a
Goguen J.A.
ORDINARY Specification of KWIC Index Generation
Proc Workshop on Program Specification
(ed. Staunstrup J.)
LNCS, Vol 134
pp 114-117
Springer Verlag
1982
GOGU82b
Goguen J.A.
ORDINARY Specification of Some Constructions in Plane Geometry
Proc Workshop on Program Specification
(ed. Staunstrup J.)
LNCS, Vol 134
pp 31-46
Springer verlag
1982
GOGU82c
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Algebras, Theories and Freeness: An Introduction for Computer Scientists
in "Theoretical Foundations of Programming Methodology"
(eds. Broy M. & Schmidt G.)
pp 329-348
D. Reidel
1982
GOGU82d
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Security Policies and Security Models
Proc 1982 Berkeley Conf on Computer Security
IEEE Computer Society Press
pp 11-20
1982
GOGU82e
Goguen J.A.
Universal Realisation, Persistent Interconnection and Implementation of
Abstract Modules
Proc 9th Int Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
(Aarhus, denmark)
LNCS, Springer Verlag
1982
GOGU82f
Goguen J.A.
Rapid Prototyping in the OBJ Executable Specification Language
Proc Rapid Prototyping Workshop
(Columbia, Maryland)
1982
also in Software engineering Notes, ACM Special Interest
Group on Software engineering, vol 7, no 5, pp 75-84, 1983
GOGU83a
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J. & Plaisted D.
Programming with Parameterised Abstract Objects in OBJ
in "Theory and practise of Software technology"
(eds. Ferrari D. & Bolognani M. & Goguen J.A.)
pp 163-193
North-Holland
1983
GOGU83b
Future Directions for Software Engineering
in "Theory and Practise of Software Technology"
(eds. Ferrari D. & Bolognani M. & Goguen J.A.)
pp 243-244
North-Holland
1983
GOGU83c
Goguen J.A. & Ferrari D. & Bologanani M.
Theory and Practise of Software Technology
North Holland
1983
GOGU83d *
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Correctness of Recursive Parallel Non-Deterministic Flow Programs
Journal of Computer and System Sciences, vol 27, no 2
pp 268-290
October 1983
GOGU83e
Goguen J.A.
Parameterised Programming
IEEE TOSE, vol SE-10, no 5, september 1984, pp 528-543
preliminary version in Proc. Workshop on Reusability in Programming,
ITT, pp 138-150
1983
GOGU83f
Goguen J.A. & Linde & Weiner J.
Reasoning and Natural explanation
International Journal of man-Machine Studies, Vol 19
pp 521-559
1983
GOGU83g
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Introducing Institutions
Logics of programs
(Carnegie-mellon Univ., Pittsburgh PA, June 1983)
LNCS, vol 164, Springer Verlag
pp 221-256, 1984
GOGU84a
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Unwinding and Inference Control
1984 Symp on Security and privacy, IEEE, pp 75-86
1984
GOGU84b
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Equality, types, Modules and generics for Logic Programming
Tech Rep no. CSLI-84-5, Center for the Study of Logic and Information,
Stanford University, March 1984
also in Proc. 2nd int. Logic Programming Conf., Upsala, Sweden,
pp 115-125
1984
GOGU84c *
Goguen J.A. & Bustall R.M.
Some Fundamental Properties of Algebraic Theories: For the Semantics
of Computation, Part 1: Comma Categories, Colimits, Signatures and Theories
Theoretical Computer Science, vol 31, no 2,
pp 175-209
1984
GOGU84d
Goguen J.A. & Burstall R.M.
Some Fundamental Algebraic Tools For The Semantics
of Computation, Part 2: Signed and Abstract Theories
Theoretical Computer Science, vol 31, no 3
pp 263-295
1984
GOGU84e *
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Equality, Types, Modules and (Why Not ?) Generics for Logic programming
Journal of Logic programming, vol 1, no 2
pp 179-210
(Erratum in Journal of Logic Programming, Vol 1, No 4, pp 356,
December 1984)
August 1984
GOGU84f
Goguen J.A. & Murphy M. & Randle R.J. & Tanner T.A. & Frankel R.M. &
Linde C.
A Full Mission Simulator study of Aircrew performance: The measurement
of Crew Coordination and descisionmaking factors and their relationships
to Flight task performance
Proc. 20th Annual Conf on Manual control, vol II
(eds. Hartzell E.J. & Hart S.)
NASA Conference publication 2341, pp 249-262
1984
GOGU84g
Goguen J.A. & Linde C. & Murphy M.
Crew Communication as a factor in Aviation Accidents
Proc 20th Annual Conf on Manual control, vol II
(eds. Hartzell E.J. & Hart S.)
NASA Conference Publication 2341, pp 217-248
1984
GOGU85a
Goguen J.A. Meseguer J.
EQLOG: Equality, Types and Generic Modules for Logic Programming
In Functional and Logic Programming, Prentice Hall
1985
GOGU85b *
Goguen J.A. & Jouannaud J-P & Meseguer J.
Operational Semantics for Order-Sorted Algebra
In Proceedings of ICALP 1985
1985
GOGU85c *
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Initiality, Induction and Computability
to appear in "Algebraic Methods in Semantics"
(ed. Nivat M. & Reynolds J. )
Cambridge U.P.
chapter 14, pp 459-540 approx.
1985
GOGU85d *
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
Completeness of Many-Sorted Equational Logic
to appear in Houston Journal of Mathematics
1985
GOGU85e *
Goguen J.A. & Futatsugi K. & Jouannaud J.-P. & Meseguer J.
Principles of OBJ2
Proc 1985 Symp on Principles of programming languages, ACM
pp 52-66
1985
GOGU86a *
Goguen J.A.
Aspects of the Past Present and Future of OBJ
Presented at The Alvey SIG FM One Day Colloquium on The Specification
Language OBJ And Applications, Imperial College
Friday, 18th April, 1986
GOGU86b *
Goguen J.A. & Meseguer J.
EQLOG : Equality, Types, and Generic Modules for Logic Programming
in DEGR86a, pp 295-364
1986
GOGU86c *
Goguen J. & Kirchner C. & Meseguer J.
A Rewrite Rule Machine : Models of Computation for the Rewrite Rule Machine
July 9, 1986
SRI Project ECU 1243
Final Report
July 1986
GOGU86d *
Goguen J.
A Rewrite Rule Machine : Programming by Generic Example
SRI Project ECU 1243
Final Report
July 1986
GOGU86e *
Goguen J.A. & Mesgeuer J.
Extensions and Foundations of Object-Oriented Programming
1986
GOLD81a *
Goldfarb W.
The Undecidability Of The Second-Order Unification Problem
Theoretical Computer Science, 13, pp 225-230
1981
GOLS82a
Golshani F.
Growing Certainty With Null Values
Research Report 82/22
Department of Computing, Imperial College
December 1982
GOOD83a
Goodall A.
Language Of Intelligence (PROLOG)
Systems International p21-24 Jan 1983
GOOD85a
Good D.I.
Mechanical Proofs about Computer Programs
in HOA85a
1985
GORD79a *
Gordon M.J. & Milner R. & Wadsworth C.P.
Edinburgh LCF
Lecture Notes In Computer Science, Vol 78
Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1979
GORD85a *
Gordon M.
HOL : A Machine Oriented Formulation of Higher order Logic
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Technical Report no 68
July 16 1985
GOST79a
Gostelow K.P. & Thomas R.E.
A View of Dataflow
Proc. Nat. Comp. Conf., Vol 48, pp 629-636
1979
GOTO82a
Goto A. & Moto-oka T.
Basic Architecture of Highly Parallel Processing System for Inference
Document Univ. of Tokyo, Dec 1982
GOTO84a *
Goto A. & Tanaka H. & Moto-oka T.
Highly Parallel Inference Engine PIE - Goal Rewriting Model and Machine
Architecture
New Generation Computing, Vol 2, No 1, pp 37-58
1984
GRAH84a *
Graham P.C.J.
Providing Architectural Support For Expert Systems
ACM SIGARCH, 12, 5, pp 12-18
December 1984
GREE85a *
Greene K.J.
A Fully Lazy Higher Order Purely Functional Programming Language with
Reduction Semantics
CASE Center Technical Report No. 8503
CASE Center, Syracuse University, New York
December 1985
GREG80a *
Gregory S.
Towards The Compilation Of Annotated Logic Programs
Department of Computing, Imperial College, Research Report 80/16
June 1980
GREG83a
Gregory S.
Getting Started With PARLOG
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
October 1983
GREG84a *
Gregory S.
Implementing PARLOG On The Abstract Prolog Machine
Research Report DOC 84/23
Department of Computing, Imperial College
August 1984
GREG84b *
Gregory S.
How To Use PARLOG (C-Prolog Version)
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
October 1984
GREG84c
Gregory S.
How To Use PARLOG (micor-PROLOG Version)
Dept of Computing, Imperial College
August 1984
GREG85a *
Gregory S.
Design, Application and Implementation of a Parallel Programming Language
PhD Thesis, Dept of Computing, Imperial College, Univ of London
September 1985
GREG85b *
Gregory S.
Sequential Parlog Machine Specification (Draft)
Department of Computing, Imperial College
24 Jan 85
Minor Revisions 16 Feb 85, 16 Mar 85
Major Revision 16 May 85
GRIE77a
Gries D.
An Exercise in Proving Parallel Programs Correct
CACM, 20, no 12, pp 921-930
1977
GRIS71a
Griswold R.E. & Poage J.F. & Polonsky J.P.
The Snobol-4 Programming Language
Prentice Hall
1971
GRIS84a *
Griswold R.E.
Expression Evaluation in the Icon Programming Language
Proceedings of 1984 ACM Symposium on Lisp and Functional Programming
Austin, Texas
pp 177-183
1984
GRIT81a *
Grit D.H. & Page R.L.
Deleting Irrelevant Tasks in an Expression-Oriented Multiprocessor System
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 3, No 1, pp 49-59
January 1981
GUES76a *
Guessarian I.
Semantic Equivalence of Program Schemes and its Syntactic Characterization
Proceedings 3rd International Colloquium on Automata Languages and Programming
pp 189-200
Edinburgh University Press, 1976
GULL85a *
Gullichsen E.
Heuristic Circuit Simulation Using Prolog
Integration, the VLSI Journal, 3, pp 283-318
1985
GUNN84a *
Gunn H.I.E. & Harland D.M.
Polymorphic Programming II. An Orthogonal Tagged High Level Architecture
Abstract Machine
Software - Practise and Experience, Vol 14(11), pp 1021-1046
November 1984
GUNT?? *
Gunter C.A.
The Largest First-Order-Axiomatizable Cartesian Closed Category of Domains
Computer Laboratory, Univ of Cambridge
GURD78a *
Gurd J. & Watson I. & Glauert J.
A Multi-Layered Data Flow Computer Architecture
Internal Report, Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Manchester
1978
GURD85a *
Gurd J. & Kirkham C.C. & Watson I.
The Manchester Prototype Dataflow Computer
CACM, vol 28, p 34-52,
1985
GUTT75a
Guttag J.V.
The Specification and Application to programming of Abstract Data Types
PhD dissertation, Univ. of Toronto, Dept of Comp Sci
1975
GUTT77a
Guttag J.V.
Abstract Data Types and the Development of Data Structures
CACM Vol 20, no 6, pp 396-404, June
1977
GUTT78a
Guttag J.V. & Horowitz E. & Musser D.R.
Abstract Data Types and Software Validation
CACM Vol 21, pp 1048-1064, december
also USC Information Sciences Institute Tech. Rep. Aug 76
1978
GUTT78b
Guttag J.V. & Horning J.J.
The Algebraic Specification of Abstract Data Types
Acta Informatica, 10, 1, pp 27-52
1978
GUTT80a
Guttag J.V.
Notes on Type Abstraction (version 2)
IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng. Vol SE-6, no 1, pp 13-23, January
1980
GUTT82a
Guttag J.
Notes On Using Types and Type Abstraction In Functional Programming
in DARL82a
1982
GUZM81a *
Guzman A.
A heterarchical Multi-Microprocessor Lisp Machine
1981 IEEE Computer Society Workshop on Computer Architecture for Pattern
Analysis and Image Database Management, Hot Springs, Virginia
pp 309 - 317
November 11-13, 1981
--
Andy Cheese
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂22-Dec-86 1253 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU December 24
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Dec 86 12:53:41 PST
Date: Mon 22 Dec 86 12:50:37-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: December 24
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12264896852.13.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
For your information, CS offices will close at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday,
December 24. Happy Holidays to all!
Betty
-------
∂22-Dec-86 1849 hpfclp!dcm@hplabs.HP.COM Charter statement
Received: from HPLABS.HP.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Dec 86 18:49:07 PST
Received: by hplabs.HP.COM ; Mon, 22 Dec 86 14:07:40 pst
From: hpfclp!dcm@hplabs.HP.COM
Received: by hpfclp; Mon, 22 Dec 86 10:24:52 mst
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 86 10:24:52 mst
Return-Path: <hpfclp!dcm>
Received: from hpfcdcm.UUCP; Mon, 22 Dec 86 10:15 MST
To: hpfclp!x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Charter statement
This may have already appeared from another source, I'm not sure since there
seems to be some problem with my mail address. Here is the text of Guy's
statement of purpose with some comments from the discussions. Words or
clauses that were topics of discussion are enclosed in []s. Additional notes
are indented after each item.
Dave Matthews
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise draft 86-005
Purposes of X3J13 Committee (proposed)
1. X3J13 is chartered to produce an American National Standard for Common Lisp.
It will codify existing practice, provide [extensions] [necessary] to
[facilitate] portability of code among diverse implementations and [establish]
normative [Common] Lisp programming practice.
change establish to stabilize?
extensions is a loaded word, are they required or not, maybe features is
a better word?
should a stronger term than facilitate be used
are we really establishing a programming practice, including style, etc
2. The committee will begin with the language described in Common Lisp: the
Language by Guy L. Steele Jr., which is the current de facto standard for
Common Lisp. Whenever there is a proposal for the standard to differ from CLTL
the committee shall weigh both future costs of adopting (or not adopting) a
[feature] and costs of conversion of existing code. [Aesthetic criteria shall
be a subordinate consideration.]
feature might be better said as change
should the clause about aesthetics exist at all
3. The committee will address at least the following topics in the course of
producing the standard, in each case either incorporating specific features or
explaining why no action was taken:
a) repairing [errors/mistakes], ambiguities and minor omissions in CLTL
b) error handling/condition signalling
c) semantics of compilation
d) object-oriented programming
e) iteration [the LOOP] constructs
f) multiprocessing
g) graphics
h) windows
i) one or two name spaces for functions or values
j) validation
Topics (a)-(c) concern deficiencies in CLTL that require resolution. Topics
(d) and (e) are not addressed by CLTL but appear to be well-understood and
ready for standardization. Topics (f)-(h) concern areas where standardization
is desirable but not crucial to production of a standard. Topic (i) is an
area of current controversy in the LISP community.
Topic (j) is not currently clarified.
4. The committee recognizes that Lisp programming practice will continue to
evolve, and anticipates the need for future revisions and extensions to the
standard. This may include a family of Lisps and/or a layered Lisp model.
5. X3J13 is committed to work with ISO toward an international Lisp standard.
separated from item 4.
∂23-Dec-86 0052 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V4 #90
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Dec 86 00:52:15 PST
Date: Mon 22 Dec 1986 11:13-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #90
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 23 Dec 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 90
Today's Topics:
LP Library - Declarative Language Bibliography,
& Komorowski's Contribution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 86 11:28:57 EST
From: jan@harvard.HARVARD.EDU (Jan Komorowski)
Subject: Bibliography
Here is my bibliography. Please accept my appologies for the delay.
KOMOR79
Komorowski, H. J., QLOG interactive environment - the experience from
embedding a generalized Prolog in Interlisp, Department of Computer
and Information Science, Linkoping University, LiTH-MAT-R-79-19,
Sweden, 1979.
KOMOR80
Komorowski, H.J., QLOG - The Software for Prolog and Logic Programming
in Proc. of Logic Programming Workshop, S.-A. Tarnlund, Ed., Debrecen,
Hungary, July 1980.
KOMOR81
Komorowski, H.J., Embedding Prolog in Lisp: An Example of a Lisp Craft
Technique, Department of Computer and Information Science, Linkoping
University LiTH-MAT-R-1981-2, Sweden, 1981.
KOMOR82a
Komorowski, H. J., Partial Evaluation as a Means for Inferencing Data
Structures in An Applicative Language: A Theory and Implementation in
the Case of Prolog, in: Proc. of the IXth ACM Symposium on Principles
of Programming Languages, Albuquerque, 1982.
KOMOR82b
Komorowski, H. J., QLOG - The Programming Environment for Prolog in
Lisp, in: Logic Programming, K. Clark and S.A. Tarnlund, Eds., Academic
Press, 1982.
KOMOR82c
Prolog Programming Environments Workshop, Proceedings, Komorowski, H.
J., Ed., Department of Computer and Information Science, Linkoping
University, Sweden 1982.
KOMOR83a
Komorowski, H.J, Interactive and Incremental Programming
Environments: Experience, Foundations and Future, in: Colloquium
Programmeer-Omgevingen, J. Heering and P. Klint, Eds, Matematisch
Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1983.
KOMOR83b
Komorowski, H. J., An Abstract Prolog Machine, in Proc. of the
European Conference on Integrated Interactive Computer Systems,
Stresa, Italy, North-Holland, 1983.
KOMOR84
Komorowski, H.J, Rapid Software Prototyping in a Database Framework,
A case Study, in: IEEE 1984 Proceedings of the International
Conference on Data Engineering.
KOMOR85a
Komorowski, H.J., A Model and an Implementation of a Logic Programming
Environment, Proc. of ACM SIGPLAN 85 Symposium on Language Issues in
Programming Environments, Seattle, June 1985.
KOMOR85b
Maluszynski, J., Komorowski, H.J., Unification-free Execution of
Horn-clause Programs, Proc. of the 2nd Logic Programming Symposium,
Boston, IEEE, July 1985.
KOMOR86a
Komorowski, H.J., Maluszynski, J, Rapid Software Prototyping and
Logic Programming, to appear in Science of Computer Programming
journal, also available as a Harvard University, Aiken Computation
Laboratory TR-01-86.
KOMOR86b
Komorowski, H.J, A Declarative Logic Programming Environment, to
appear in The Journal of Systems and Software, also available as a
Harvard University, Aiken Computation Laboratory TR-06-86.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂23-Dec-86 0950 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Honors for Gene
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Dec 86 09:50:30 PST
Date: Tue 23 Dec 86 09:44:26-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Honors for Gene
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12265125103.18.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'm happy to be able to pass along the following news:
Gene Golub will receive an Honorary Doctor of Laws degree from
The University of Dundee next July.
He has also been elected as an "Honorary Member" of the IEEE. The
letter informing Gene of this honor also stated:
"This is a special honor reserved for those who have rendered
meritorious service to mankind in engineering or other allied fields. The
citation accompanying your election to Honorary Mebership is as follows:
'For improvements in signal processing, modeling, control, and
other areas through numerical methods for least-squares
estimation and matrix singular value decomposition.' "
Congratulations, Gene!
-------
∂23-Dec-86 1502 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu papers received
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Dec 86 14:59:46 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 23 Dec 86 14:52:39 PST
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 86 14:52:39 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
"On the relationship between circumscription and negation as failure"
M. Gelfond, H and T. Przymusinski, UT El Paso.
The idea is that a suitably generalized closed-world assumption
(roughly: assume K if for no B does K or B follow from the DB,
yet B by itself does not follow)
is equivalent to circumscription.
"Deductive systems for database theory"
S Cosmodakis, IBM Yorktown
Uses cylindrical algebra, an algebraic equivalent to first-order logic.
---jdu
∂24-Dec-86 0929 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu GillisSymposia
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Dec 86 09:29:04 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 24 Dec 86 09:21:21-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 24 Dec 86 09:21:34 PST
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 86 09:23:15 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: GillisSymposia
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 86 09:44:56 -0200
From: Aviezri Fraenkel <fraenkel@wisdom>
Subject: GillisSymposia
Message_id: <C032.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 24 Dec 1986 12:17:21-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Please Post
A BOUQUET OF MATHEMATICS
Symposium in the honor of the 75th birthday of Professor Joseph Gillis
December 31, 1986 SCHMIDT AUDITORIUM, Weizmann Institute, Rehovot
09: 00 Cyril Domb Bar Ilan Univ. Self-avoiding Random
Walks
09: 45 George Weiss Natl. Inst. of Health, Random Walks in the
Bethesda, MD Presence of Constraints
10: 30 Coffee
11: 00 Nadav Liron Technion Convection-Diffusion
Problems
11: 45 Achi Brandt Weizmann Institute Multigrid Methods
14: 00 Itamar Procaccia Weizmann Institute Chaos
14: 45 Dominique Foata Univ. of Strasbourg Multivariate Basic
Hypergeometric Series
and Combinatorics
15: 30 Coffee
16: 00 Doron Zeilberger Drexel University, Special Functions that
Philadelphia, PA Count
16: 45 Richard Askey Univ. of Wisconsin, Orthogonal Polynomials
Madison and Positivity
For further information contact Dr. M. Shimshoni, Department of Applied
Mathematics, Weizmann Institute, Phone: 08-483545.
Please Post
COMBINATORIAL DAY IN HONOUR OF PROFESSOR JOSEPH GILLIS
Jan 1, 1987 Weizmann Institute, Rehovot
Schmidt Auditorium
------------------
09:00 Dominique Foata Univ. of Strasbourg Permutation Statistics
09:45 Doron Zeilberger Drexel University, The Berger-Felzenbaum-
Philadelphia, PA Fraenkel Approach to
Covering Systems Viewed
as an Extension of Boolean
Algebra
10:30 Coffee
11:00 Richard Askey Univ. of Wisconsin, Orthogonal Polynomials and
Madison the Rogers-Ramanujan
Identities
11:45 Paula Cohen Weizmann Institute An Application of the
Central Limit Theorem to
Combinatorics and Special
Functions
Theoretical Mathematics Seminar Room, Zyskind Building
------------------------------------------------------
14:00 Gil Kalai Hebrew University, The Mysterious
Jerusalem Combinatorics of h-vectors
14:45 Alan Hartman IBM Scientific Ctr., The Existence of Resolvable
Haifa Steiner Quadruple Systems
15:30 Coffee
16:00 Ed Scheinerman Johns Hopkins Univ., Hamiltonian Closure in
Baltimore, MD Random Graphs
16:45 Roger B. Eggleton* Univ. of Newcastle, Recent Progress on
and Australia; Prime Distance Graphs
Aviezri S. Fraenkel Weizmann Institute
For further information contact Dr. M. Shimshoni, Department of Applied
Mathematics, Weizmann Institute, Phone: 08-483545.
∂24-Dec-86 0943 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu PODS Program
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Dec 86 09:43:27 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 24 Dec 86 09:30:08-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 24 Dec 86 09:30:18 PST
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 86 09:30:44 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: PODS Program
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1986 11:33:48 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@ibm.com>
Subject: PODS Program
Message_id: <C031.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 24 Dec 1986 12:21:37-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
Please Post Please Distribute
Sixth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium
on
PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE SYSTEMS
March 22-25, 1987
San Diego, California
INFORMATION
LOCATION
The technical sessions, business meeting, Sunday evening recep-
tion, and lunches will all be at the Bahia Resort Hotel, situated
on San Diego's Mission Bay. The Bahia is within walking distance
of the beach, recreational facilities (sailing, tennis courts,
pool), Sea World, and relaxed boardwalk shops and cafes. Checkout
time is 1pm; checkin time is 4pm, or earlier subject to room
availability. A block of rooms has been reserved until March 1,
1987. Please reserve a room by using the form provided or by cal-
ling 800-821-3619 (800-542-6010 within California). First night's
deposit is required. Room rates and availability are not
guaranteed past March 1.
REGISTRATION
Advanced registration is requested using the form provided.
Registration rates go up markedly after March 9. A registration
desk will be open Sunday night from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and
during the day on Monday (8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Registrants,
other than students, receive admission to the technical sessions,
one copy of the proceedings, reception, lunches, and a dinner
cruise on Tuesday evening. Student registration, available to
full-time students only, includes the technical sessions and one
copy of the proceedings. Additional copies of the proceedings
will be available for sale at the registration desk.
TRANSPORTATION
There are three choices for ground transportation from the air-
port to the hotel. Courtesy airport transportation is provided by
the hotel. The Bahia Hotel van leaves the airport every two
hours, starting at 7:30am and ending at 9:30pm. The van can also
be called outside scheduled times using the free telephone marked
"Bahia Hotel" at the hotel reservation desk in the airport ar-
rival lounge. Additionally, a regular limousine van is available
for $5 (direction Mission Bay). Taxi fare to the hotel is about
$10.
For participants driving to San Diego on I-5, take I-8 West, then
exit at West Mission Bay Drive. The hotel is located on the North
side of Mission Bay Drive.
CLIMATE
The average temperature in March is 60 degrees. Rain is unlikely,
but cannot be ruled out.
EVENT LOCATION
All technical sessions and the business meeting are in the Mis-
sion Room. The exhibit program is in the Mission Lounge. Sunday
night registration and the reception are in the Del Mar Room. On
Tuesday night there will be a dinner cruise with live music
around the San Diego Harbor, between 6:30pm and 9pm. Transporta-
tion to the harbor will be provided. Buses will leave the hotel
at 6pm.
TECHNICAL PROGRAM
SUNDAY, MARCH 22, 1987
Reception 8:30 pm - 11 pm, Del Mar Room
MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1986
Note: All talks will take place in the Mission Room
SESSION 1 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: M.Y. Vardi (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Invited Talk: Database Theory - Past and Future, J.D. Ullman
(Stanford University)
Logic Programming with Sets, G.M. Kuper (IBM T.J. Watson Research
Center)
Sets and Negation in a Logic Database Language (LDL1), C. Beeri
(Hebrew University), S. Naqvi (MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University
of Texas at Austin and MCC), O. Shmueli, and S. Tsur (MCC)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 2 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: A.K. Chandra (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center)
Logical Design of Relational Database Schemes, L.Y. Yuan (Univer-
sity of Southern Louisiana) and Z.M. Ozsoyoglu (Case Western
Reserve University)
On Designing Database Schemes Bounded or Constant-Time Maintain-
able with Respect to Functional Dependencies, E.P.F. Chan and
H.J. Hernandez (University of Alberta)
Computing Covers for Embedded Functional Dependencies, G. Gottlob
(CNR, Italy)
SESSION 3 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: R. Fagin (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Dynamic Query Interpretation in Relational Databases, A. D'Atri
(Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma), P. Di Felice (Universita
dell'Aquila), and M. Moscarini (CNR, Italy)
A New Basis for the Weak Instance Model, P. Atzeni (CNR, Italy)
and M.C. De Bernardis (Universita "La Sapienza" di Roma)
Answering Queries in Categorical Databases, F.M. Malvestuto
(Italian Energy Commision)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 4 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: U. Dayal (CCA)
Nested Transactions and Read-Write Locking, A. Fekete (Harvard
University), N. Lynch (MIT), M. Merrit (AT&T Bell Laboratories),
and W. Weihl (MIT)
Transaction Commitment at Minimal Communication Cost, A. Segall
and O. Wolfson (Technion)
The Precedence-Assignment Model for Distributed Databases Con-
currency Control Algorithms, C.P. Wang and V.O.K. Li (University
of Southern California)
A Knowledge-Theoretic Analysis of Atomic Commitment Protocols, V.
Hadzilacos (University of Toronto)
Business Meeting: 8:30 pm - 10:00 pm, Mission Room
TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1986
Note: There will be exhibits in the Mission Lounge
SESSION 5 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: T. Imielinski (Rutgers University)
Invited Talk: Perspectives in Deductive Databases, J. Minker
(University of Maryland)
Maintenance of Stratified Databases Viewed as a Belief Revision
System, K. Apt (Ecole Normal Superieure and Universite Paris 7)
and J.M. Pugin (BULL Research Center)
Specification and Implementation of Programs for Updating Incom-
plete Information Databases, S. Hegner (University of Vermont)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 6 - 11:00 am - 12:15 pm
Chair: H. Korth (University of Texas at Austin)
Operation Specific Locking on B-Trees, A. Billiris (Boston
University)
Concurrency Control in Database Structures with Relaxed Balance,
O. Nurmi, E. Soisalon-Soininen (Universitat Karlsruhe), and D.
Wood (University of Waterloo)
Performance Results on Multiversion Timestamping Concurrency Con-
trol with Predeclared Writesets, R. Sun (Iona College) and G.
Thomas (Clarkson University)
SESSION 7 - 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm
Chair: V. Vianu (University of California at San Diego)
Decomposing an N-ary Relation into a Tree of Binary Relations, R.
Dechter (Hughes Aircarft Company and University of California at
Los Angeles)
Formal Bounds on Automatic Generation and Maintenance of Integri-
ty Constraints, J.P. Delgrande (Simon Fraser University)
Relative Knowledge in a Distributed Database, T. Imielinski
(Rutgers University)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 pm
SESSION 8 - 3:45 pm - 5:25 pm
Chair: M. Yannakakis (AT&T Bell Laboratories)
The Parallel Complexity of Simple Chain Queries, F. Afrati (Na-
tional Technical University of Athens) and C. Papadimitriou
(Stanford University and National Technical University of Athens)
Bounds on the Propagation of Selection into Logic Programs, C.
Beeri (Hebrew University), P. Kanellakis (Brown University), F.
Bancilhon (INRIA and MCC), R. Ramakrishnan (University of Texas
at Austin and MCC)
A Decidable Class of Bounded Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford
University) and Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
Decidability and Expressiveness Aspects of Logic Queries, O.
Shmueli (Technion and MCC)
Dinner Cruise: 6:30 pm - 9:00 pm
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1986
SESSION 9 - 9:00 am - 10:35 am
Chair: P.A. Larson (University of Waterloo)
Invited talk: Chickens and Eggs - The Interrelationship of Sys-
tems and Theory, P. Selinger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
Axiomatization and Simplification Rules for Relational Transac-
tions, A. Karabeg, D. Karabeg, K. Papakonstantinu, and V. Vianu
(University of California at San Diego)
A Transaction Language Complete for Database Update and Specifi-
cation, S. Abiteboul (INRIA) and V. Vianu (University of Califor-
nia at San Diego)
Coffee Break 10:35 am - 11:00 am
SESSION 10 - 11:00 am - 12:15pm
Chair: Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
On the Power of Magic, C. Beeri (Hebrew University) and R. Ramak-
rishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC)
Efficient Evaluation for a Subset of Recursive Queries, G. Grahne
(University of Helsinki), S. Sippu (University of Jyvaskyla), and
E. Soisalon-Soininen (University of Helsinki)
Worst-Case Complexity Analysis of Methods for Logic Query Imple-
mentation, A. Marchetti-Spaccamella, A. Pelaggi (Universita "La
Sapienza" di Roma), and D. Sacca (CRAI, Italy)
SESSION 11 - 2:00 pm - 4:35pm
Chair: P. Kanellakis (Brown University)
On the Expressive Power of the Extended Relational Algebra for
the Unnormalized Relational Model, D. Van Gucht (Indiana Univer-
sity)
Safety and Correct Translation of Relational Calculus Formulas,
A. Van Gelder (Stanford University) and R. Topor (University of
Melbourne)
Safety of Recursive Horn Clauses with Infinite Relations, R.
Ramakrishnan (University of Texas at Austin and MCC), F. Ban-
cilhon (INRIA and MCC), and A. Silberschatz (University of Texas
at Austin)
Coffee Break 3:15 pm - 3:45 am
One-Sided Recursions, J.F. Naughton (Stanford University)
Optimizing Datalog Programs, Y. Sagiv (Hebrew University)
_________________________________________________________________
CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION
Sponsors: SIGACT, SIGMOD, and SIGART.
Executive Committee: A.K. Chandra, S. Ginsburg, A. Silberschatz,
J.D. Ullman, and M.Y. Vardi.
Chairman: Ashok K. Chandra, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center,
P.O.Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, (914) 945-1752,
ashok@ibm.com, ashok@yktvmv.bitnet
Program Chairman: Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM Almaden Research Center,
650 Harry Rd., San Jose, CA 95120-6099, (408) 927-1784,
vardi@ibm.com, vardi@almvma.bitnet
Local Arrangements: Victor Vianu, Dept. of Electrical Engineer-
ing and Computer Science MC-014, University of California at San
Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, (619) 534-6227, vianu@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
Program Committee: U. Dayal, T. Imielinski, P.K. Kanellakis, H.
Korth, P.A. Larson, K.J. Raiha, Y. Sagiv, M.Y. Vardi, M. Yan-
nakakis.
_________________________________________________________________
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please send this form or a facsimile along with a money order or
check (payable to 6th ACM SYMPOSIUM ON PRINCIPLES OF DATABASE
SYSTEMS) to:
ACM-PODS Registration
c/o Victor Vianu
EECS Department, MC-014
Univ. of California at San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
(Before Mar. 9) (After)
ACM and SIG member $165 $225
ACM member only $175 $235
SIG member only $175 $235
Nonmember: $205 $275
Student: $50 $60
Requests for refunds will be honored until March 9, 1987.
Name___________________________________________________________
Affiliation____________________________________________________
Address________________________________________________________
City_________State________Zip__________________________________
Country_________Telephone______________________________________
Net Address____________________________________________________
Check here if confirmation of registration is required.
Dietary restrictions: Kosher Vegetarian
Special meals can be guaranteed only for those who register in
advance.
_________________________________________________________________
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM, ACM-PODS
Please mail this form or a facsimile (being sure to mention the
ACM-PODS Conference) by March 1, 1987 to:
Bahia Resort Hotel
998 W. Mission Bay Dr.
San Diego, CA 92109
Tel: (619) 488-0551
Accommodations desired:
Single $68 Double (1 bed) $72
Twin (2 beds) $72 Triple $76
Quad $80
Children under 12 stay free when occupying same rooms as parents.
Accomodation prices do not include 7% city hotel tax.
Arrival date_______________________Time_____________________________
Departure date_____________________Time_____________________________
Name________________________________________________________________
Sharing room with___________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________________
City__________State_______Zip_______________________________________
Country____________________________Telephone________________________
First night deposit is required.
First night's deposit enclosed: $_________________________________
Credit card: VISA, Mastercard, Amer. Express
Other credit card: ________________________________________________
Credit card number_________________________________________________
Exp. Date__________________________________________________
Signature__________________________________________________
∂24-Dec-86 1050 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLB of 1987
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Dec 86 10:49:57 PST
Date: Wed 24 Dec 86 10:45:57-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: First AFLB of 1987
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12265398446.11.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I am still looking for speakers for February and March.
The abstract for the first AFLB of 1987 follows.
8-January-1987: Nicholas Pippenger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
THE CONFERENCE-CALL TELEPHONE-EXCHANGE PROBLEM
We consider the problem of constructing, with a minimum number of
``switches'', a telephone exchange capable of continuously
accomodating any number of disjoint but dynamically changing
``conferences'', always without disturbing existing connections. It
has long been known that Omega(nlog n) switches are required, but
until recently the best upper bound available was O(n(log n)↑2)$. We
shall present a new upper bound of O(nlog n), due to P. Feldman, J.
Friedman and the speaker, and describe some algorithmic problems left
open by this work.
***** Time and place: January 8, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂26-Dec-86 1126 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU ATT Grant
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Dec 86 11:04:38 PST
Date: Fri 26 Dec 86 11:01:29-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ATT Grant
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12265925560.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Al Aho of Bell Labs has encouraged the CSD to submit a proposal for
an ATT grant by Feb. 1.
The grant cannot pay anyone's salary (not even student's), but it
can purchase equipment.
The grant should be for the purposes of "advancing knowledge and/or
teaching and should encourage excellence"
It can be used to help initiate research projects.
The grant will be for $50K
Previous grants (that I know about) have gone to Stuart Reges for
improving ug education/helping get women interested in CS; and to
Ed Feigenbaum for equipment to enhance our use of video in
instruction and in taping seminars.
Ideas?
-Nils
-------
∂29-Dec-86 1114 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Wednesday, December 31.
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Dec 86 11:14:06 PST
Date: Mon 29 Dec 86 11:10:11-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Wednesday, December 31.
To: Staff@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12266713576.20.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
All CS offices will close at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 31.
Happy New Year!
Betty
-------
∂29-Dec-86 1526 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Program Committee meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Dec 86 15:26:14 PST
Date: Mon 29 Dec 86 15:23:49-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MS Program Committee meeting
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12266759748.27.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Just a reminder that the MS Program Committee meeting for Autumn Quarter
degree approval is scheduled for Monday, January 5, at 11 a.m., in MJH 301.
----
-------
∂30-Dec-86 1422 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Dec 86 14:22:32 PST
Date: Tue 30 Dec 86 14:19:51-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU, srstaff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
cheadle@Score.Stanford.EDU, jutta@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12267010248.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a faculty meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 6 at 2:30 in MJH 252.
We are presently compiling a list of agenda items that will be distributed
on-line Monday, Jan. 5. Should you have any items that you would like
included, please let me know.
-Anne
-------
∂30-Dec-86 1433 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Dec 86 14:24:22 PST
Date: Tue 30 Dec 86 14:20:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12267010436.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting on Tuesday, Jan 6 following the general
faculty meeting (which is scheduled to begin at 2:30 in MJH 252).
-Anne
-------
∂30-Dec-86 1727 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU End-of-Year Msg
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Dec 86 17:27:03 PST
Date: Tue 30 Dec 86 17:22:55-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: End-of-Year Msg
To: csd-list@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12267043574.28.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Stanford computer scientists and friends of computer science at Stanford:
Last year at this time I wrote a note summarizing the
"state-of-the-department" on my first anniversary as chairman. This
past year flew by so fast that it seems impossible that there could have
been sufficient time for us to confront and solve some of the problems I
mentioned in last year's note. Here are some of the things I listed
then:
"We still have only one endowed chair in the CSD. That has to change!"
----No news to report yet, but I have good reason to be confident about
1987.
"We still have too little space, and what we have is spread around too
much." ----Well, we are spread around even more now! We did get a few
thousand square feet of new space in Tressider for the Computer Science
Undergraduate program, but will probably have to endure our various
locations until we move into the Near West Campus.
"We have had a search going for a robotics professor for almost a year,
and still our search committee has not found a suitable candidate."
----Jean-Claude Latombe joins us on March 30, 1987 as an Associate
Professor.
"We are facing the stresses of a proposed undergraduate major, and we
have not yet begun searching for the new faculty that will be required
to staff that major." ----The major is in place, we seem to be dealing
with the stresses, and we have the following new faculty members: Dan
Weise (EE), Anoop Gupta (CS), Yoav Shoham (CS). We also have the
following lecturers: Roy Jones, Jean Rogers, and James Wilson. We'll
probably get one more lecturer, and searches for additional faculty are
in progress.
"Most of the CSD faculty and staff are stressed by needing to do more
than there is time to do it in." ----Still true! (If anyone out there
does not feel pushed, please let me know so that problem can be fixed.)
There was other good news during the year also. Here's a brief list of
headlines: The PhD program was redesigned with a new comprehensive exam
and establishment of "research mentors," John Hennessy was promoted to a
full professor and moved half into CSD; Terry Winograd moved fully into
CSD; Michael Genesereth was promoted to an associate professor with
tenure; CSD faculty, staff, and students received a number of honors,
honorary degrees, and prizes; the Stanford Instructional TV/Honors
Coop, the WICS summer-course program, and the Computer Forum all were
extremely successful financially; and we continued to upgrade our
educational computing environment (TI Explorers and "Truffle").
Bad News: Andy Yao left us for Princeton; we have not been successful
yet in getting new faculty in the "foundations" area; and we overran our
budget substantially during academic 85/86.
Here are the major challenges, problems, and opportunities I see for
calendar 1987 (in no particular order):
1) Integrate the new faculty successfully into the Department.
2) Complete the following searches: two searches for
"programming-language" people; two searches for "foundations" people; a
search for a "scientific computing" person, and a search for a "systems"
person to fill the "CIS" billet.
3) Exploit the new opportunities for collaboration with CIS now that
a broad-based executive committee is running it.
4) Continue the campaign to establish additional endowed professorships.
5) Get the Near West Campus planning effort to a stage at which CS will
be able to hire an architect and get started on designing the new
building(s).
6) Begin the campaign for adequate funds for the new building(s).
7) Hire a new Director for CSD-CF.
8) Balance the budget.
9) Reverse the downward trend in research support.
(I'm sure everyone has a suggestion for a 10th item needing work.)
You all have taught me a lot so far. I'll try to absorb a bit more next
year. The Stanford Computer Science Department has the best faculty,
staff, and students in the world, and that makes this job both exciting
and exhausting---but also enjoyable. Thanks for all of your efforts and
best wishes for a happy and productive 1987!
-Nils
-------
∂31-Dec-86 0958 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 Dec 86 09:58:05 PST
Date: Wed 31 Dec 86 09:51:32-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12267223547.13.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
8-January-1987: Nicholas Pippenger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
THE CONFERENCE-CALL TELEPHONE-EXCHANGE PROBLEM
We consider the problem of constructing, with a minimum number of
``switches'', a telephone exchange capable of continuously
accomodating any number of disjoint but dynamically changing
``conferences'', always without disturbing existing connections. It
has long been known that Omega(nlog n) switches are required, but
until recently the best upper bound available was O(n(log n)↑2)$. We
shall present a new upper bound of O(nlog n), due to P. Feldman, J.
Friedman and the speaker, and describe some algorithmic problems left
open by this work.
***** Time and place: January 8, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂31-Dec-86 1354 LES CSD-CF Cost Center Rates
To: su-computers@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, BScott@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
New rates are listed below for CSD-CF computer services that will be
effective January 1, pending approval. These rates are a bit lower than
those currently in effect because of two principal factors.
1. CSD-CF has begun charging research contracts directly for more of
of the ancillary services that it provides, reducing the costs to
be recovered from computer charges.
2. Certain computer services that have been free in the past will now
be charged for.
For example, charges will now be made for ethernet connections within
Jacks Hall at the rate of $30/month for workstations and minis and
$300/month for mainframes.
LaBrea has operated as a free archival file service in the past but will
now become a cost center. Its disk storage rates are substantially lower
than those of other systems, however. Any users who wish to continue
using LaBrea must have their account manager send their Stanford account
number to Lynn Gotelli (Gotelli@Score). Any existing accounts for which
this has not been done by January 9 will be frozen.
Our new Sun fileserver called JEEVES also becomes a cost center, but with
charges only for disk storage. Users who wish to run Unix on the
departmental Sun workstations must open accounts on JEEVES in the same way
as for LaBrea.
In order to make charges more closely model costs, all active computer
accounts will be charged a monthly fee of $5.00 to partially cover
accounting and billing costs.
For most users, the net effect of these changes will be a reduction in
charges. Any who end up paying more should consider themselves lucky for
having a free ride (or at least a cheap one) for so long.
Les Earnest
CSD-CF Director Pro Tem
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Time B Time C Time
Weekday hours 8:00-17:59 18:00-23:59 0:00-7:59
Weekend hours 13:00-17:59 18:00-12:59
Rates Full 2/3 of A rate 1/3 of A rate
JEEVES Fileserver
Account charge 5.00/month
Disk space 1.16/megabit-mo.*
NAVAJO Computer
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time .88/minute .58/minute .29/minute
Disk space 1.43/megabit-mo.*
LABREA Archive
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 1.76/minute 1.16/minute .58/minute
Disk space .50/megabit-mo.*
SAIL & SCORE Computers
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 2.53/minute 1.68/minute .84/minute
Disk space 2.27/megabit-mo.*
Printers
DOVERs .09/page
Imagen/Apple .09/page
Boise .07/page
Phototypsetter
Page charges 4.50/page
Ethernet Maintenance
Workstations 30.00/month
& minis
Mainframes & 300.00/month
bridges
SUSHI Computer Maintenance and Depreciation
DEC-20 9,865.00/month
Computer Maintenance
Basic VAX 450.00/month
RA81 Disk Drive 100.00/month
Ken. 9300 Tape 200.00/month
Fujitsu M2351 Disk 50.00/month
TU78 100.00/month
CDC 9766 Contrl. 100.00/month
Emulex SC758 66.00/month
8 line term. MUX 16.00/month
----------
* Note that a "megabit" is precisely 1,000,000 bits. Storage is allocated
in blocks whose size is system-dependent.
∂02-Jan-87 0150 LES CSD-CF Cost Center Rates
To: su-computers@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, facil@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I am pleased to announce a further reduction in CSD-CF computer rates
effective yesterday (January 1), as shown below. However, this price
decrease is not attributable to virtuous administration -- it is the
result of stomping on a bug in the rate calculations.
Les Earnest
CSD-CF Director Pro Tem
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A Time B Time C Time
Weekday hours 8:00-17:59 18:00-23:59 0:00-7:59
Weekend hours 13:00-17:59 18:00-12:59
Rates Full 2/3 of A rate 1/3 of A rate
JEEVES Fileserver
Account charge 5.00/month
Disk space 1.08/megabit-mo.*
NAVAJO Computer
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time .72/minute .48/minute .24/minute
Disk space 1.18/megabit-mo.*
LABREA Archive
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 1.44/minute .96/minute .48/minute
Disk space .44/megabit-mo.*
SAIL & SCORE Computers
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 2.22/minute 1.48/minute .74/minute
Disk space 1.99/megabit-mo.*
Printers
DOVERs .09/page
Imagen/Apple .09/page
Boise .07/page
Phototypsetter
Page charges 4.50/page
Ethernet Maintenance
Workstations 30.00/month
& minis
Mainframes & 300.00/month
bridges
SUSHI Computer Maintenance and Depreciation
DEC-20 9,865.00/month
Computer Maintenance
Basic VAX 450.00/month
RA81 Disk Drive 100.00/month
Ken. 9300 Tape 200.00/month
Fujitsu M2351 Disk 50.00/month
TU78 100.00/month
CDC 9766 Contrl. 100.00/month
Emulex SC758 66.00/month
8 line term. MUX 16.00/month
----------
* Note that a "megabit" is precisely 1,000,000 bits. Storage is allocated
in blocks whose size is system-dependent.
∂02-Jan-87 0924 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI December Monthly
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jan 87 09:24:32 PST
Date: Fri 2 Jan 87 08:44:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI December Monthly
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
Will be going out later today. No copies will be mailed to
Stanford Computers (other than Forsythe) or to sri-warbucks.
Copies can be ftped from <csli>csli-monthly.12-86.
Emma Pease
ps. The monthly is late because of flu.
-------
∂02-Jan-87 1217 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jan 87 12:16:54 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 2 Jan 87 12:13:05-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA01081; Fri,
2 Jan 87 12:18:18 PST
Date: Fri 2 Jan 87 12:18:15-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 2-Jan-87 12:18:15.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW RESULTS ON TIME MODELLING WITH INTERVALS
Peter Ladkin (LADKIN@KESTREL)
Kestrel Institute
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 5
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228
James Allen introduced a calculus for reasoning about time using
intervals, instead of points. In this talk, we shall indicate two
new results and one algorithm for time modelling using intervals, and
indicate why they help overcome some of the objections to using an
interval system for reasoning about time. Much of this work is joint
with Roger Maddux. Briefly, we have shown that there is only one
countable representation of the calculus, up to isomorphism , and that
the system of time units introduced in [Ladkin AAAI-86] is isomorphic to
this countable representation. The algorithm is an extension of Allen's
constraint-propagation algorithm, which catches some inconsistencies
missed by his algorithm. (The problem is known to be NP-hard in general).
-------
∂02-Jan-87 1236 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA:ladkin@kestrel.ARPA MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jan 87 12:36:12 PST
Received: from kestrel.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 2 Jan 87 12:32:12-PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9) id AA10611; Fri,
2 Jan 87 12:33:33 pst
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 87 12:33:33 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8701022033.AA10611@kestrel.ARPA>
To: LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA
Cc: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Amy Lansky's message of Fri 2 Jan 87 12:18:15-PST
Subject: MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
god, that was fast! I guess Monday it is!
p.
∂03-Jan-87 1628 talmy%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UC Davis conference on interaction of form and function in language
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jan 87 16:27:53 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.57/1.17)
id AA13902; Sat, 3 Jan 87 16:22:05 PST
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 87 16:22:05 PST
From: talmy%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Len Talmy)
Message-Id: <8701040022.AA13902@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UC Davis conference on interaction of form and function in language
For those interested, the following is the preliminary schedule for the
upcoming linguistics conference at UC Davis:
UC DAVIS CONFERENCE ON THE INTERACTION OF FORM AND FUNCTION IN LANGUAGE
January 17-18, 1987
Preliminary Schedule
Saturday, January 17
General Session
9:00 Non-embedded nominalization in Newari: the interaction of form and
function
David Hargreaves (U Oregon)
9:30 Modality, illocutionary force, and psychological mode
Evelyn N. Ransom (Eastern Illinois U)
10:00 On the syntactic and semantic alignment of attributive and
identificational constructions
Linda Schwartz (Indiana U)
10:45 Person marking in Tepehua
James K. Watters (UC Berkeley)
11:15 Grammatical relations in Bantu languages
Lioba Moshi (Stanford U)
11:45 Relations in German: Mediators between form and function
Peter Rolf Lutzeier (UC San Diego)
Symposium on Language Acquisition
1:30 Some implications of Role and Reference Grammar for language
acquisition
Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. (UC Davis)
2:00 Structural telescoping, plurifunctionality, and morphosyntactic
acquisition
Michael Silverstein (U Chicago)
3:15 The organization of pronominal forms around parameters of agentivity
and control: developmental perspectives
Nancy Budwig (Clark U)
3:45 Towards a psychologically plausible parser
Brian MacWhinney (Carnegie-Mellon U)
5:00 The question of negative evidence from a functionalist perspective
Jeri J. Jaeger (UC Davis)
5:30 Language acquisition and language breakdown from a functionalist
perspective
Elizabeth Bates (UC San Diego)
8:00 Acquisition of relative clauses: a functional approach
Katherine Demuth (Boston U)
8:30 Frequency reflects function
Dan I. Slobin (UC Berkeley)
Sunday, January 18
Symposium on Language Acquisition
9:30 From discourse to semantics: A case study of a 2 year old's use of
the verb morphology
Julie Gerhardt (SUNY Buffalo)
10:00 "Quickly, before a witch gets me": aspects and functions of children's
temporal conjunctions
Aura Bocaz (U Chile) & Susan Ervin-Tripp (UC Berkeley)
10:45 Where grammar and discourse meet: a developmental analysis of the
relation between tense contrasts and anaphora in the organization
of narratives
Michael Bamberg (Clark U)
11:15 Learning German definite articles in a connectionist network
Roman Taraban & Janet McDonald (Carnegie-Mellon U)
1:00 Discussion (including panel discussion with invited speakers)
General Session
2:45 Some aspects of the 'hidden' grammar: government/agreement relations
and functional isomorphism of some parts of speech (verb/
adjective)
Valery Jossan & James Gallant (UC Davis)
3:15 From discourse strategies to parsing strategies: Romanian case markers
Maria Manoliu-Manea (UC Davis)
3:45 The case of the intransitive subject in Tsova-Tush (Batsbi)
Dee Ann Holisky (George Mason U)
4:30 The problem of coding in functional grammars
Russell S. Tomlin (U Oregon)
5:00 Phonetic form and social function
Caroline G. Henton (UC Davis)
5:30 Literal and figurative meaning in a hierarchical linguistic memory
Michael Gasser (UCLA)
6:15 Discussion and Conclusion
* * * * *
For more information about the Conference, send your USPS address to:
UCDAVIS!HARPO!LAKHOTA@BERKELEY.EDU (Arpanet)
RDVANVALIN@UCDAVIS.BITNET
Or write to: Conference Organizing Committee
Linguistics Program
University of California
Davis, CA 95616
(916) 752-7555/0675
∂04-Jan-87 1716 POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU colloquium announcement
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jan 87 17:16:10 PST
Date: Sun 4 Jan 87 17:08:33-PST
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: colloquium announcement
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Linguistics Department Colloquium
Stanford University
Melissa Monroe
Stanford University
Poetic Language and Philosophical Speculation in Stevens, Moore, and Berryman
(Thesis Proposal Presentation)
Date:6 January 1987 (Tuesday)
Time:15:15
Place:420-050 (Jordan Hall)
Refreshments will be served after the talk in the Greenberg Room.
Abstract
"...one's style is not necessarily a mechanism - it is a way of objectifying
one's subject."
Wallace Stevens
In the language of poetry, the morphological, semantic,
syntactic, and pragmatic relations encoded in the standard
language may serve as metaphors for the real-life relations
they model. By altering grammatical relations, the poet can
hypothetically reshape the relations they represent, creating
an alternate possible world. I will be looking at the work of
three 20th century American poets - Wallace Stevens, Marianne
Moore and John Berryman - each of whom is concerned with issues
which may broadly be termed "philosophical": the relation of
idea to thing, the creation of structure through the perception
of resemblances, and the nature of the self. They approach
these issues less through thematic exposition than through a
reshaping of language - the substitution of original relational
principles for a subset of the conventions of Standard English.
I will discuss the linguistic structures characteristic of each
poet, and indicate how these structures function thematically
as concrete exempla of the philosophical issues under
consideration.
-------
∂05-Jan-87 0856 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 08:56:03 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 08:53:24-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU, srstaff@Score.Stanford.EDU,
cheadle@Score.Stanford.EDU, jutta@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268523683.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a general faculty meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 6 in MJH 252 at
2:30.
Items on the agenda include:
Approval of Degree Candidates
Administrative Reports
NWC Progress Report, Nils
Student Support Policy, Nils
-------
∂05-Jan-87 0906 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Student Support
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 09:06:37 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 09:03:08-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Student Support
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268525456.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The following is intended to initiate discussion:
STUDENT SUPPORT
There seems to be a certain amount of ambiguity among students and
faculty alike concerning matters of PhD student support. It's important
that we evolve a clear policy regarding support---especially now when
research projects seem hard-pressed to take on students. I am sending
out these comments on support in anticipation of discussion of the topic
at our January 6, 1987 faculty meeting.
First, I'm sure we all agree that second-year (and later) PhD students
should all be supported either by research project RA-ships or by
fellowships (or by their own funds if they prefer). In all of these
cases, second-year and later PhD students will be associated with a
research project and doing research in connection with that project.
Computing costs incurred in connection with this research will be paid
for by the research project (after exhausting any fellowship funds that
may be available for that purpose).
The ambiguities arise concerning first-year PhD students. Every
first-year student will have a "research mentor"---normally to be
assigned during autumn quarter. One purpose of the research mentor
arrangement is for students to become familiar with a research
project(s) before making firm commitments. Should a student's
developing research interests indicate that changing mentors would be
appropriate, that's fine. Usually a student would have picked a
research area by the end of his/her first year, although many might have
done so earlier. I have stressed to entering PhD students that they
should spend most of their energies during their first year on taking
whatever courses they need, on taking and passing the comprehensive
exams, and on finding out what research area they are interested in.
The research mentor arrangement helps insure progress on the last topic.
In the best of all worlds, every first-year PhD student would have a
fellowship---NSF, ATT etc., or School of Engineering. This year about
half of our first-year students have fellowships. Next year, I expect
the ratio to be higher. (The SOE fellowships are for one year only;
some of the others continue.) Last year and this year, the CS
Department is providing support for otherwise-unsupported students. It
would be nice if the CSD were wealthy enough to continue the policy of
supporting all unsupported first-year students. It would also be nice
if the various faculty mentors could and would support some or all of
their mentees---even those who haven't really started research yet.
There is no necessary connection between mentoring and supporting; we
want to create a climate in which faculty members are willing to mentor
even if they don't have sufficient funds to support their mentees.
One undesirable side effect of the mentor system is that student mentees
who become enthusiastic about their research project during their first
year might not remember to switch to becoming a research assistant on
that project even though such a switch might be appropriate. The
mentor, in turn, as long has he is getting "free research" from the
student isn't motivated to sign the student on as an RA. Mentoring is
supposed to be a bridge to active research involvement; as soon as the
student has crossed the bridge, he/she ought to be a
research-project-supported RA. The CSD budget assumes that about half
of the unfellowshipped first-year students would have crossed that
bridge by the end of winter quarter. Our message to students about
their first year needs to get a somewhat complicated point across,
namely that they really are to concentrate on
courses/exams/shopping-for-research, BUT that we expect that some of
them will nevertheless be supported by the end of winter quarter.
The Department also needs faculty cooperation in doing what they can to
support first-year students. Without going over entirely to a
"CMU-style," I think we can take the view that "preparing" first-year
students for research is a legitimate charge to a research project.
Unless we do more of that, we will have to admit fewer PhD students.
-------
∂05-Jan-87 0919 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 09:19:39 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 08:54:20-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268523855.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 6 in MJH 252 following
the general faculty meeting (which is scheduled to begin at 2:30).
-Anne
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1111 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU CSD Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 11:11:47 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 11:08:09-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268548213.11.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The regular CSD Tuesday lunch series resumes on Tuesday, Jan. 6 at 12:15 in
MJH 146 with general discussion.
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1135 INGRID@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Japanese Visitors from ATR
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 11:35:03 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 11:26:02-PST
From: Ingrid Deiwiks <INGRID@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Japanese Visitors from ATR
To: Folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
We will be visited by four Japanese visitors this afternoon. They are:
Prof. Tsujii (Kyoto University)
Dr. Ishizaki (ETL)
Dr. Iida (ATR - Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute)
Dr. Yoshimoto (ATR)
Three of the visitors will give a presentation about machine translations,
natural-language processing, and discourse analysis. They have very
concrete results and would like to discuss them.
The presentation will be at 2:00 this afternoon (Monday) in the Ventura
Conference Room. Please join us if you're interested.
TOM WASOW
←
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1137 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Another special issue
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 11:37:27 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 11:23:27-PST
From: John R Delaney <DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Another special issue
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: delaney@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12268551000.25.DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The January, 1987 issue of IEEE COMPUTER is a special issue on
"New AI Systems: Harnessing the Combinatorial Explosion".
The following is a summary of the table of contents with my comments
on the three articles I have read.
Computer Architectures for Artificial Intelligence Processing,
Hwang, Ghosh, and Chowkwanyun
A bit shallow but rather broad survey with reasonable (as far
as I can tell) pointers into the literature.
Software Development Support for AI Programs, Ramamoorthy, Shekhar, and
Garg
Remarkably bad article by people who appear to know little about
the subject.
Symbolics Architecture, Moon
Very nice article, if not quite as deep as one might want.
The Architecture of FAIM-1, Anderson, Coates, Davis, Hon, Robinson, and
Robison
What Price SMALLTALK? Ungar and Patterson
Initial Performance of the DADO2 Prototype, Stolfo
Applications of the Connection Machine, Waltz
Connectionist Architectures of Artificial Intelligence, Fahlman and Hinton
The issue will be in my office for the next few days.
John
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1416 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Forsythe Lectures
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 14:16:21 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 13:53:38-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Forsythe Lectures
To: csd-list@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268578341.21.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Following is a copy of the press release we are sending out in reference
to the upcoming Forsythe Lectures.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Nils J. Nilsson, Professor and Chairman
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
(415) 723-9745
Professor Robert E. Tarjan will deliver the George and Sandra Forsythe
Memorial Lectures in Computer Science on January 28 and 29, 1987. The
public is invited. Tarjan is James S. McDonnell Distinguished
University Professor of Computer Science at Princeton University and a
distinguished member of the technical staff at AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Professor Tarjan received his Ph.D. in Computer Science at Stanford
University in 1972 and held faculty positions at Cornell University and
Stanford before joining the staff of AT&T Bell Laboratories in 1980. He
was an adjunct professor at New York University from 1981 to 1984 and
joined the Princeton faculty in 1985.
The first lecture, entitled ``New Themes in Data Structure Design,''
will be given in Fairchild Auditorium at 7:30 p. m. on Wednesday
evening, January 28, 1987. (Fairchild Auditorium is just southwest of
Stanford Medical Center off Campus Drive.) The lecture will cover
recent work by the speaker and his colleagues concerning the design and
analysis of data structures and will be of general interest to people in
the computer community. There will be a reception in the Fairchild
Auditorium foyer immediately following the lecture.
The second lecture, entitled ``Fast Algorithms for Network
Optimization,'' will be given at 12:30 p. m. on Thursday afternoon,
January 29, 1987, in room 370, building 370 (on the west side of the Quad).
This lecture will describe recent work by Andrew Goldberg of MIT, Harold
Gabow of the University of Colorado, and Tarjan on new, fast algorithms
for the maximum flow problem, the minimum cost flow problem, and the
weighted matching problem.
Professor Tarjan is an expert in the areas of computer data structures,
algorithm design and analysis, combinatorial optimization, computational
geometry, and computational complexity. He has written numerous papers
on these subjects and two books: ``Data Structures and Network
Algorithms'', and ``Notes on Introductory Combinatorics'', the latter
co-authored with George Polya and Donald Woods.
Tarjan is an editor of the Princeton University Press Series in Computer
Science and of several technical journals, including the forthcoming
Journal of the American Mathematical Society. He is a member at large of
the Section A (Mathematics) committee of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, and a member of the steering committee of the
special interest and activities group in discrete mathematics of the Society
for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
Tarjan held a Miller Research Fellowship at the University of California,
Berkeley, from 1973 to 1975 and a Guggenheim Fellowship from 1978 to 1979.
In 1983 he was awarded the first Nevanlinna Prize in Information Science. He
received the National Academy of Sciences Award for Initiatives in Research
in 1984. In 1985 he was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences. In 1986 he was the co-recipient of the A. M.Turing Award of the
Association for Computing Machinery.
The annual Forsythe Lectures honor the memory of computer science
pioneers George and Sandra Forsythe. George was the founder of
Stanford's Computer Science Department, and as its first chairman
attracted a core of distinguished faculty members. Sandra was an
influential textbook writer and educator in computer science. The
Forsythes encouraged young people to pursue academic careers and did
much to support the educational process.
<<<photograph of Professor Tarjan included>>>
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1628 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 16:28:20 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 16:25:44-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268606030.21.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The sr. faculty meeting scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 6 has been cancelled.
We plan to reschedule this meeting for approximately 10 days from now.
Stay tuned!
-------
∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU 2nd meeting minutes X3J13/86-021
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 17:27:05 PST
Date: 5 Jan 1987 17:12-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: 2nd meeting minutes X3J13/86-021
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Jan-87 17:12:03.MATHIS>
DRAFT Minutes X3J13 Committee Meeting
Dates: December 10, 11, 12, 1986
Location: Sheraton Park Central Hotel, Dallas, Texas
Chair: Bob Mathis (acting)
Secretary: Gary Brown (acting)
Hour of opening: December 10, 1986 1:20 PM
Hour of adjournment: December 12, 1986 11:25 AM
List of Voting members: Attached
Approved Agenda: Attached (86-0016)
Approval of previous minutes: None were prepared
Register of Documents: Attached
Motions seconded and not withdrawn:
Motion to formally thank Ellen Waldrum and Texas Instruments for
the meeting arrangements.
Moved by Dave Slater
Seconded by Peter Coffee
Unanimously approved
Future meeting schedule:
The next meeting is scheduled for March 16, 17 and 18, 1987 in Palo
Alto, California. Dick Gabriel will make the arrangements.
List of action items assigned to committee members:
Working groups were formed for eleven areas requiring investigation
and a convenor was assigned for each group. These groups are
informally charged with bringing evaluation and recommendations back
to the full committee. The body of the minutes lists the groups
and their convenors.
Meeting Summary:
Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 1:20 PM.
Opening remarks:
Bob Mathis specified significant dates for X3J13:
December 30, 1986: Wrapup mailing for second meeting
January 9, 1987: Minutes for second meeting due
January 15, 1987: Membership fees due (however no one has
yet received bills)
February 4, 1987: Deadline for next meetings mailing
February 10, 1987: Mailing for meeting 3
Bob Mathis introduced himself discussed his background. All attendees
then introduced themselves.
Approval of agenda:
The agenda, X3J13/86-016, was approved without objection.
Approval of minutes:
The minutes of the first meeting (September 23-24) were not available.
Report on International Activities:
Bob Mathis attended SC22 in Vienna and reported on that meeting.
The major decision was that an ISO Lisp committee would be formed
with a convenor from France and a project editor from the United
States.
Dick Gabriel reported on the "EuLisp" meeting in Paris. The
"EuLisp" group intends to work through ISO and Christian Queinnec
would be group convenor. Several technical issues were also
discussed at the Paris meeting and it is obvious that there
are some technical differences between the initial "EuLisp"
proposal and Common Lisp.
Other liaisons reports:
Bob Mathis asked if there were any volunteers to review:
o Guidelines for programming language conformity and testing
o Programming language standards document standard (i.e. a standard
for how a standard should be written)
Mathis also reported that DEC Press would cooperate with X3J13 in
preparation of standards document. However, initial discussions
with ANSI on allowing the "free" distribution of the standard
document were not encouraging.
Review of Goals and Objectives (86-005):
Approximately an hour and a half was spent discussing the proposed
goal statement for X3J13. Issues raised included:
o the relationship between X3J13 and an ISO Lisp standard effort
o conservative vs ambitious planning and language design
o de-facto vs real standards
Various committee members contributed opinions and historical anecdotes.
No formal motions were made.
Overview of technical topics.
Dick Gabriel gave a brief overview of issues surrounding function
and value cell separation. Kent Pitman gave a overview of the
proposed condition handling system.
Recess:
The meeting was recessed on December 10, 1986 at 5:30 PM.
Call to Order:
The meeting was resumed on December 11, 1986 at 9:07 AM.
Function/Value Cells (86-010):
Dick Gabriel presented the technical issues raised in "Issues of
Separation in Function Cells and Value Cells" (86-010). This topic
was dsicussed for two and a half hours.
Lunch:
The meeting was recessed for lunch from 11:45 AM to 12:50 PM.
Goals and Objectives:
Danny Bobrow presented some alterations to the "Goals and Objectives".
These proposed changes included:
o Stating that X3J13 would work on two fronts; ANS standard for Common
Lisp and working with ISO to prodcue Lisp standard for the longer term.
o Stating we would address other areas such as windows, graphics and
multi-processing
Jerome Chailloux gave his opinions on the goals for X3J13.
Error Systems:
Kent Pitman presented a description of the proposed Common Lisp
Condition handling system. Discussions lasted an hour and fifteen
minutes. Kent believes this proposal is relatively firm and a
final specification will be available soon.
Update on object systems:
Danny Bobrow presented the status of the proposed Common Lisp
object subsystem. The major change between current design and
what was previously proposed is no longer using DEFSTRUCT for
object definition but instead using two new macros; DEFRECORD and
DEFCLASS. Danny believes that this work is progressing well and
expects convergence before the next meeting.
Goal and Objectives:
Approximately half an hour was spent in another open discussion
X3J13 of Goals and Objectives. Bob Mathis suggested that an
ANS standard separate from ISO might be rejected by X3.
Recess:
The meeting was recessed on December 11, 1986 at 5:15 PM.
Call to Order:
The meeting was resumed on December 12, 1986 at 9:10 AM.
The committee voted to formally thank Ellen Waldrum and Texas
Instruments for the meeting arrangements.
Handling Technical Issues:
Bill Scherlis reported on the reccommendations of a subgroup formed
to discuss effective ways for X3J13 to discuss and decide issues.
They suggested that small working groups be formed to:
o Prepare briefings for the entire committee
o Evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative
o Make recommendations for appropriate action.
The following task groups were suggested. The person speicified is
the acting chair for each group [other initial members are listed].
1. Steele book cleanup Scott Fahlman
[Matthews, Pitman, White, Maisinter, Steele]
2. Lisp1/Lisp2 Dick Gabriel
[Pitman, Clinger, Wegman, Giansiracusa, Weinreb]
3. Objects Danny Bobrow
[Gabriel, Moon, Dusaud, Gregor, Keen, DeMicale]
4. Errors and conditions Kent Pitman
[Daniels]
5. Validation and conformance Rich Berman
[Beckerle, Slater, White]
6. Types and declarations Bill Scherlis
[Curtis, Slater, Poser]
7. Macros Kent Pitman
[Haflich, Wegman]
8. Compiler specification Steve Haflich
[Beckerle, Bartly, MacLaughlin]
9. Presentation of standard Gary Brown
[Matthews, Lieberman, Ohlander, Rosenking, Boelk, Ennis]
10. Graphics and windows Doug Rand
[Masinter, Hadden, Waldrum, Debrowski]
11. Iteration JonL White
[Weinreb, Perdue]
Groups to discuss multiprocessing, transition management and ISO
iteraction were proposed but not formed.
Goal and Objectives:
Guy Steele presented the recommendation of a subgroup formed
to create another draft of the Goals and Objectives statement for
X3J13. Here is a draft of this document:
1. X3J13 is chartered to produce an American National Standard
for Common Lisp. It will codify existing practice, provide
features to facilitate portability of code among diverse
implementations and establish normative Common Lisp practice.
2. The committee will begin with the language described in "Common
Lisp: the Language" by Guy L. Steele Jr., which is the current
"de facto" standard for Common Lisp. Whenever there is a
proposal for the Standard to differ from CLtL, the committee
shall weigh both future costs of adopting (or not adopting)
a change and costs of conversion of existing code. Aesthetic
criteria shall be a subordinate consideration.
3. The committee will address at least the following topics
in the course of producing the standard, in each case either
incorporating specific features or explaining why no action
was taken:
(a) Repairing mistakes, ambiguities and minor omissions in CLtL
(b) Error handling/condition signalling
(c) Semantics of compilation
(d) Object-oriented programming
(e) Iteration construct(s)
(f) Multiprocessing
(g) Graphics
(h) Windows
(i) One or two namespaces for functions and values
(j) Validation
Topics (a)-(c) concern deficiencies in CLtL that require resolution.
Topics (d) and (e) are not addressed by CLtL but appear to be
well understood and ready for standarization. Topics (f)-(h)
concern areas where standarization is desirable but not crucial
to production of a standard. Topic (i) is an area of current
controversy within the Lisp community. Other topics may be
considered if specific proposals are received.
4. The comittee recognizes that Lisp programming practice will
continue to evolve and anticipates the need for future revisions
and extensions to the standard. This may include a family of
Lisps and/or a layered Lisp model.
5. X3J13 is committed to work with ISO toward an international
Lisp standard.
A discussion of this proposal took place followed by an informal
"sense of the committee" vote. The committee overwhelmingly
accepted this proposal. A final draft of this will be prepared
for a formal vote at the next meeting.
Call for officer candidates:
The following committee members are standing for X3J13 elected offices:
o Chair - Bob Mathis
o Vice-chair - Guy Steele
o International Representative - Dick Gabriel
Future meeting Schedule:
The next meeting will be March 16-18, 1987 in Palo Alto, California.
Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned on December 12, 1986 at 11:25 AM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gary L. Brown
∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU proposed purposes X3J13/86-020
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 17:27:30 PST
Date: 5 Jan 1987 17:15-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: proposed purposes X3J13/86-020
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Jan-87 17:15:45.MATHIS>
Purposes of X3J13 Committee (Proposed)
1. X3J13 is chartered to produce an American National Standard
for Common Lisp. It will codify existing practice, provide
extensions [amendment: change the word "extensions" to
"additional features".] to facilitate portability of code among
diverse implementations, and establish normative Common Lisp
programming practice.
2. The committee will begin with the language described in Common
Lisp: The Language by Guy L. Steele Jr. (Digital Press, 1984),
which is the current de facto standard for Common Lisp. Whenever
there is a proposal for the standard to differ from Common Lisp:
The Language, the committee shall weigh both future costs of
adopting (or not adopting) a change and costs of conversion of
existing code. Aesthetic criteria shall be a subordinate
consideration.
3. The committee will address at least the following topics in
the course of producing the standard, in each case either
incorporating specific features or explaining why no action was
taken:
(a) Repairing mistakes, ambiguities, and minor ommissions
in Common Lisp: The Language
(b) Error handling and condition signalling
(c) Semantics of compilation
(d) Object-oriented programming
(e) Iteration constructs
(f) Multiprocessing
(g) Graphics
(h) Windows
(i) Validation
(j) One versus two namespaces for functions and variables
Topics (a)-(c) concern deficiencies in Common Lisp: The Language
that require resolution. Topics (d) and (e) are not addressed by
Common Lisp: The Language, but appear to be well-understood and
ready for standardization. Topics (f)-(i) concern areas where
standardization is desirable but not crucial to production of a
standard. Topic (j) is an area of current controversy within the
Lisp community. Other topics may be considered if specific
proposals are received.
4. The committee recognizes that Lisp programming practice will
continue to evolve and anticipates the need for future revisions
and extensions to the standard. This may include a family of
Lisps and/or a layered Lisp model.
5. X3J13 is committed to work with ISO toward an international
Lisp standard.
∂05-Jan-87 1727 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU general letter X3J13/86-022
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 17:26:57 PST
Date: 5 Jan 1987 17:03-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: general letter X3J13/86-022
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 5-Jan-87 17:03:23.MATHIS>
Doc. No.: X3J13/86-022
Date: 86-12-30
Reply to:
Robert F. Mathis
9712 Ceralene Dr.
Fairfax, VA 22032
To everyone on the X3J13 (Common Lisp) mailing list:
This letter is being sent out in three different configurations: by
electronic mail to <x3j13> at SAIL (to everyone on that list), by regular
mail with enclosures (to everyone who has given an indication of
participation), and by regular mail without enclosures (to those on the
mailing list who have never responded). People who receive this letter
without enclosures, need to respond to this letter to remain on the mailing
list. Membership on X3J13 is open, but is based on a commitment to
continuing participation.
The Draft minutes of the Dallas meeting are enclosed (Doc: X3J13/86-021).
Thanks to Gary Brown. Included there is the list of initial members in the
task groups we formed (this was also the content of a separate electronic
message). Groups to discuss multiprocessing, transition management and ISO
iteraction were proposed but not formed. At least part of the reason for
not forming the ISO interaction group was that the US delegation to the ISO
working group has not been chosen. Anyone from X3J13 is eligible if they
can make the additional commitment to work, time and travel. If anyone is
interested (no commitment yet) in serving on the ISO delegation, please
contact me; Mathis, Gabriel, and Clinger have already expressed their
interest.
The acting chairs are to make sure that the members of their group
communicate with each other. If it is appropriate that a group set itself
an agenda and select a leader, the acting chair should make sure it
happens. Each of these groups will be called on for a BRIEF report at the
next meeting. If that report will be any more than just an affirmation of
existence, please contact me for scheduling.
As a separate document (Doc: X3J13/86-020) the draft proposed purposes are
also enclosed. This differs slightly from the version in the minutes; it is
X3J13/86-020 (or its revision) that we will be considering at the next
meeting. This has also been circulated electronically.
You (that is people who received enclosures with this letter or who respond
to this letter) will be sent the other documents resluting from the Dallas
meeting separately.
If you have any comments or other documents you want circulated before the
next meeting, please send them to me by February 4, 1987.
Sincerely yours,
Robert F. Mathis
Acting Chairman, X3J13
∂05-Jan-87 1739 WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Visitors policy
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 87 17:39:46 PST
Date: Mon 5 Jan 87 17:27:43-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Visitors policy
To: researchers@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
All--
Some of you have been inviting people to come to CSLI as visitors
without checking with anyone else. We are bursting at the seams this
quarter, and, unless you let us know well in advance, you shouldn't
expect to be able to provide your visitors with desk space. To remind
you what CSLI's policy on visitors is, I have appended a copy of it.
Tom
---------------
VISITORS POLICY FOR 1986-87
Noncasual visitors to CSLI fall roughly into three groups:
(1) "Collaborators"; those whose visit is actively sought by a CSLI
researcher(s), for purposes of collaboration in some CSLI
project, or at any rate to work closely with such researcher(s).
Often travel money and other support is supplied from initiators
or area funds.
(2) "Sojourners"; those who are here mostly of their own volition,
finding it convenient to spend a sabbatical or other leave in
the midst of the resources offered here. Support is limited to
computer accounts and possibly shared office space.
(3) Special cases.
Visitors bring a great deal to CSLI, and independently of that we have
some obligation to share our good fortune. However, there are many
hidden and not so hidden costs. To keep things in balance, I intend
to adopt the following policies, mostly modest revisions of the
policies of the past.
Collaborators will be most welcome, of course. But:
a) We ask that the details of an impending visit, the duration, the
facilities needed, etc., be made available before the visit is
too impending. There are sudden opportunities, of course, but
in general a couple of weeks warning, via the forms available
from Bach-Hong, Elsie, or Jackie, seems reasonable. Of course,
the less the needs of the visitor, the less this matters.
b) We will allocate a limited amount of space at Ventura for
Collaborators; if this space is taken for the period in question,
by the time the details reach us, we may be unable to provide
any.
c) Please discuss the details of any proposed long-term visits
(much more than a month, say) with Betsy well in advance.
As to Sojourners, I think we would all agree that we are better off
with a few that we can treat pretty well, rather than a lot we don't
have time, space, or xerox paper for. So, we will let Sojourner
applications for Visiting Scholar status during a given academic year
(June to June) accumulate (except for special cases) until March 15 of
the previous year. Decisions will then be made on the basis of
projected available space and the credentials and projects of the
visitors. Thus Visiting Scholar status at CSLI will be somewhat more
meaningful, and somewhat less easy to obtain than the same status in
departments at Stanford. We will be nice to everyone, but only
committed to contributing to the space and computational needs of our
own Visiting Scholars. If you receive a request from someone wanting
to be a Sojourner, send it to Ingrid to be added to our applications
file.
Special cases. E.g., people whom we more actively encourage to come,
perhaps even providing some salary support or travel money. These
will be treated as special cases.
-------
∂06-Jan-87 0723 MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU task groups
Received: from ADA20.ISI.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 07:19:23 PST
Date: 6 Jan 1987 07:13-PST
Sender: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
Subject: task groups
From: MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[ADA20.ISI.EDU] 6-Jan-87 07:13:41.MATHIS>
This has been covered in my over messages, but
is also being sent separately for emphasis.
-- Bob
At the meeting in Dallas, we decided to form some subgroups
(working groups, task groups, committees, or whatever name). What
follows is a section from the draft minutes giving the initial
structure of these groups. (Thanks to Gary Brown for getting the
minutes ready so promptly.) Others are free to join these groups,
but the size of each group should remain reasonable and
individuals should recognize they are making a commitment by
joining.
Bill Scherlis reported on the recommendations of a subgroup
formed to discuss effective ways for X3J13 to discuss and decide
issues. They suggested that small working groups be formed to:
o Prepare briefings for the entire committee
o Evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative
o Make recommendations for appropriate action.
The following task groups were suggested. The person specified is
the acting chair for each group [other initial members are
listed].
1. Steele book cleanup Scott Fahlman
[Matthews, Pitman, White, Maisinter, Steele]
2. Lisp1/Lisp2 Dick Gabriel
[Pitman, Clinger, Wegman, Giansiracusa, Weinreb]
3. Objects Danny Bobrow
[Gabriel, Moon, Dusaud, Gregor, Keen, DeMicale]
4. Errors and conditions Kent Pitman
[Daniels]
5. Validation and conformance Rich Berman
[Beckerle, Slater, White]
6. Types and declarations Bill Scherlis
[Curtis, Slater, Poser]
7. Macros Kent Pitman
[Haflich, Wegman]
8. Compiler specification Steve Haflich
[Beckerle, Bartly, MacLaughlin]
9. Presentation of standard Gary Brown
[Matthews, Lieberman, Ohlander, Rosenking, Boelk,
Ennis]
10. Graphics and windows Doug Rand
[Masinter, Hadden, Waldrum, Debrowski]
11. Iteration JonL White
[Weinreb, Perdue]
Groups to discuss multiprocessing, transition management and ISO
iteraction were proposed but not formed.
[At least part of the reason for not forming the ISO interaction
group was that the US delegation to the ISO working group has not
been chosen. Anyone from X3J13 is eligible if they can make the
additional commitment to work, time and travel. If anyone is
interested (no commitment yet) in serving on the ISO delegation,
please contact me; Mathis, Gabriel, and Clinger have already
expressed their interest.]
[The acting chairs are to make sure that the members of their
group communicate with each other. If it is appropriate that a
group set itself an agenda and select a leader, the acting chair
should make sure it happens. Each of these groups will be called
on for a BRIEF report at the next meeting. If that report will be
any more than just an affirmation of existence, please contact me
for scheduling.]
∂06-Jan-87 1015 GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU combinatorics seminar
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 10:15:40 PST
Date: Tue 6 Jan 87 10:05:25-PST
From: Anil R. Gangolli <GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: combinatorics seminar
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, su-events@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268798939.13.GANGOLLI@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Announcing
A SEMINAR ON COMBINATORICS
Wednesdays, 7:00pm
First Meeting: Wed. Jan 7, Sequoia Hall 114
We aim to start a series of expository lectures and discussion on
topics in combinatorics, hoping to bring together interested parties
in mathematics, computer science, statistics, and operations research.
We will meet Wednesday evenings at 7:00pm in Room 114, Sequoia Hall.
The meetings will be informal, encouraging interaction and exchange of
ideas, rather than only presentations of completed work. Coffee, etc.
will be provided after the meetings.
Tentatively, the topics for Winter Quarter will be loosely structured
about the combinatorial aspects of Young tableaux (with applications to
probability, computer science, and statistics), and algebraic graph
theory. The seminar may also treat other topics of joint interest to
the participants, as time and enthusiasm permits. Below is a list of
topics and speakers for the first three meetings:
Jan. 7 An Introduction to Young Tableaux, Persi Diaconis.
Jan. 14 Applications of Young Tableaux to Sorting and
Non-Parametric Statistics, Persi Diaconis.
Jan. 21 Young Tableaux in the Olden Days, Don Knuth.
Persi Diaconis
Don Knuth
Anil Gangolli
Questions should be directed to Anil Gangolli, CS Dept., Stanford,
(phone: 723-3605; net-mail: gangolli@sushi.stanford.edu).
-------
∂06-Jan-87 1107 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Test message
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 11:07:03 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 6 Jan 87 10:57:08 PST
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 87 10:57:08 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Test message
To: nail-list@navajo.stanford.edu
We've had troubles with the mailer at navajo.
In order to fix them,we've created a file that only I can edit,
so in the future, additions and deletions will have to be made
by me. Also, temporarily, the way to address the entire list
is by nail-list@navajo. Eventually, it will be reset to nail@navajo,
and you'll be warned.
---jeff
∂06-Jan-87 1107 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU paco 1/9/87
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 11:05:24 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue 6 Jan 87 10:57:14-PST
Date: Tue 6 Jan 87 10:57:08-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: paco 1/9/87
To: paco@Navajo.Stanford.EDU, aflb.local@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268808352.48.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
paco seminar, Friday, Jan. 9, at 1:15pm in MJH352:
"Fail-Safe Compilation of Protocols on Dynamic Communication Networks"
Baruch Awerbuch
Department of Mathematics and
Laboratory for Computer Science,
MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139
Abstract
Existing communication networks, e.g. ARPANET, have dynamic topology in the
sense that network links can fail and recover arbitrarily many times. The
design and analysis of protocols in such networks is much more difficult than
a similar task in static networks. A fail-safe compiler enables us to resolve
this difficulty. This is an automatic procedure, which transforms an
arbitrary static network protocol into an "equivalent" dynamic network
protocol. Efficiency of such a compiler is measured in terms of its
communication, time, and space overheads, amortized over all topological
changes (recoveries and failures of links).
The problem of designing fail-safe compiler with bounded amortized
complexities has been open for 10 years. The (amortized) complexities of the
best known compiler are O(E log k), O(V log k), and O( log k ), in
communication, time and space, respectively. Here E,V,k are upper bounds on
number of network links, number of network nodes, and total number of
topological changes, respectively. Those complexities increase without bound
as the number of topological changes grows.
We present, for the first time in the literature, a fail-safe compiler
with BOUNDED amortized complexities, which are
O(E), O(V), and O(1), in communication, time and space, respectively.
-------
∂06-Jan-87 1237 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Message from Marshall Bern
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 12:37:02 PST
Date: Tue 6 Jan 87 12:29:11-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Message from Marshall Bern
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12268825110.32.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Marshall Bern asked me to relay the following message.
_______________________________________________________________
I just found out that my new Steiner tree results that I
presented at AFLB are not new! Erickson, Monma, and Veinott used
almost the same algorithm to solve a more general problem in
"Send-and-Split Method for Minimum-Concave-Cost Network Flows",
Tech. Rpt. 33, OR Dept., Stanford.
Their algorithm does some unnecessary work, so it's slower,
especially in the rectilinear case. But their paper is definitely earlier
than mine.
Pass this on to the AFLB mailing list.
Marshall
-------
∂06-Jan-87 2157 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu proposed purposes
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jan 87 21:56:12 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 6 Jan 87 21:55:27 PST
Received: from bhopal.edsel.uucp by edsel.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA01003; Tue, 6 Jan 87 21:48:53 pst
Received: by bhopal.edsel.uucp (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3)
id AA16556; Tue, 6 Jan 87 21:46:18 PST
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 87 21:46:18 PST
From: edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu (Jon L White)
Message-Id: <8701070546.AA16556@bhopal.edsel.uucp>
To: navajo!MATHIS%ADA20.ISI.EDU@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: navajo!x3j13%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: navajo!MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU's message of 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST
Subject: proposed purposes
[Sorry for the late entry of this comment -- I sent it out over two weeks
ago, and it got "bounced back" from some mail gateway at Stanford after
a few days of mailer problems; also, I've been "out of action" for
the past two weeks.]
Return-Path: <jonl>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 86 11:27:59 PST
From: jonl (Jon L White)
To: navajo!MATHIS%ADA20.ISI.EDU
Cc: navajo!x3j13%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: navajo!MATHIS@ADA20.ISI.EDU's message of 19 Dec 1986 05:46-PST
Subject: proposed purposes
At Dallas, there was question about the first paragraph wording:
". . . establish normative Common Lisp programming practice."
Just what does that mean? and how can a committee "establish" it?
Someone suggested that that phrase was a replacement for some nebulous
statement about "portability of programmers", or "portability of skills".
If that is indeed the goal, then it's hard to see how a committee can
"establish" it -- I remember a suggestion being offered to re-word the
whole sentence roughly as follows:
"It will codify existing practice, provide additional features to
enable the portability of code among diverse implementations,
and facilitate the establishment of normative Common Lisp
programming practice."
-- JonL --
∂07-Jan-87 0137 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:USZKOREI%DS0LILOG.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Greetings from Stuttgart
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 01:35:20 PST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 7 Jan 87 01:20:36-PST
Received: from (USZKOREI)DS0LILOG.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 01/07/87
at 03:20:28 CST
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 86 18:01:25 MEZ
To: folks@su-csli.ARPA
From: USZKOREI%DS0LILOG.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: Greetings from Stuttgart
Dear All,
Greetings from Swabia. After having been here for almost a month now,
we still haven't fully arrived.
Thanks again to all the friends who have made our departure so hard
emotionally and technically so smooth. As you know, leaving SRI, CSLI,
the bay area has been an extremely difficult decision for us. We'll try
to come back often.
The first weeks here were hectic, even more so than we had already
expected. Things got worse for a while through a transatlantic
communication breakdown that resulted from the bombing of the main
computer of the IBM Scientific Center Heidelberg by the Red Army
Faction. Although the explosion had happened already shortly before I
got to Germany, I could still feel the results because it took them a
while to replace the machine. Now things are back to normal. Our own
BITNET node (DS0LILOG) is up and running. I will see that the mail sent
to UZ@SRI-AI (or SRI-STRIPE) will be forwarded directly. My EMAIL
and postal addresses can be obtained by asking FINGER/FIND at
SRI-STRIPE, SRI-WARBUCKS, or SU-CSLI.
We have enjoyed a typical German white Christmas. Our children love the
snow but miss the Californian sunshine. They were excited about the
real candles on the Christmas tree but at the same time they were
missing the colored lights. For Swanni and me its just different things
that we appreciate here and that we miss now. It would be quite bad if
for every thing we like here there was something missing that we had in
California. Fortunately, it's the other way around: for every thing we
miss now there is something here that we like and didn't have before.
Swanni and I wish you all a Happy New Year.
Hans Uszkoreit
∂07-Jan-87 0841 sciore@bu-cs.bu.edu a "new" paper
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 08:41:13 PST
Received: from BU-CS.BU.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Wed, 7 Jan 87 08:39:10 PST
Return-Path: <sciore@bu-cs.bu.edu>
Received: by bu-cs.bu.edu (5.31/4.7)
id AA14748; Wed, 7 Jan 87 11:40:36 EST
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 87 11:40:36 EST
From: sciore@bu-cs.bu.edu (Edward Sciore)
Message-Id: <8701071640.AA14748@bu-cs.bu.edu>
To: nail-list@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: a "new" paper
Those of you interested in the history of relational database theory should
look at the paper "An Information Algebra", which appeared in CACM, April
1962. That's right - no typo - 1962. In it is a complete relational algebra,
along with some other stuff, all of which have quaint-sounding names like
"area", "line", "bundle", and "glump". I won't tell you any more; go read it.
An interesting point is that the paper was produced by the CODASYL
group (pre-Bachman, N.B.). For some reason this stuff didn't catch on, and
got lost (I guess) during the Network Model craze. The main author was Robert
Bozak; anyone know if he is still around?
∂07-Jan-87 0949 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Qlisp meeting reminder
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 09:48:50 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 7 Jan 87 09:48:17-PST
Date: 07 Jan 87 0937 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Qlisp meeting reminder
To: "@Q.DIS[1,CLT]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, aap@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Professor Takayasu Ito of Tohoku University, Sendai Japan
is visiting Stanford this week. He will tell us about
work in his laboratory on design and implementation of
parallel computers and parallel Lisps.
We will discuss how the Qlisp model of parallel computation
relates to Professor Ito's work.
Time: Friday Jan 9, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
∂07-Jan-87 1031 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU First AFLBs of 1987
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 10:31:27 PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 10:23:12-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: First AFLBs of 1987
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269064320.24.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the first two AFLBs of 1987 follow.
8-January-1987: Nicholas Pippenger (IBM Almaden Research Center)
THE CONFERENCE-CALL TELEPHONE-EXCHANGE PROBLEM
We consider the problem of constructing, with a minimum number of
``switches'', a telephone exchange capable of continuously
accomodating any number of disjoint but dynamically changing
``conferences'', always without disturbing existing connections. It
has long been known that Omega(nlog n) switches are required, but
until recently the best upper bound available was O(n(log n)↑2)$. We
shall present a new upper bound of O(nlog n), due to P. Feldman, J.
Friedman and the speaker, and describe some algorithmic problems left
open by this work.
***** Time and place: January 8, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
15-January-1987: Leo Guibas (Stanford and DEC SRC)
PROBLEMS ON ARRANGEMENTS OF SEGMENTS IN THE PLANE
We discuss a number of combinatorial and algorithmic questions for
arrangements of line segments in the plane. For example, given an
arrangement of n segments, how many sides total can all the regions
containing endpoints have? How can all these regions be computed? How
fast can a particular region in the arrangement be extracted? Can the
connectivity of the segments be determined without computing all their
intersections? In order to obtain subquadratic answers to these questions
we utilize techniques related to the epsilon-nets of Haussler and Welzl,
and the Davenport-Schinzel sequences of Sharir and Hart.
These results are joint work with Micha Sharir of NYU.
***** Time and place: January 15, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂07-Jan-87 1102 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU MIS Committee
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 11:02:25 PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 10:59:11-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MIS Committee
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269070871.24.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The dean's office at the Medical Center is about to review the MIS program
and would like several faculty members from Computer Science (not affiliated
with the program) to serve on the committee. Nils would like to know if any
of you would like to volunteer.
Thanks!
-Anne
-------
∂07-Jan-87 1602 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Contact TAs
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 16:02:09 PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 15:56:42-PST
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Contact TAs
To: Instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12269125032.32.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We'd like to hear from any of our CS instructors that have more than one TA
assigned to any given course. The question:
Which TA would you like designated the "contact TA"? This TA would be the
one we'd contact about distributing Tau Beta Pi evaluations, picking-up grade
sheets, etc. etc. We hope that having one TA to contact, rather than several,
will simplify matters this quarter.
Hope to hear from you.
Thanks again.
Claire
-------
∂07-Jan-87 1801 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Next Weeks PLANLUNCHES -- Pierpaolo Degano and Takashi
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 18:01:25 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Wed, 7 Jan 87 17:54:25-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA04649; Wed,
7 Jan 87 18:00:11 PST
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 87 18:00:11 PST
From: lansky@sri-venice.ARPA (Amy Lansky)
Message-Id: <8701080200.AA04649@sri-venice.ARPA>
To: planlunch@sri-warbucks
Subject: Next Weeks PLANLUNCHES -- Pierpaolo Degano and Takashi
Sakuragawa
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
NOTE: NEXT WEEK THERE ARE 2 SEMINARS, ONE AT THE USUAL TIME AND
THE OTHER ON FRIDAY AT 3:00. PLEASE ALSO NOTE ROOM CHANGE (EK242).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A SEMANTICS FOR CCS BASED ON PARTIAL ORDERINGS
Pierpaolo Degano
University of Pisa
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 12
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
Milner's CCS has a two-level semantics. The first level consists of
an abstract machine, based on a labelled transition system, which
defines the STRING of all the actions that a CCS agent performs.
Thus, possible concurrency among independent actions IS NOT explicitly
represented, and is reduced to nondeterminism and interleaving. The
second level consists in defining a congruence on CCS agents, called
observational congruence. This is obtained by abstracting out the
"internal" moves of the agents, and by considering as congruent those
agents that exhibit the same "external behaviour".
We also take the same approach, but utilize a semantics where the
notion of concurrency IS primitive. More precisely, we directly
express when two actions are causally/temporally related and when they
are independent, i.e. concurrent. This is done by considering a
PARTIAL ORDER of actions as operational behaviour of an agent, rather
than a string of actions. In detail, we first single out of a CCS
agent its "processes", i.e., those subagents which may immediately
perform an action. Then a labelled rewriting system is defined which
makes clear the asynchrony of our operational semantics. The second
semantic level must extend the classical notion of bisimulation to
cope with partial orderings. A major result of our work is that our
"partial ordering observational congruence" is finer than Milner's
observational congruence exactly in that it distinguishes interleaving
of sequential nondeterministic processes from their concurrent
execution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN IMPLEMENTATION OF ADAPTIVE SEARCH
Takashi Sakuragawa (TAKASHI@IBM.COM)
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center and Kyoto University
3:00 PM, FRIDAY, January 16
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
The Adaptive Optimizer is a program that optimizes Prolog programs by
reordering clauses. It is an implementation of Natarajan's adaptive
search algorithm that reorders the subproblems of a disjunctive
problem and minimizes the expected search effort. This talk will
describe implementation details as well as how the efficiency of an
example tree search program is improved. In this particular example,
the execution speed of the optimized program is more than 200 times
faster than the original one. The speed improvement observed is for
an artificial example and is not necessarily representative of what
might be obtained from real applications.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
∂07-Jan-87 1836 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, January 8, No.12
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 18:36:43 PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 17:51:22-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, January 8, No.12
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
_____________________________________________________________________________
8 January 1987 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 11
_____________________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, 8 January 1987
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Resurrection of Metaphors -- A Tool for
Conference Room Transdisciplinary Migration
Discussion led by Egon Loebner
(Loebner%hp-thor@hplabs.hp.com)
Abstract in this Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall No Seminar
Room G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, 15 January 1987
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Events and LF" by Stephen Neale
Conference Room Discussion led by Peter Ludlow
(Ludlow@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in this Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Redwood Hall An Application of Default Logic to Speech Act Theory
Room G-19 C. Raymond Perrault
(rperrault@sri-warbucks.arpa)
(Abstract in this Calendar)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
New CSLI Working Group
Problems in Authentic Discourse
Those of us at CSLI who study natural language ordinarily work from
sanitized examples of language we have thought up to test this or
that point of theory. We rarely put our ideas to test on language that
has actually occurred in conversation, extemporaneous narratives, or
even literature. With the emphasis on situated language at
CSLI, it is especially important that we do this. The situations in
which language is actually used are likely to have many features we
cannot discover through traditional intuitive methods. The proposal
is to begin with segments of authentic discourse and examine the
problems they raise for the theories and models we are currently
working on. The working group would begin this quarter. If you are
interested in participating or have suggestions, please write me
at herb@psych.stanford.edu.
Herb Clark
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
An Application of Default Logic to Speech Act Theory
C. Raymond Perrault
Artificial Intelligence Center and
Center for the Study of Language and Information
SRI International
January 15
One of the central issues to be addressed in basing a theory of speech
acts on independently motivated accounts of propositional attitudes
(belief, knowledge, intentions, ... ) and action is the specification
of the effects of communicative acts. The very fact that speech acts
are largely conventional means that specifying, for example, the
effects of the utterance of a declarative sentence, or the performance
of an assertion, requires taking into consideration many possible
exceptions to the conventional use of the utterances (e.g., the
speaker may be lying, the hearer may not believe him, etc.). Previous
approaches to the problem have attempted to deal with these exceptions
by stipulating the consequences of the utterance as the strongest
condition which is true in all possible conditions of utterance. We
will argue against this approach and present an alternative solution
within the framework of an extension of Reiter's nonmonotonic default
logic. Default rules are used to embody a simple theories of belief
adoption, of action observation, and of the relation between the form
of a sentence and the attitudes it is used to convey. This allows
quite a simple picture of the relation between certain illocutionary
and perlocutionary acts. The emphasis will be on uses of declarative
sentences.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
"Events and LF"
by Stephen Neale
discussion led by Peter Ludlow
January 15
In this article (forthcoming in Linguistics and Philosophy),
Neale argues against a criticism of Situation Semantics due to
Higginbotham (1983). Higginbotham's argument is a response to a
treatment of perceptual reports due to Barwise (1981). Roughly put,
Barwise's suggestion was that perceptual reports such as `John saw
Bill run' express relations between agents and situations.
Higginbotham's counter was that in fact per- ceptual reports contain
implict quantification over events, and that the logical form of the
above sentence is something akin to the following:
(Ex, x an event: Run(x, Bill))[John saw x]
Neale offers four reasons for rejecting Higginbotham's position.
1) Higginbotham's analysis does not predict all the available
inferences in perceptual reports.
2) Higginbotham's analysis leads him to make several errant
predictions about causative constructions.
3) Higginbotham's analysis does not comport well with his chosen
syntactic framework (GB).
4) Higginbotham purports to reject model theory, but must in fact
exploit its resources to capture inferences.
I will BRIEFLY clarify and defend Higginbotham's views and then
open the floor for discussion.
!
local modes:
Mode: Text
Fill column:73
fill prefix:" "
end:
-------
∂07-Jan-87 1855 SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU flicks schedule
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 18:54:48 PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 18:51:58-PST
From: Sol Lederman <SOL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: flicks schedule
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
HELP FLICK on turing has the winter quarter flicks schedule, if
anyone cares.
Sol
-------
∂07-Jan-87 2227 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU baruch awerbuch
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jan 87 22:27:20 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 7 Jan 87 22:23:52-PST
Date: Wed 7 Jan 87 22:23:43-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: baruch awerbuch
To: paco@Navajo.Stanford.EDU, aflb.su@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269195486.11.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
... will be visiting this Friday (1/9) and giving a talk in the paco seminar
(see separate announcement). I am still trying to line up a few people
willing to talk to him on Friday. Open slots: 11 - noon, 2:30 - sundown.
Please drop me a note if you are interested in talking with Baruch!
-ernst
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1322 CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU orphaned (still) book
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 13:22:07 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 13:14:15-PST
From: Donald Churma <CHURMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: orphaned (still) book
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: linguists@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
In mid-to-late December, I lost a copy of PHONOLOGY YEARBOOK 2
somewhere around CSLI. (I think I left it in one of the trailer
restrooms.) I am sure that Bill Poser, to whom it belongs, misses it
greatly. Please help me reunite the once-happy family by contacting
me (or Bill, or Susi) concerning its whereabouts. (Unfortunately, it
has no distinguishing characteristics--like Bill's name in it, but
unless it wandered away from CSLI, which it has never done before, it
will presumably be the only copy that could be found (sobbing,
perhaps) at CSLI.
Don Churma
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1519 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU AFLB on 15 January changed
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 15:19:11 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 15:10:51-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: AFLB on 15 January changed
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269378829.37.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Today I found out that Ashok Chandra from IBM Yorktown Heights is
visiting Stanford for a couple of weeks and would like to give a talk.
Professor Guibas has very graciously agreed to move his talk to a later
available slot, so that Dr. Chandra can speak at AFLB next week
(15 January). I'll send out a title and abstract when I get it.
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1537 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Simonovits seminar on extremal graph theory
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 15:37:13 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 15:14:53-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Simonovits seminar on extremal graph theory
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, su-events@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269379564.37.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Professor Miklos Simonovits one of the world's foremost experts in
extremal graph theory is visiting our department this quarter. He will
be giving a weekly seminar in this research area. The seminar will
meet Fridays at noon in MJH301. We want to make sure to start on time
so as not to run over into the PACO time slot which starts at 1:15PM.
The first meeting is tomorrow (9 January).
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1605 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 16:05:45 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 15:56:50-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269387199.34.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
An abstract for the next AFLB follows.
15-January-1987: Ashok Chandra (IBM Yorktown Heights)
Large processors typically have a complex memory hierarchy. For
instance, there may be registers, cache, main memory and extended
store. We consider the following approximation (the hierarchical
memory model or HMM): a random access machine where access to memory
location x requires log x time instead of the usual constant time.
Algorithms that take time T(n) on a RAM can be run in time T(n)log n
where T(n) is polynomial. It is shown that in some cases this
log n factor cannot be improved (as for searching). In other cases it
can be reduced to a constant (e.g. for matrix multiplication using
only semiring operations). For yet others it can be reduced only to
log log n (e.g. for oblivious sorting or for computations on a butterfly
network). Differences in the various algorithms give some indication of the
inherent locality of reference in the problem.
***** Time and place: January 15, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1645 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Talks of AFLB interest
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 16:45:25 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 16:29:35-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Talks of AFLB interest
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269393161.34.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Next Wednesday there will be two talks of AFLB interest.
At 2:15PM Andrew Odlyzko from Bell LAbs will speak in the
Math Department (Bldg. 380 Rm 383N-third floor lounge) on
``New Algorithms for Computing the Riemann Zeta Function''
At 4:30PM David Gale from UCBerkeley will give th OR colloquium
in Bldg 550, Rm. 550A on ``The Core of the Assignment Game''.
Call the respective departments for more information.
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1705 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU Awerbuch seminar
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 17:04:55 PST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu 8 Jan 87 16:39:32-PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 16:37:50-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Awerbuch seminar
To: aflb.local@Score.Stanford.EDU, paco-list@Navajo.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269394664.34.MAYR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is a reminder for the paco seminar, Friday, Jan. 9, at 1:15pm in MJH352:
"Fail-Safe Compilation of Protocols on Dynamic Communication Networks"
Baruch Awerbuch
Department of Mathematics and
Laboratory for Computer Science,
MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139
Abstract
Existing communication networks, e.g. ARPANET, have dynamic topology in the
sense that network links can fail and recover arbitrarily many times. The
design and analysis of protocols in such networks is much more difficult than
a similar task in static networks. A fail-safe compiler enables us to resolve
this difficulty. This is an automatic procedure, which transforms an
arbitrary static network protocol into an "equivalent" dynamic network
protocol. Efficiency of such a compiler is measured in terms of its
communication, time, and space overheads, amortized over all topological
changes (recoveries and failures of links).
The problem of designing fail-safe compiler with bounded amortized
complexities has been open for 10 years. The (amortized) complexities of the
best known compiler are O(E log k), O(V log k), and O( log k ), in
communication, time and space, respectively. Here E,V,k are upper bounds on
number of network links, number of network nodes, and total number of
topological changes, respectively. Those complexities increase without bound
as the number of topological changes grows.
We present, for the first time in the literature, a fail-safe compiler
with BOUNDED amortized complexities, which are
O(E), O(V), and O(1), in communication, time and space, respectively.
-------
∂08-Jan-87 1721 DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU Informational Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jan 87 17:19:13 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 87 17:12:03-PST
From: Gerda de Werk <DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Informational Meeting
To: tas@Score.Stanford.EDU, instructors@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: starlady@Othello.Stanford.EDU, stager@Score.Stanford.EDU,
jimenez@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12269400892.39.DEWERK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There will be an informational meeting for all those people who will
be making use of our Tresidder space on Tuesday, 13 January. The
meeting will start promptly at 12:15, in the Oak Lounge West at
Tresidder Union, and should end around 1:00. The TV people will also
be there to discuss SITN policies, and to answer any questions you may
have. This meeting applies to all TAs, student instructors, and
industrial lecturers who have no office space in MJH.
I hope you can make it.
-------
∂08-Jan-87 2126 CLT Logic seminar, organizational meeting
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-events@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
LOGIC SEMINAR
Department of Mathematics
Stanford University
The Logic Seminar will hve an organizational meeting on
Tuesday January 13 at 4pm in 381-T. Contact P. Scowcroft
to learn of the topics already suggested. Other suggestions
are welcome.
Philip Scowcroft
382-J
3-1851
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are reading this msg on a bulletin board and would like to be
on the mailing list for announcements relating to logic and
mathematical theory of computation (or if you are on the mailing list and
would like to be removed) send a message to CLT@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂09-Jan-87 0122 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V5 #1
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jan 87 01:22:42 PST
Date: Thu 8 Jan 1987 13:28-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V5 #1
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 9 Jan 1987 Volume 5 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Position & Final Call for Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 87 10:13:12 EST
From: Peter Crockett <crockett%syr-sutcase.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Subject: Position Announcement
PROGRAM MANAGER of the Northeast Artificial Intelligence Consortium
(NAIC), a multi-university consortium for research in artificial
intelligence. Reports directly to Consortium Director and the
Executive Committee. Responsible for day-to-day programmatic
management of overall consortium and interaction with sponsors.
Coordinate preparation of research proposals and reports. Organize
industrial affiliates program and attract external research support
for consortium members. Initiate and coordinate educational programs
including short courses, meetings, and seminars. The ideal candidate
would have a degree in Computer Science or Computer Engineering, some
background in artificial intelligence, and experience in research
administration and corporate relations. Consortium member
universities are: SUNY at Buffalo, Clarkson University, University of
Massachusetts, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Rochester Institute
of Technology, University of Rochester, and Syracuse University. The
Program Manager will be an employee of Syracuse University, which is
the lead institution for the Consortium, and will be covered by a
comprehensive University benefit package. Applications will be
accepted until January 21, 1987. Send application with three letters
of reference to Human Resources Office, c/o Dr. Volker Weiss, Director
NAIC, Skytop Office Building, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Jan 87 14:30:33 EST
From: MCCARTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: Final Call for Papers
FINAL CALL FOR PAPERS:
First International Conference on
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LAW
May 27-29, 1987
Northeastern University
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
In recent years there has been an increased interest in the applications of
artificial intelligence to law. Some of this interest is due to the potential
practical applications: A number of researchers are developing legal expert
systems, intended as an aid to lawyers and judges; other researchers are
developing conceptual legal retrieval systems, intended as a complement to the
existing full-text legal retrieval systems. But the problems in this field are
very difficult. The natural language of the law is exceedingly complex, and it
is grounded in the fundamental patterns of human common sense reasoning. Thus,
many researchers have also adopted the law as an ideal problem domain in which
to tackle some of the basic theoretical issues in AI: the representation of
common sense concepts; the process of reasoning with concrete examples; the
construction and use of analogies; etc. There is reason to believe that a
thorough interdisciplinary approach to these problems will have significance
for both fields, with both practical and theoretical benefits.
The purpose of this First International Conference on Artificial Intelligence
and Law is to stimulate further collaboration between AI researchers and
lawyers, and to provide a forum for the latest research results in the field.
The conference is sponsored by the Center for Law and Computer Science at
Northeastern University. The General Chair is: Carole D. Hafner, College of
Computer Science, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston MA
02115, USA; (617) 437-5116 or (617) 437-2462; hafner.northeastern@csnet-relay.
Authors are invited to contribute papers on the following topics:
- Legal Expert Systems
- Conceptual Legal Retrieval Systems
- Automatic Processing of Natural Legal Texts
- Computational Models of Legal Reasoning
In addition, papers on the relevant theoretical issues in AI are also invited,
if the relationship to the law can be clearly demonstrated. It is important
that authors identify the original contributions presented in their papers, and
that they include a comparison with previous work. Each submission will be
reviewed by at least three members of the Program Committee (listed below), and
judged as to its originality, quality and significance.
Authors should submit six (6) copies of an Extended Abstract (6 to 8 pages) by
January 15, 1987, to the Program Chair: L. Thorne McCarty, Department of
Computer Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick NJ 08903, USA; (201)
932-2657; mccarty@rutgers.arpa. Notification of acceptance or rejection will
be sent out by March 1, 1987. Final camera-ready copy of the complete paper
(up to 15 pages) will be due by April 15, 1987.
Conference Chair: Carole D. Hafner Northeastern University
Program Chair: L. Thorne McCarty Rutgers University
Program Committee: Donald H. Berman Northeastern University
Michael G. Dyer UCLA
Edwina L. Rissland University of Massachusetts
Marek J. Sergot Imperial College, London
Donald A. Waterman The RAND Corporation
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂09-Jan-87 1548 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MS Committee meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jan 87 15:48:26 PST
Date: Fri 9 Jan 87 15:35:37-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MS Committee meeting
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12269645480.41.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The MS committee needs to meet in order to discuss what to do about two
students who have not made reasonable progress and who have had Holds
placed on their Winter Quarter registration. The meeting is scheduled
for Tuesday, January 13, at 1:15 p.m., in MJH 301. It is important that
it be attended by as many committee members as possible. Please let me
know right away whether you will be there.
--Jutta McCormick
----
-------
∂09-Jan-87 1806 @Score.Stanford.EDU:Stansbury.pa@Xerox.COM Re: MS Committee meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jan 87 18:05:26 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 9 Jan 87 17:39:07-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 09 JAN 87 16:00:46 PST
Date: 9 Jan 87 16:00 PST
From: Stansbury.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: MS Committee meeting
In-reply-to: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>'s message of
Fri, 9 Jan 87 15:35:37 PST
To: JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <870109-160046-3423@Xerox>
I have a meeting at Xerox at 2:00 that day which I cannot avoid. So I
can make the MS meeting, but I may have to leave a bit early.
-- Tayloe.
∂10-Jan-87 1541 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu We're back
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jan 87 15:41:54 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Sat, 10 Jan 87 15:36:34 PST
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 87 15:36:34 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: We're back
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
We're now nail@navajo again.
Under the new system, I have to handle all insertions/deletions
from the list, so mail such requests to ullman@navajo.
The address mailer@navajo no longer handles such things automatically.
Another clerical matter: there is also a list nail-local@navajo
used for nontechnical matters concerning, e.g., meetings of the
NAIL! research group. If you want to be on that list, you may;
again, requests have to be send directly to me.
---jeff
∂11-Jan-87 1446 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice REMINDER -- tomorrow's Planlunch -- Pierpaolo Degano
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jan 87 14:46:28 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Sun, 11 Jan 87 14:39:52-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA07056; Sun,
11 Jan 87 14:45:29 PST
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 87 14:45:29 PST
From: lansky@sri-venice.ARPA (Amy Lansky)
Message-Id: <8701112245.AA07056@sri-venice.ARPA>
To: planlunch_reminder@sri-warbucks
Subject: REMINDER -- tomorrow's Planlunch -- Pierpaolo Degano
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A SEMANTICS FOR CCS BASED ON PARTIAL ORDERINGS
Pierpaolo Degano
University of Pisa
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 12
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
Milner's CCS has a two-level semantics. The first level consists of
an abstract machine, based on a labelled transition system, which
defines the STRING of all the actions that a CCS agent performs.
Thus, possible concurrency among independent actions IS NOT explicitly
represented, and is reduced to nondeterminism and interleaving. The
second level consists in defining a congruence on CCS agents, called
observational congruence. This is obtained by abstracting out the
"internal" moves of the agents, and by considering as congruent those
agents that exhibit the same "external behaviour".
We also take the same approach, but utilize a semantics where the
notion of concurrency IS primitive. More precisely, we directly
express when two actions are causally/temporally related and when they
are independent, i.e. concurrent. This is done by considering a
PARTIAL ORDER of actions as operational behaviour of an agent, rather
than a string of actions. In detail, we first single out of a CCS
agent its "processes", i.e., those subagents which may immediately
perform an action. Then a labelled rewriting system is defined which
makes clear the asynchrony of our operational semantics. The second
semantic level must extend the classical notion of bisimulation to
cope with partial orderings. A major result of our work is that our
"partial ordering observational congruence" is finer than Milner's
observational congruence exactly in that it distinguishes interleaving
of sequential nondeterministic processes from their concurrent
execution.
∂12-Jan-87 0111 RESTIVO@Score.Stanford.EDU PROLOG Digest V5 #2
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 01:11:32 PST
Date: Sun 11 Jan 1987 11:07-PST
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Subject: PROLOG Digest V5 #2
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 12 Jan 1987 Volume 5 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
Query - Need prolog_lib & Collecting Bug Stories
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Dec 86 06:46:08 GMT
From: Steve Childress <felix!scgvaxd!wlbr!wlbreng1!steve@hplabs.hp.com>
Subject: Need prolog_lib for UNSW Prolog
I have ported the UNSW prolog interpreter to the AMIGA. Seems to work,
but to test I need the library "prolog_lib" which this site doesn't
have. This file contains the code for many built-in's.
Sure would appreciate any pointers on where to obtain said file!
Regards,
Steve Childress
------------------------------
Date: 10 Jan 87 08:34:15 GMT
From: levin@locus.ucla.edu
Subject: Collecting favorite bug stories
I am collecting anecdotes of experiences, (real or imagined) for a
book to be titled:
MY FAVORITE BUGS: Humourous, and Horrible Experiences in Software
Engineering.
As one might tell from the title, the book will be filled with
wonderful tales that programmers tell each other, over a few too many
beers, after a long day at the keyboard.
The book is meant to be read for entertainment, as well as for
education. In that light, I am asking that contributions include
(when possible), a short description of the bug, some comments on why
it was special, how the solution was found, and maybe (for the
appendix of the book) a few lines of code.
You don't need to write anything long; a page should do it. All
contributors are thanked in advance, and will be credited in the book
for their contributions.
-- Stuart LeVine
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂12-Jan-87 0958 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu More history
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 09:58:53 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 12 Jan 87 09:56:04 PST
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 87 09:56:04 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: More history
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
The following was contributed by Dave Maier, but failed to reach the
list because 2-phase locking was not used when the name of the
list was changed.
***************************************************************
Another tidbit of history about the relational model
is an MIT Masters/BA
Thesis on a database system called Goldstar that ran under Multics. It
had join, project, union, difference, intersection (but not selection).
The two guys who implemented it also
figured out functional dependencies,
and proved the basic decomposition theorem: XYZ decomposes losslessly
onto XY and XZ if X-->Y. They also knew the difference between a
relation vs. a table (sets/lists).
When was it defended? June 1970, the same month that Codd's first paper
appeared in CACM.
If anyone wants a reference, I can send it.
Dave Maier
∂12-Jan-87 1448 FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU goodbye
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 14:48:23 PST
Date: Mon 12 Jan 87 14:41:21-PST
From: Marilyn Ford <FORD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: goodbye
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Dear All,
I am off again to the land down under, but hope to be back before too long.
Thanks to all for making my visit so enjoyable.
Marilyn
-------
∂12-Jan-87 1600 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Sunrise Club Meeting 1/20/87
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 15:59:57 PST
Date: Mon 12 Jan 87 15:49:36-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Sunrise Club Meeting 1/20/87
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270434459.31.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Faculty Members:
You are cordially invited to attend the next School of
Engineering Sunrise Club meeting on Tuesday, January 20, 1987, at
7:30 a.m. The meeting will be held in Tresidder Union's Oak
Lounge. Professor James D. Plummer, Director of the Integrated
Circuits Laboratory, will speak on "Integrated Circuits--Where is
VLSI Heading?"
The Sunrise Club is designed to provide a common meeting
ground for students and faculty and their counterparts in venture
capital firms and small or start-up high technology companies.
There are currently 29 members.
The benefits to us are an increased pool of fellowship funds
(the $2500 annual gift made by the corporate members goes for
fellowships) and an opportunity to exchange information with an
important local group of engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs.
Since we must have a fairly accurate head count in order to
plan the breakfast, please respond to Ann Diaz-Barriga at
723-3051 or Diaz@Score.
Sincerely,
Nils Nilsson
Chairman
-------
∂12-Jan-87 1618 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu KB/DB notes offered
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 16:17:29 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 12 Jan 87 16:14:55 PST
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 87 16:14:55 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: KB/DB notes offered
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
I have produced a few copies of the first three chapters of
my revised database book, which will cover "knowledge-base" systems
fairly heavily. The rough outline is:
Ch. 1: Introductory BS, like Sect. 1.1, 1.2 of old book,
but including motivation for the use of logical rules as queries.
Ch. 2: Data models, like old Sect. 1.3, 1.4, but including
5.2 (relational algebra) and a section on the "object" model.
CH.3: Logic as a data model; LFP interpretation of Datalog,
negation and stratified programs, relational calculus, domain independence
and safety of TRC, DRC, nonrecursive, stratified Datalog;
logic with function symbols; CWA.
If anybody is willing to give this material a critical reading or
would like to try it out in a course, please let me know, and
I'll mail you a copy.
---jdu
∂12-Jan-87 1712 vardi@navajo.stanford.edu Re: More history
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 17:12:22 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 12 Jan 87 17:10:25 PST
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 87 17:10:25 PST
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: More history
To: nail@navajo.stanford.edu
There is also the work by Kuns at the Rand Corporation from 1967.
His query language was the relational calculus (i.e., first-order logic).
The result that safety of queries is undecidable (by Di Paola) was
published in JACM in 1969.
Moshe
∂12-Jan-87 1830 @Score.Stanford.EDU:cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu CSD Colloquium
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jan 87 18:30:35 PST
Received: from pescadero.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 12 Jan 87 18:26:22-PST
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Mon, 12 Jan 87 18:28:37 pst
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 87 18:28:37 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu>
Subject: CSD Colloquium
To: faculty@score
I am running the CSD Colloquium for Winter quarter and Anop Gupta is
running it in Spring Quarter. At this point, I have only two slots left
at the end of the Winter quarter. However, Anop and I are soliciting
suggestions for the end of this quarter, and especially next quarter.
Let us know if there are some people you would like to speak here.
Thanks
David C.
∂13-Jan-87 0836 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU Pricing for Reunion
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jan 87 08:36:31 PST
Date: Tue 13 Jan 87 08:30:38-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Pricing for Reunion
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270616692.17.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The Reunion Committee met last night and I raised the issue of
cost for the faculty. It was decided that the committee members,
full-time faculty members, and significant others, would be charged
$75.00
One of the professors sent in the full amount and he will be given
a refund.
The only ones who will not be required to pay are those invited to
speak at the symposium.
The dates are:
Thursday evening, March 26 - no-host cocktail party at the faculty club.
Friday, March 27 -- all day symposium and banquet at faculty club.
Sat., March 28 -- picnic
Carolyn
-------
∂13-Jan-87 0843 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jan 87 08:43:06 PST
Date: Tue 13 Jan 87 08:35:07-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Lunch
To: Faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270617508.23.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils won't be able to make the lunch today, but requests that you enjoy
lunch anyway.
LaDonna
-------
∂13-Jan-87 2057 SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Next AFLB(s)
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 Jan 87 19:48:26 PST
Date: Tue 13 Jan 87 19:41:33-PST
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Next AFLB(s)
To: aflb.all@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270738829.17.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Abstracts for the next two talks follow. Any typos are my fault. A.
15-January-1987: Ashok Chandra (IBM Yorktown Heights)
A Model for Hierarchical Memory
Large processors typically have a complex memory hierarchy. For
instance, there may be registers, cache, main memory and extended
store. We consider the following approximation (the hierarchical
memory model or HMM): a random access machine where access to memory
location x requires log x time instead of the usual constant time.
Algorithms that take time T(n) on a RAM can be run in time T(n)log n
where T(n) is polynomial. It is shown that in some cases this
log n factor cannot be improved (as for searching). In other cases it
can be reduced to a constant (e.g. for matrix multiplication using
only semiring operations). For yet others it can be reduced only to
log log n (e.g. for oblivious sorting or for computations on a butterfly
network). Differences in the various algorithms give some indication of the
inherent locality of reference in the problem.
***** Time and place: January 15, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
22-January-1987: Silvio Ursic (Madison, WI)
A Linear Characterization of Counting Problems
The problem of counting the number of inputs accepted by a
Turing machine in a polynomial number of steps is transformed to
a linear program in a polynomial number of variables and with integer
coefficients of polynomial size.
The polytopes defined by the linear program are projections of cubes.
Their vertices are labeled with some of the boolean
functions in N boolean variables. They are defined with recursions
that mirror the binomial recursion and have been named ``binomial
polytopes''.
Boolean symmetric functions assume a preeminent role in this work. A new
symmetry, distinct from negation and permutation of variables
is found to be present. The results extend the range of combinatorial
problems that can be approached with methods to solve systems
of linear inequalities to counting problems. They show that an incomplete
knowledge of the face structure of the associated polytopes leads
to imprecise counting. With a linear program, we obtain upper and lower
bounds to the number of inputs accepted by the associated Turing
machine. They also show that probabilistic Turing machines are a more
natural model for integer and linear programming methods based
on an incomplete description of the underlying polytopes.
***** Time and place: January 22, 12:30 pm in MJH 352 (Bldg. 460) *****
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1010 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Feb 6 Executive Council Meeting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 10:10:17 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 10:04:52-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Feb 6 Executive Council Meeting
To: officers: ;
cc: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12270895991.44.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
'
The Executive Committee (President, President-elect, Sec-Treasurer,
and the Past President) have decided to postpone the February 6
meeting in Denver because after a review of the agenda items none
seemed pressing enough to warrant a meeting. Those agenda items
included the establishment of a mini-symposium eries, discussion of
the 1986 conference survey (which you will be receiving in the mail),
appointment of the magazine's associate editor, ideas to generate more
basic research,etc.
In lieu of a meeting, some other mechanisms for discussing these items
such as a meeting of a subset of the Council or electronic discussions
will be used. This postponement does not mean that no interim meetings
will occur in the future. If pressing items of discussion do arise,
then a meeting will be convened.
We apologize for any inconvenience from this postponement.
--Claudia
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1123 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Fac. Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 11:23:46 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 11:20:04-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Fac. Meeting
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270909679.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The faculty meeting scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 20 has been rescheduled.
It will now be held on Tuesday, Jan. 27 at 2:30 in MJH 252.
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1125 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Cheriton/Lantz
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 11:25:49 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 11:21:30-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Cheriton/Lantz
To: tenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270909942.12.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I'd like to remind all tenured faculty to stop by my office prior to the
faculty meeting on Jan. 27 to read through the Cheriton and Lantz letters
that we have received.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1157 @Sushi.Stanford.EDU:THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu a day of complexity theory at northeastern university
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 11:55:42 PST
Received: from lindy.STANFORD.EDU by Sushi.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed 14 Jan 87 11:43:06-PST
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 14 Jan 87 11:44:11 PST
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 87 11:46:33 PST
From: <THEORYNT@yktvmx.bitnet>
Reply-To: THEORYNT%YKTVMX.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
To: aflb.tn@sushi.stanford.edu
Subject: a day of complexity theory at northeastern university
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 87 10:25:33 EST
From: selman%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: a day of complexity theory at northeastern university
Message-id: <C033.THEORYNT@ibm.com>
Resent-date: 14 Jan 1987 14:41:12-EST (Wednesday)
Resent-From: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Reply-To: THEORYNT@YKTVMX.bitnet
Resent-to: Theory-List@ibm.com
College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
A Day of Structure in Complexity Theory
Friday, January 23, 1987
SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT
Join us for a day of talks given by members of the Program
Committee of the Second Annual Structure in Complexity Theory
Conference.
Schedule of Events
10:00 a.m. Shafi Goldwasser "Interactive Proof Systems"
M.I.T.
11:00 a.m. Uwe Schoening "Probabilistic Complexity Classes,
EWH Koblenz Lowness, and Graph Isomorphism"
12:00 noon Lunch Break
1:30 p.m. Stephen Mahaney "Collapsing Degrees: Progress on
AT&T Bell Labs the Isomorphism Conjecture"
2:30 p.m. Neil Immerman "Expressibility and Parallel
Yale University Computation"
3:30 p.m. Juris Hartmanis "About UP, One-Way Functions,
Cornell University and the Isomorphism Conjecture"
All talks will take place at 356 Ell Center on the Northeastern
University campus.
PARKING ON CAMPUS WILL BE AVAILABLE BUT REQUIRES PRIOR APPROVAL.
If you will be driving, for information about visitor parking and
maps of campus, please contact:
Mrs. Gerry Hayes
College of Computer Science
Northeastern University
360 Huntington Ave.
Boston, MA 02115
(617) 437-2462
For other information please contact Alan Selman, (617)437-8688,
selman@corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu.
The Second Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference will
be held June 16 -18, 1987, at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, and
is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on
Foundations of Computer Science, Cornell University, and
Northeastern University.
∂14-Jan-87 1310 SHIRAI@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Greeting
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 13:10:12 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 12:38:12-PST
From: Shirai Kenichiro <SHIRAI@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Greeting
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Hi, everyboy!
I am here after spending 8 months working on important issues in formal
semantics in Amsterdam.
I will stay here for 3 month to return to my teaching and administrative
obligation in Japan, ah....
I am looking for people here who want to discuss with me empirical and
theoretical issues in formal semantics with special reference to those
concerning Japanese and other oriental languages. I am hunting for a
theoretical framework which best describe and explain semantic phenomena
in Japanese language which are probably unimaginable and alien to naive
theoretical linguists who work only on their native tongues and Another
language. Or should I construct a totally new theory from scratch myself?
Help me!
Ken
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1704 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU MSCS Program Committee Meetiing
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 17:00:55 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 16:57:17-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: MSCS Program Committee Meetiing
To: ms-program@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: ag@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12270971068.47.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The next MSCS Program Committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 27,
1:15 p.m. in MJH 252. This meeting is intended specifically for the
Committee to look at the MS program in view of the course changes due to the
undergraduate program. Several Committee members will examine the
specializations and will have recommendations for changes and/or
additions/deletions.
The specializations were assigned as follows:
Numerical Analysis/Scientific Computation - Oliger
Systems - Stansbury
Software Theory - Sharkansky
Theoretical Computer Science - Manna
Symbolic and Heuristic Computation - Reges
Database - Wiederhold
Please let me know ASAP if you will attend this meeting.
--Jutta
-------
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1758 TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Japanese semantics
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 17:58:21 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 17:43:11-PST
From: Syun Tutiya <TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Japanese semantics
To: iida@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, shirai@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, yo@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU,
TUTIYA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: saiki@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, klee@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU,
mukai%icot.jp@RELAY.CS.NET, mukai%icot.uucp@EDDIE.MIT.EDU,
a88868%ccut.u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
We are going to have informal discussion on Japanese semantics to find
a theoretical framework which best describes those phenomena peculiar
to Japanese language but which also can deal with other closely
examined languages.
We will meet on Friday mornings, 10:30 -- 12:00 at CSLI Ventura
Trailer Seminar Room, beginning on Jan 16.
Please join us if you are interested.
Ken Shirai(shirai@csli)
Masayo Iida(iida@csli)
Syun Tutiya(tutiya@csli)
-------
∂14-Jan-87 1938 EMMA@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU CSLI Calendar, January 15, No.12
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jan 87 19:33:26 PST
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 17:45:10-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSLI Calendar, January 15, No.12
To: friends@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Tel: (415) 723-3561
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
_____________________________________________________________________________
15 January 1987 Stanford Vol. 2, No. 12
_____________________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, 15 January 1987
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Events and LF" by Stephen Neale
Conference Room Discussion led by Peter Ludlow
(Ludlow@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in the last Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Classroom An Application of Default Logic to Speech Act Theory
Ventura Trailers C. Raymond Perrault
(Rperrault@sri-warbucks.arpa)
Abstract in the last Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, 22 January 1987
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Pragmatics and Modularity"
Conference Room by Deirdre Wilson and Dan Sperber
Discussion led by Gary Holden
(Holden@csli.stanford.edu)
Abstract in the next Calendar
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Classroom The Semantics of Clocks
Ventura Trailers Brian Smith
(BrianSmith.pa@xerox.com)
Abstract in this Calendar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please note that this Thursday's Seminar will be in the Ventura
Trailer Classroom, not in Redwood G-19. Future Thursday Seminars will
also meet in the Ventura Trailer Classroom until a better room can be
found.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
The Semantics of Clocks
Brian Smith
January 22
Clocks participate in their subject matter. Temporal by nature, they
also represent time. And yet, like other representational systems,
clocks have been hard to build, and can be wrong. For these and other
reasons clocks are a good foil with which to explore issues in AI and
cognitive science about computation, mind, and the relation between
semantics and mechanism.
An analysis will be presented of clock face content and the
function of clockworks, and of various notions of chronological
correctness. The results are intended to illustrate a more general
challenge to the formality of inference, to widen our conception of
computation, and to clarify the conditions governing representational
systems in general.
-------
∂14-Jan-87 2123 CLT Special talk
To: logmtc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Mail-From: ETCHEMENDY created at 14-Jan-87 11:50:03
Date: Wed 14 Jan 87 11:50:03-PST
From: John Etchemendy <ETCHEMENDY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Special talk
To: phil-all@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Please note in your calendar the following special talk:
Tony Ungar
"The Interpretation of Derivations"
When: Tuesday, January 27, noon
Where: Bldg 60, room 62P
(Apologies for the nonstandard day, time, and room; please come
anyway. Bring your lunch.)
∂15-Jan-87 1054 admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar -- January 27, 1987
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 10:50:53 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.57/1.20)
id AA01185; Thu, 15 Jan 87 10:35:57 PST
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 10:35:57 PST
From: admin%cogsci.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8701151835.AA01185@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar -- January 27, 1987
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
SPRING - 1987
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, January 27, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
2515 Tolman Hall
``Using fast weights to deblur old memories and assimilate new ones."
Geoff Hinton
Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon
Connectionist models usually have a single weight on each connection. Some
interesting new properties emerge if each connection has two
weights -- a slow, plastic weight which stores long-term
knowledge and a fast, elastic weight which stores temporary
knowledge and spontaneously decays towards zero. Suppose that a
network learns a set of associations, and then subsequently
learns more associations. Associations in the first set will be-
come "blurred", but it is possible to deblur all the associations
in the first set by rehearsing on just a few of them. The
rehearsal allows the fast weights to take on values that cancel
out the changes in the slow weights caused by the subsequent
learning.
Fast weights can also be used to minimize interference by minim-
izing the changes to the slow weights that are required to as-
similate new knowledge. The fast weights search for the smallest
change in the slow weights that is capable of incorporating the
new knowledge. This is equivalent to searching for analogies
that allow the new knowledge to be represented as a minor varia-
tion of the old knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 10: Anne Treisman, Psychology Department, UC Berkeley.
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
Geoff Hinton will speak at the SESAME Colloquium on Monday Jan. 26, in
Tolman 2515 from 4-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------
∂15-Jan-87 1137 HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Explorer time lossage
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 11:35:12 PST
Date: Thu 15 Jan 87 11:33:43-PST
From: Mike Hewett <HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Explorer time lossage
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12271174309.66.HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The KSL TI Explorers suffer from some weird ailment where
the on-screen clock rapidly falls behind real time. I find
this especially annoying so I found a reasonable solution.
In my login-init, I have the line:
(process-run-function
'(:name time-keeper :restart-after-boot t)
#'(lambda () (loop (time:set-local-time) (sleep 1800))))
This process comes in every 30 minutes and resets the time. For
all practical purposes it's invisible (I've never seen it come
in) and it works!
I think that this or something like this should at least be installed
on X8, the file server, and it would probably be useful to everyone on
their own machines.
Mike
-------
∂15-Jan-87 1137 HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Explorer time lossage
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 11:35:12 PST
Date: Thu 15 Jan 87 11:33:43-PST
From: Mike Hewett <HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Explorer time lossage
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12271174309.66.HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The KSL TI Explorers suffer from some weird ailment where
the on-screen clock rapidly falls behind real time. I find
this especially annoying so I found a reasonable solution.
In my login-init, I have the line:
(process-run-function
'(:name time-keeper :restart-after-boot t)
#'(lambda () (loop (time:set-local-time) (sleep 1800))))
This process comes in every 30 minutes and resets the time. For
all practical purposes it's invisible (I've never seen it come
in) and it works!
I think that this or something like this should at least be installed
on X8, the file server, and it would probably be useful to everyone on
their own machines.
Mike
-------
∂15-Jan-87 1137 @Score.Stanford.EDU:cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu Coffee, tea and me
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 11:37:03 PST
Received: from pescadero.stanford.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Jan 87 11:21:44-PST
Received: by pescadero.stanford.edu with Sendmail; Thu, 15 Jan 87 11:14:32 pst
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 11:14:32 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu>
Subject: Coffee, tea and me
To: faculty@score
I would like us to make the coffee. tea, etc. in the lounge free again,
as it was last year. I think it adds to the friendly feeling to the dept.
that I think we should foster. Les says that the cost is $6K per year.
I would like to cover this from my unrestricted funds but its a bit much
for my resources alone. Would anyone else be willing to contribute some
funds to the cause?
David C.
∂15-Jan-87 1156 @CSLI.STANFORD.EDU:JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Guest speaker
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 11:54:07 PST
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by CSLI.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 15 Jan 87 11:38:29-PST
Date: Thu 15 Jan 87 11:38:21-PST
From: Mae Jones <JONES@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Guest speaker
To: aic-staff@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(122)+PONY(0) 15-Jan-87 11:38:21.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Ernie Davis, New York University, will be our guest speaker on Monday,
January 19, 2:00 p.m. in Conference Room EK242, AI Center. Following
is his abstract:
A Logical Framework for Commonsense Reasoning
about Solid Objects
Ernie Davis
New York University
Abstract
When a small die is dropped inside a large funnel, it comes
out the bottom. How do you know that? I will discuss why this
problem is harder than it looks; what kinds of knowledge could
be used to solve it; and how this knowledge can be expressed
formally.
-------
∂15-Jan-87 1329 Mailer@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Document 86-019
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 13:29:03 PST
Received: from LIVE-OAK.LCS.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 Jan 87 16:28-EST
Received: from GOLD-HILL-ACORN.DialNet.Symbolics.COM by MIT-LIVE-OAK.ARPA via DIAL with SMTP id 24905; 15 Jan 87 16:14:20-EST
Received: from BOSTON.Gold-Hill.DialNet.Symbolics.COM by ACORN.Gold-Hill.DialNet.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 51643; Thu 15-Jan-87 14:31:21-EST
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 14:31 est
Sender: mike@acorn
To: x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
From: mike%acorn@mit-live-oak.arpa
Subject: Document 86-019
Note: You will be receiving hardcopy of the following from Bob Mathis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
!
To: ANSI x3j13
From: Mike Beckerle, Gold Hill Computers
Date: 1/13/87
Subject: Document x3j13/86-019
Since my draft proposal which was hastily drawn up at the last x3j13
meeting, I have had time to reconsider several points in my proposal
for adding a few features to CL to support Higher-Order Functional
Programming. I have also decided to bring up the meta issue in this
forum.
The meta-issue is this: Would adding enough syntactic accommodation
to Common Lisp to make functional programming palatable defuse this
Lisp1 vs. Lisp2 debate enough? Or more optimistically, what level of
accommodation for programming with functionals would in fact defuse
this issue. For example, Would it be enough to provide the following:
Programs written in in a Lisp1 "educational/functional" dialect would
not be directly upwardly compatible with ANS Common Lisp; however,
the changes required would be straightforward to make and
syntactically convenient. (We know that they can't be automatic due
to use of EVAL.) I am particularly trying to address the issues of
Appendix B, section 6 of the "Issues..." paper.
What I'm trying to get at here is this: Why do people want a
"one-cell" lisp? Is it because it promotes/allows effective
programming using higher-order functions (style), because it is
more consistent/cleaner and therefore easier to understand and
teach (conceptual economy), because they are more familiar with a
one-cell lisp than a two cell lisp (momentum), because of a
purely aesthetic view that one cell is "better" (aesthetics),
because they don't like the name-capture problems of
common-lisp's so called "non-hygienic" macros (macrophobia), or
finally because they want political clout (politics).
My approach addresses that the push for lisp1 is due at least
partially to aesthetics but primarily is due to the style issue.
The following is a proposal for adding a small number of features
to Common Lisp to accommodate programming using higher-order
functions, or functionals. Functional programming is much easier
in a Lisp1 dialect than a Lisp2 dialect since functional
programming makes extensive use of functions as values. Common
Lisp's current (Funcall ...) and (Function ...) or #' syntax
makes functional programming particularly awkward. In addition
the fact that one cannot write an application which produces a
function in the car of a list representing an application is a
pain. [let's call this the "((f g) h)" problem.] These features
are intended to accommodate the functional style, without changing
the language too radically from the current status defined in
CLtL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
!
Document x3j13/86-019
Accommodating Functional-Style Programming in Common Lisp.
Mike Beckerle
Gold Hill Computers
Jan. 6, 1986.
One of the primary motivations for use of Lisp1 dialects is the
ease of higher-order programming. Many of the examples of
effective programming practice in Lisp1 given in the "Issues of
Separation in Function and Value Cells" paper recently discussed
by x3j13 at the Dec. '86 meeting are exactly of this type.
Unfortunately, macro programming in Lisp1 dialects is not well
understood and is a subject of current research; nevertheless
macro programming is heavily entrenched in the Common lisp world.
As a result, the approach advocated in this proposal is to
provide some standard operators and macros which make programming
using higher-order functions in Common Lisp significantly easier.
The Changes to CL as defined in CLtL are enumerated here, after
which there are some examples.
Change 1:
To section 5.2. Functions
Function call forms should be changed to allow the lisp1 like
syntax of:
((f g) h)
((lambda (x) x) #'(lambda (y) y)) 10) => 10.
i.e., the "function" position of an application should be treated
specially only if it contains a SYMBOL. If it contains a list
beginning with something other than LAMBDA it should be
interpreted as an application itself.
The forms above should, in every sense of the word except syntax,
be equivalent to:
(funcall (f g) h)
and
(funcall ((lambda (x) x) #'(lambda (y) y)) 10))
in the current CL as per CLtL.
Essentially, whenever symbols are used as functions, their
function-cell definitions are used. Lambda expressions and
function applications can also be used as functions. Lambda
expressions evaluate to functions. Function applications must
evaluate to either functions or symbols. If they evaluate to
symbols, then (recursively) the function definition of that
symbol is used.
The CL spec can explain the purpose of this special treatment for
function-positioned symbols in terms of the name-capture problem
of macros. Inadvertant name capture is, after all, the only real
reason for the special distinction for funtion-positioned symbols.
!
Change 2: Section 7.1.1.
The FUNCTION special form will be optional in front of
lambda expressions regardless of where they appear in a
program text. (The obvious exception for within quoted lists
obviously applies here, but isn't worth mention.)
It is as if the following definition was part of the CL system
(Defmacro lambda (&rest forms)
`(function (lambda ,@forms)))
The FUNCTION special form is needed only to distinguish between
the function and value of symbols which are either globally
referenced or locally bound using one of FLET, LABELS, MACROLET,
parameter passing, LET, LET*, and MULTIPLE-VALUE-BIND.
!
Change 3: Section 20.2
For syntactic convenience, the value cell of all CL symbols
which are defined as functions are defined to contain
the function object as well as the function cell.
E.g.,
(symbol-value 'mapcar) => #<compiled-function 1234>
(symbol-function 'mapcar) => #<compiled-function 1234>
This allows use of the CL symbols which name CL functions in
variable position without need for the FUNCTION special form as
in (mapcar list '(a b c) '(d e f)). If the value of the variable
"list" is locally bound to a function, possibly using let, then
the local definition will be used in accordance with the rules of
lexical scoping.
The primary change this requires is the renaming of certain
symbols of significance to the standard read-eval-print loop.
I suggest that the following renamings be used:
+ => +1
++ => +2
+++ => +3
- => -- or _ ;; this one's difficult to get a nice name for!
* => *1
** => *2
*** => *3
/ => /1
// => /2
/// =? /3
The behavior of these variables would be identical to the current
behavior of the old-named variables. I consider this change to
be simply cosmetic, aesthetic, etc. No program of any quality
(other than those written as read-eval-print loops by
implementors) ever uses these variables. (Unfortunately, the
Peter Principle dictates that the least significant point always
gets the most debate, so I'm prepared for absolute tirades on
this one! Please restrain yourselves!!!!!)
!
Change 4: Section 7.11. Use of Higher-order Functions
Organizationally, this seems to belong in the chapter 7
discussion, so I've proposed a new section for that chapter
in lieu of any guidelines for how to present standards proposals.
The text as a preliminary draft follows:
"Common Lisp provides some support for programming using higher-
order functions. These allow the programmer to partially hide the
distinction between function-cells and value-cells and to program
as if using a language where only one cell is associated with
each symbol. The objective is to make the syntax of higher-order
programs easier to read and understand. The abstraction that this
creates is not complete; it is possible for programs to detect
that there are separate function and value cells even when these
abstractions are used; however, the syntactic convenience of
using these forms where they are applicable is significant.
FUNCTIONAL Vars* {form}* [Macro]
The Functional macro is used to create an environment where the
variables in the list "Vars" can be used both as variables and
in function position within the body forms without need for the #' or
(function ...) operator, nor use of (funcall ...).
For example:
(defun doublemap (f g)
(functional (f g)
(lambda (list) (f (g (mapcar f list)
(mapcar g list))))))
(defun y (f) ;; the paradoxical combinator
(functional (f)
((lambda (x)
(functional (x)
(f (x x))))
(lambda (x)
(functional (x)
(f (x x)))))))
Here, notice that "f" and "g" are used both as variables
representing functions, and also as functions, as if defined by
FLET or LABELS.
One possible definition for FUNCTIONAL is:
(defmacro functional (vars &body body)
(let* ((bindings (mapcar #'(lambda (name)
`(,name (&rest args) (apply ,name args)))
vars)))
`(flet ,bindings
,@body)))
Implementation note: FUNCTIONAL can also be implemented
using MACROLET.
Care is required if FUNCTIONAL is used in programs which perform
side-effects on symbols via SYMBOL-FUNCTION or SYMBOL-VALUE. The
behavior of the resulting program can be difficult to predict."
!
Change 5: Section 7.1.1. (again)
Note: The following is the least kosher aspect of this proposal,
but I am including it anyway. Once again it is written as an
addition to section 7.1.1. Its intended use is for defining new
named functions which will be associated with both function and
value cells of symbols, thereby forming a consistent extention.
In general, use of side-effects within higher-order programs is
extremely tricky; one tends to program in a pure style out of
necessity.
SYMBOL-CONTENTS symbol [Function]
In order to facilitate programming in the functional style it is
often useful to ignore the function-cell/value-cell aspect of
symbols. Symbol-contents, if used consistently throughout an
entire program can facilitate this style of programming.
The function Symbol-contents can be used to extract or replace the
value of a symbol in a manner which is indifferent to the
normal CL distinction between function cells and value cells.
Symbol-contents returns the contents of the value-cell of the
symbol when used as an accessor. When used as an assigner
(with setf); however, the value assigned is placed into both
the function-cell, and the value-cell.
Symbol-contents cannot access nor assign (using setf) the value
of local symbol or function definitions created using let, flet, labels,
let*, etc. Only the global value can be accessed or modified.
It is an error to execute code which calls a function named by a symbol
where that symbol has been assigned a value other than a function object
via setf of symbol-contents.
(defun foobar (x) x)
(symbol-contents 'x) => #<unbound>
(setf (symbol-contents 'x) (lambda (x) (+ x x)))
(symbol-contents 'x) => #<function-object (lambda (x) (+ x x))>
(symbol-function 'x) => #<function-object (lambda (x) (+ x x))>
(symbol-value 'x) => #<function-object (lambda (x) (+ x x))>
(eq (symbol-function 'x) (symbol-value 'x)) => T
--------------------------------------------------------------------
!
Use of the Higher-order function extensions to CL.
To show the utility of these abstractions in higher order
programming, it is important to look at some example programs.
Hence, I have rewritten the examples in Appendix B of
the "Issues of Separation in Function Cells and Value Cells"
using Common Lisp with the proposed extensions.
;;;---------------------------------------------------------------------
;;; from Appendix B: "High-Order Procedures for Functional Abstractions"
;; our macro for making functional programming easier.
(defmacro functional (vars &body body)
(let* ((bindings (mapcar (lambda (name)
`(,name (&rest args) (apply ,name args)))
vars)))
`(flet ,bindings
,@body)))
;; a macro which obviates #' notation.
(defmacro lambda (&rest forms)
`(function (lambda ,@forms)))
;; the symbol-contents function and its setf.
(defun symbol-contents (name)
(symbol-value name))
(defun set-symbol-contents (name value)
(setf (symbol-value name) value)
(setf (symbol-function name) value))
(defsetf symbol-contents set-symbol-contents)
;; a DEFINE macro, syntactic sugar to make the examples
;; more scheme-like. Doesn't put implicit blocks on lambda's,
;; doesn't handle local defines. This could be done, but we won't bother
;; here.
(defmacro define (name value)
`(setf (symbol-contents ',name) value))
;; misc.
(defun null? (x) (null x))
(defun future (x) x)
(defun assq (x y)
(assoc x y :test 'eq))
;;--------------------------------------------------------------------
!
;; The example programs.
;; these have been translated slightly from Scheme to Common Lisp
;; plus my suggested extentions.
(define sum
(lambda (f a next b)
(functional (f next)
(if (> a b)
0
(+ (f a)
(sum f (next a) next b))))))
(define integral
(lambda (f a b dx)
(functional (f)
(* (sum f (+ a (/ dx 2)) (lambda (x) (+ x dx)) b)
dx))))
(define map
(lambda (f x)
(functional (f)
(if (null x)
nil
(cons (f (car x))
(map f (cdr x)))))))
(define reduce
(lambda (f l)
(functional (f)
(if (null? (cdr l))
(car l)
(f (car l)
(reduce f (cdr l)))))))
(define pairs
(lambda (x k)
(functional (k)
(if (or (null? x) (null? (cdr x)))
(k nil x)
(pairs (cddr x)
(lambda (p r)
(k (cons (list (car x) (cadr x))
p)
r)))))))
(define reduce
(lambda (f x)
(functional (f)
(pairs x
(lambda (p r)
(if (null? p)
(car r)
(reduce f
(append (map (lambda (z)
(future (apply f z)))
p)
r))))))))
(defstruct (table-abstraction
(:constructor make-table-abstraction
(maker looker-up inserter))
(:conc-name nil))
maker looker-up inserter)
(defun hashfunction (n)
(lambda (x)
(mod (sxhash x) n)))
(define hashify
(lambda (n table-abstraction)
(let ((hash (hashfunction n))
(bucket-make (maker table-abstraction))
(bucket-lookup (looker-up table-abstraction))
(bucket-insert! (inserter table-abstraction)))
(functional (hash bucket-make bucket-lookup bucket-insert!)
(let ((make
(lambda ()
(let ((hashtable (make-array n)))
(dotimes (i n)
(setf (aref hashtable i)
(bucket-make)))
hashtable)))
(lookup
(lambda (key table)
(bucket-lookup key
(aref table
(hash key)))))
(insert!
(lambda (key table value)
(bucket-insert! key
(aref table (hash key))
value))))
(make-table-abstraction make lookup insert!))))))
(defun make-entry (key value) (cons key value))
(defun set-value! (vcell value) (rplacd vcell value))
(define alist-table-abstraction
(make-table-abstraction
(lambda () (list '*alist-table*))
(lambda (key table)
(cdr (assq key (cdr table)))) ;; alist of cons pairs
(lambda (key table value)
(let ((vcell (assq key (cdr table))))
(if vcell
(set-value! vcell value)
(rplacd table
(cons (make-entry key value)
(cdr table))))))))
(define hash-table-of-alists-abstraction-generator
(lambda (n) (hashify n alist-table-abstraction)))
(define hash-table-of-alists
(hash-table-of-alists-abstraction-generator 16))
(define two-level-hash-table-abstraction-generator
(lambda (m n table-abstraction)
(hashify m (hashify n table-abstraction))))
(define two-level-hash-table-of-alists-abstraction-1
(two-level-hash-table-abstraction-generator
128 256 alist-table-abstraction))
;;-----------------------------------------------------------------
My observation is that using the FUNCTIONAL abstraction along with the
ability to perform applications which syntactically look like "((f g) h)"
makes the enhanced CL version pretty close to the Lisp1 version at least
as far as syntactic aesthetics are concerned.
∂15-Jan-87 1656 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Reminder: TOMORROW's PLANLUNCH 3pm Friday
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 16:56:07 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Thu, 15 Jan 87 16:51:34-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA09748; Thu,
15 Jan 87 16:56:24 PST
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 16:56:24 PST
From: lansky@sri-venice.ARPA (Amy Lansky)
Message-Id: <8701160056.AA09748@sri-venice.ARPA>
To: planlunch_reminder@sri-warbucks, reid@spar-20.ARPA
Subject: Reminder: TOMORROW's PLANLUNCH 3pm Friday
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN IMPLEMENTATION OF ADAPTIVE SEARCH
Takashi Sakuragawa (TAKASHI@IBM.COM)
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center and Kyoto University
3:00 PM, FRIDAY, January 16
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
The Adaptive Optimizer is a program that optimizes Prolog programs by
reordering clauses. It is an implementation of Natarajan's adaptive
search algorithm that reorders the subproblems of a disjunctive
problem and minimizes the expected search effort. This talk will
describe implementation details as well as how the efficiency of an
example tree search program is improved. In this particular example,
the execution speed of the optimized program is more than 200 times
faster than the original one. The speed improvement observed is for
an artificial example and is not necessarily representative of what
might be obtained from real applications.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
∂15-Jan-87 1721 @Score.Stanford.EDU:GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Coffee, tea and me
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 17:21:22 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Jan 87 17:16:57-PST
Date: Thu 15 Jan 87 17:03:35-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Coffee, tea and me
To: cheriton@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU
cc: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "David Cheriton <cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu>" of Thu 15 Jan 87 11:37:44-PST
Message-ID: <12271234359.45.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
David,
I'm willing to add $ from my unrestricted funds for free coffee etc.
mrg
-------
∂15-Jan-87 2015 Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Document 86-019
Received: from SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 87 20:15:31 PST
Received: from EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 44898; Thu 15-Jan-87 23:13:42 EST
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 23:13 EST
From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Document 86-019
To: mike%acorn@MIT-LIVE-OAK.ARPA
cc: x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: The message of 15 Jan 87 14:31 EST from mike%acorn@mit-live-oak.arpa
Message-ID: <870115231337.6.MOON@EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 87 14:31 est
From: mike%acorn@mit-live-oak.arpa
I don't know if X3J13 is the right mailing list for technical discussions,
but I'd like to offer a few comments on your proposal. To avoid contributing
to total mail overload, I will abbreviate your proposal as much as possible
when referring to it.
Change 1: Function call forms should be changed to allow the lisp1 like
syntax of: ((f g) h)
i.e., the "function" position of an application should be treated
specially only if it contains a SYMBOL. If it contains a list
it should be interpreted as an application itself.
I think this is a good idea. It's a kludge, of course, and creates a
small inconsistency in the language (allowing list forms but not symbol
forms), however I think the ratio of benefit to harm is favorable.
Maclisp on the pdp-10 used to have a feature similar to this, but it was
removed because it caused a lot of problems. I believe the problems can
be traced to the fact that it allowed the result of evaluating a list or
efunctuating a symbol to be another list, which was then evaluated. The
question is, in what lexical scope should that list be evaluated. Your
proposal avoids this problem by forbidding repeated evaluation.
Your proposal allows repeated efunctuation (that is, the result of
evaluating a list can be a symbol, which is then efunctuated) and you
don't specify in what lexical environment the symbol is to be
efunctuated. CLtL is not very clear on this point; p.107 says that
APPLY efunctuates in the global lexical environment if given a symbol,
but otherwise the issue is not addressed as far as I can see. This
feature may not be essential to your proposal; you might want to remove
it.
(For those who haven't seen the term before, "efunctuate" is what the
FUNCTION special form does.)
Change 2: It is as if the following definition was part of the CL system
(defmacro lambda (&rest forms)
`(function (lambda ,@forms)))
This is definitely a good idea and causes no problems.
Change 3:
For syntactic convenience, the value cell of all CL symbols
which are defined as functions are defined to contain
the function object as well as the function cell.
I don't think this is a good idea, because it creates an artificial
distinction between built-in CL functions and functions defined by
the user with DEFUN or LABELS. If the rule of storing the definition
in both cells applies to the latter type of functions too, then
we would just have Lisp1.
Change 4:
The Functional macro is used to create an environment where the
variables in the list "Vars" can be used both as variables and
in function position within the body forms without need for the #' or
(function ...) operator, nor use of (funcall ...).
This is a good idea. To me it seems that having this eliminates the
need for your change 3.
Change 5:
Symbol-contents returns the contents of the value-cell of the
symbol when used as an accessor. When used as an assigner
(with setf); however, the value assigned is placed into both
the function-cell, and the value-cell.
This stands or falls with change 3. Again, I think change 4 is
a better approach.
∂16-Jan-87 0806 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 08:05:57 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 08:00:10-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Lunch
To: faculty@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: halpern@ibm.com, strong@ibm.com
Message-ID: <12271397578.10.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Jean-Claude Latombe (who will be joining our faculty in April) will be
visiting us next week. He will be our guest at the CSD Faculty lunch on
Tuesday, Jan. 20 in MJH 146 at 12:15.
-------
∂16-Jan-87 0822 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Document 86-019
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 08:21:50 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 16 Jan 87 11:21:29-EST
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1987 11:21 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12271401438.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: "David A. Moon" <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Cc: mike%acorn@LIVE-OAK.LCS.MIT.EDU, x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Document 86-019
In-reply-to: Msg of 15 Jan 1987 23:13-EST from David A. Moon <Moon at STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
This discussion should probably be on the Common-Lisp mailing list, but
since I'm responding to Moon's mail to this list, I'll do it here.
I agree totally with Moon on this one -- I was just about to write a
reply with essentially the same content as his, supporting the idea
except for parts 3 and 5.
If the goal is to make functional-style programming easier without
disrupting Common Lisp too badly, I think your proposals (minus numbers
3 and 5) do the job about 90% as well as a move to Lisp1. For those
people whose goal is to merge Common Lisp with Scheme and/or Eulisp,
then only a move to Lisp1 will do. However, unless great progress is
made on the macro issue and on ways of making the conversion less
painful, I think that a move to Lisp1 is unlikely; less radical
proposals such as yours are definitely worth considering.
I like this much better than the &function idea, by the way. that
seems very confusing and irregular to me.
-- Scott
∂16-Jan-87 1115 BRAD@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Monday holiday
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 11:15:29 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 11:00:57-PST
From: Brad Horak <Brad@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Monday holiday
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
Monday, January 19 is an official Stanford holiday honoring
Martin Luther King's birthday. Enjoy your 3 day weekend!
--Brad
-------
∂16-Jan-87 1124 Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM Re: Document 86-019, &function, etc.
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 11:24:34 PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 16 JAN 87 11:24:00 PST
Date: 16 Jan 87 11:24 PST
From: Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: Document 86-019, &function, etc.
In-reply-to: various
To: x3j13@sail.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <870116-112400-2364@Xerox>
These proposals fail to meet what I believe is the primary goal of those
who want 1-lisp over 2-lisp, namely, to simplify and make more
consistent the programming language semantics, to reduce the number of
different kinds of references in the language.
Instead, they do the opposite. While superficially bearing some
resemblance to 1-lisp, there are more rules for evaluation rather than
fewer, the description of the language and its semantics is complex,
there are odd exceptions. (For example, in the
funcall-if-car-of-form-is-list proposal, what if the car of the form is
a macro? A macro that expands to a symbol? To a lambda?).
It does no good to pick some minor syntactic feature of 1-lisp,
implement that, and ignore the basic principle.
∂16-Jan-87 1715 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice Next Week's PLANLUNCHES -- Ernie Davis and Matt Morgenstern
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 17:15:38 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 16 Jan 87 17:06:40-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA10633; Fri,
16 Jan 87 17:10:22 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 17:10:18-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: Next Week's PLANLUNCHES -- Ernie Davis and Matt Morgenstern
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 16-Jan-87 17:10:18.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
VISITORS: Please arrive 5 minutes early so that you can be escorted up
from the E-building receptionist's desk. Thanks!
NOTE: NEXT WEEK THERE ARE 2 SEMINARS, EACH AT UNUSUAL TIMES AND PLACES...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMMONSENSE REASONING ABOUT SOLID OBJECTS
Ernie Davis
New York University
2:00 PM, MONDAY, January 19
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
When a small die is dropped inside a large funnel, it comes
out the bottom. How do you know that? I will discuss why this
problem is harder than it looks; what kinds of knowledge could
be used to solve it; and how this knowledge can be expressed
formally.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTELLIGENT DATABASE SYSTEMS
Matthew Morgenstern (MORGENSTERN@SRI-CSL)
SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 22
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
The goal is to create databases which are more intelligent about the
application they serve and more active as part of an overall system. Our
approach builds upon expert systems and other A.I. techniques to develop
capabilities for: (1) knowledge-based support for managing data,
(2) integrity and fault tolerance of the database, (3) interactive
formation and evaluation of what-if scenarios (plans), and (4) offloading
data-oriented activities and requirements from application programs --
thus aiding the software development process by providing a higher level
interface to the database.
We also are interested in (5) the relationship between inference and DB
security -- that is, detecting potential violations of security in a
multi-level database due to inference of high level data from visible
lower level data; and (6) support for heterogeneous distributed databases.
These capabilities require that the database be augmented with knowledge
of the application. We utilize constraints to describe the structure,
behavior, and requirements (semantics) of the application. Collections of
rules are associated with these constraints and automatically invoked in
response to database activity to enforce the application requirements.
-------
∂16-Jan-87 1923 HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU BATS at IBM on Friday, February 13th.
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 19:23:12 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 19:17:46-PST
From: Ramsey Haddad <HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: BATS at IBM on Friday, February 13th.
To: aflb.local@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12271520931.7.HADDAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The next Bay Area Theory Seminar will be held at IBM Almaden on
Friday, February 13th. Titles and abstracts will be announced later,
but mark your calenders now.
-------
∂16-Jan-87 1939 @Score.Stanford.EDU:JACOBS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU CSD potluck!!
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 19:39:30 PST
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 16 Jan 87 19:33:23-PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 19:29:46-PST
From: Joseph D. Jacobs <JACOBS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CSD potluck!!
To: csd@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, csd-list@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12271523116.9.JACOBS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
The event we've all been waiting for -- the return of the CSD POTLUCK!
This time it will be held on Friday, January 30.
The Nilssons have once again been kind enough to offer us the use of
their house. Unfortunately, we must limit the number of people, so
act early and secure your place. However, if you are unable to attend
this one, don't worry! We will be having a second ( perhaps better? )
potluck later in the year.
For those of you who don't know how this works, a quick explanation.
This is basically an excuse to get CSD people together in an informal,
computerless environment. We ask people to bring food in one of the
following categories:
Salad
Main Dish
Dessert
Drink
We'll supply plates, cups, and utensils. Based on past experience,
we'll especially welcome main dishes, but we'll prod as necessary to
ensure a reasonable balance. Consider this a prime opportunity to
test out your recipe for sauce du fromage au Myers, or some other
Canadian culinary treat.
To recap:
WHAT: CSD Potluck
WHEN: Friday evening, January 30
WHO: CSD faculty, staff, students, and their guests
WHERE: Nils Nilsson's house
HOW: directions to the Nilssons' house will be provided
WHY: because
rsvp to jacobs@sushi. please tell us what you plan to bring (one of
the categories above is specific enough) and also how many people
you'll be bringing.
-------
∂16-Jan-87 2023 @SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA,@sri-venice.ARPA:lansky@sri-venice PLANLUNCH CORRECTION!
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 20:22:16 PST
Received: from sri-venice.ARPA by SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA via SMTP with TCP;
Fri, 16 Jan 87 20:17:54-PST
Received: by sri-venice.ARPA (1.1/SMI-2.0) id AA10835; Fri,
16 Jan 87 20:22:24 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 20:22:19-PST
From: Amy Lansky <LANSKY@SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
Subject: PLANLUNCH CORRECTION!
To: planlunch@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-Id: <SUN-MM(195)+TOPSLIB(124) 16-Jan-87 20:22:19.SRI-VENICE.ARPA>
There was a slight error in the preceding PLANLUNCH announcement.
Next week's seminars are MONDAY at 3PM and THURSDAY at 11AM.
My apologies for any confusion...
-Amy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMMONSENSE REASONING ABOUT SOLID OBJECTS
Ernie Davis
New York University
2:00 PM, MONDAY, January 19
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTELLIGENT DATABASE SYSTEMS
Matthew Morgenstern (MORGENSTERN@SRI-CSL)
SRI International
11:00 AM, THURSDAY, January 22
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
∂16-Jan-87 2059 COWER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Brad & I missing next week
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 20:59:32 PST
Date: Fri 16 Jan 87 20:53:13-PST
From: Rich Cower <COWER@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Brad & I missing next week
To: folks@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cower@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
We will be in Washington, D.C. attending a USENIX/UNIFORUM meeting.
I am going to try and return Thursday - if it works I should be
around on Friday. Brad will be returning over the weekend. Phone
messages can be left at the Shoreham hotel - 202-234-0700. We will
try and read mail while away, depending on terminal access.
Bill Croft and Doug Jones are the best people to contact while
we are away. I've also asked the consultants to be as visible
as possible next week.
Thanks...Rich
-------
∂16-Jan-87 2155 willc%tekchips.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET Re: Document 86-019
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 87 21:55:29 PST
Received: from tektronix.tek.com by csnet-relay.csnet id ab04827;
17 Jan 87 0:43 EST
Received: by tektronix.TEK.COM (5.31/6.18)
id AA04079; Fri, 16 Jan 87 21:25:51 PST
Received: by tekchips.TEK (5.31/6.16)
id AA12223; Fri, 16 Jan 87 14:56:26 PST
Message-Id: <8701162256.AA12223@tekchips.TEK>
To: x3j13@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: mike%acorn@LIVE-OAK.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Document 86-019
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 15 Jan 87 14:31 est.
<8701160757.AA02526@tekchips.TEK>
Date: 16 Jan 87 14:56:21 PST (Fri)
From: willc%tekchips.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET
Mike Beckerle asked some interesting questions and suggested some possible
answers. Ultimately, he is asking for a philosophy of programming language
design. Here's mine.
* * *
Programming is hard because it's hard to know what you want the machine
to accomplish (the problem), and it's hard to know how to accomplish it
(the algorithm). If you knew these two things, it ought to be easy to
program the machine to do what you want.
It usually isn't. The reason is that you have to learn all sorts of arcane
things about the computing environment and programming language that you
use. These details have nothing to do with the problem you're trying
to solve. Even so, they may be almost as difficult to master.
Most people, being reasonable, don't try to master their programming
language completely, particularly if their programming language is big
and complicated. In my experience, the main thing that a programming
language can do for these people is to be consistent with a simple mental
model that they can use without getting into trouble. Extra features
that help people get their work done more easily are nice, but it is more
important that the language not get in their way. It is most important
that the language not be full of nasty surprises for its users.
This principle of programming language design is sometimes known as the
"Law of Least Astonishment", in waggish recognition of the fact that even
the best design efforts are ad hoc in part. Its motivation is very
pragmatic, its application very practical. It says that simplicity,
elegance, and aesthetics pay off.
* * *
In answer to some of Mike's specific questions, people prefer a single-
environment Lisp because of style, conceptual economy, and aesthetics; I
see little difference between conceptual economy and aesthetics, which is
perhaps a clue to my sense of aesthetics. Inertia can't be the reason,
since most of us who prefer the single environment were once more familiar
and comfortable with two-cell Lisps. Macros don't have anything to do with
this issue, so macrophobia can't be the reason; if anything, the problems
with Common Lisp-style macros are exacerbated by a single environment.
Speaking for myself, politics isn't the reason I prefer a single
environment; rather my preference for a single environment, the current
preponderance of political clout on the side of multiple environments,
and the use of that clout in the current push for Lisp standards are the
reasons I myself now seek political clout.
* * *
Mike's other question asks whether enough syntactic sugar could be added
to Common Lisp to make functional programming palatable. Well, Common
Lisp certainly could be improved in this respect, and I second David
Moon's remarks on changes 1 and 2.
As for changes 3, 4, and 5, these changes seem designed to make it possible
to program as though Common Lisp were a Lisp1 dialect, but they only go
part of the way. You might be able to go all the way by doing things like
defining the LAMBDA macro so it automatically wraps an equivalent of the
FUNCTIONAL macro around its body, by defining a SET! special form that
assigns to both the value and functional bindings (which, by the way, can't
easily be written in Common Lisp as it stands because only global functional
bindings can be assigned), and so on. This would amount to implementing
a Lisp1 sublanguage inside Common Lisp. Unless you're willing to go
all the way to that Lisp1 sublanguage, I think it's a bad idea to try
to paper over the fact that Common Lisp has multiple environments.
If the changes go only part of the way, and we teach people to use the
proposed syntax and encourage them to think about Common Lisp as though
it is a Lisp1 dialect, then they will probably end up getting burned
even more often than they do now. Even people who understand full well
that Common Lisp has multiple environments might slip into the cozier
Lisp1 mode of thought and get burned by the Lisp2 reality.
It's the law of least astonishment: A Lisp2 dialect that looks like a
Lisp1 dialect 98% of the time may be worse than a straightforward Lisp2
dialect.
Peace,
William Clinger
∂17-Jan-87 1117 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU tidbit
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jan 87 11:17:24 PST
Date: Sat 17 Jan 87 11:13:48-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: tidbit
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12271694971.11.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here's an excerpt from a thank-you letter Jim Gibbons wrote personally
to someone who gave a gift to the CSD:
"Incidentally, I should add a word about the impact that Computer
Science is making within Engineering. At the risk of exaggerating, I
think the new directions that we will be seeing in the next few years
will eventually be regarded as a watershed in the way the entire field
of engineering is conducted. So I send you additional thanks on behalf
of the rest of the faculty."
-------
∂17-Jan-87 1210 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>: suggest you send msg to faculty]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jan 87 12:10:47 PST
Date: Sat 17 Jan 87 12:07:09-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>: suggest you send msg to faculty]
To: ac@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12271704683.11.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I heartily endorse Carolyn's suggestion---especially in light
of recent research funding difficulties. -Nils
---------------
Mail-From: TAJNAI created at 12-Jan-87 09:25:09
Date: Mon 12 Jan 87 09:25:07-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: suggest you send msg to faculty
To: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12270364467.23.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils, I suggest that you send a msg to the faculty requesting that
they encourage their students to keep their fellowships enforce.
Occasionally a student will drop a fellowship and the professor agrees
to support him/her. Also, students sometimes misjudge their rate of
progress, tell the funding agency they won't need an additional year,
then end up not finishing.
If there is a choice, students should keep fellowships enforce until
dissertation is turned in.
Carolyn
-------
-------
∂17-Jan-87 1933 @Score.Stanford.EDU:LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU CSD-CF Pricing Policies and New Rates
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jan 87 19:32:20 PST
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 17 Jan 87 19:27:49-PST
Date: 17 Jan 87 1931 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: CSD-CF Pricing Policies and New Rates
To: Faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
This message discusses:
(1) the "unbusinesslike" pricing policies of CSD-CF and
(2) new rates for CSD-CF computer services that were announced at
the end of December.
For those of you who read the SU-COMPUTERS bboard, this material has
already appeared there.
Pricing Policies
Some people were distressed by the "unbusinesslike" retroactive increase
in CSD-CF computer charges that were imposed late last summer. The direct
cause of that surcharge was that a manager here neglected to track income
against budget and by the time we discovered this blunder it was too late
to make a graceful adjustment in rates. While the management has changed,
I am afraid that we cannot guarantee that CSD-CF will always be operated
in a businesslike way in the future for the simple reason that it is not a
business.
If it _were_ a business, then we would set prices so as to be price-
competitive in the market -- at substantially higher rates than are now
charged. If income ran below expectations, we would then either alter our
marketing plan or adjust our rates with the expectation of making money in
the future, or decide to get out of the business.
In fact, CSD-CF operates as a cost center under the regulations and
supervision of the federal government and is not permitted to make a
profit. Under these guidelines, if cost center income is within 5% of
expenses at the end of a fiscal year (August 31), the difference is
carried forward into the following year's cost center budget. If income
exceeds costs by more than 5% at the end of the year, then the entire
excess is immediately distributed as dividends to all users. If there is
a loss of more than 5%, the Computer Science Department has the honor of
eating it -- a genuine "no-win" situation. Inasmuch as there are very few
ways to make money within a nonprofit corporation such as Stanford, such
losses would have to be paid from Computer Science gift funds. We are
reluctant to use these limited and valuable funds in that way.
The primary goal of CSD-CF is to provide computer services essential to
the Department's research, teaching and administrative needs, while
keeping expenses as low as possible and adjusting service fees as
necessary to stay within the 5% range. Any changes in utilization
patterns, catastrophic equipment failures, or other unforseen events that
put the balance outside this range will result in rate changes,
retroactive if necessary but in no case going back beyond the beginning of
the fiscal year (September 1). We recognize that retroactive changes
cause serious budgeting problems for our users and we will do our best to
avoid them.
While manufacturers' donations, educational discounts, and access to
government-supplied equipment tend to keep our costs low, we have little
direct control over prices: they are determined by the interaction between
costs and usage rates. These prices are generally much lower than
commercial rates; any users who do not believe this are encouraged to shop
around. While the prices are low, they also may fluctuate unpredictably.
In view of the environment in which our cost centers operate, when we are
accused of being unbusinesslike we are likely to smile and say "Yes,
aren't you glad!"
New Rates
New rates are given below for CSD-CF computer services that are effective
January 1, pending approval. These rates are generally a bit lower than
those currently in effect because of two principal factors.
1. CSD-CF has begun charging research contracts directly for more of
of the ancillary services that it provides, reducing the costs to
be recovered from computer charges.
2. Certain computer services that have been free in the past will now
be charged for.
For example, charges will now be made for ethernet connections within
Jacks Hall at the rate of $30/month for workstations and minis and
$300/month for mainframes.
NAVAJO prime CPU time charges are being reduced from $1.39 to $.72 per
minute. SAIL and SCORE prime CPU rates change from $2.80 to $2.22 per
minute. In order to make charges more closely model costs, all active
computer accounts will be charged a monthly fee of $5.00 to partially
cover accounting and billing costs.
LaBrea has operated as a free archival file service in the past but will
now become a cost center. Its disk storage rates are substantially lower
than those of other systems, however. Any users who wish to continue
using LaBrea must have their account manager send their Stanford account
number to Lynn Gotelli (Gotelli@Score). Any existing accounts for which
this has not been done have been frozen.
Our new Sun fileserver called JEEVES also becomes a cost center, but with
charges only for disk storage. Users who wish to run Unix on the
departmental Sun workstations must open accounts on JEEVES in the same way
as for LaBrea.
Les Earnest
CSD-CF Director Pro Tem
Computer Science Department Computer Facility
Cost Center Rates
Beginning January 1, 1987
A Time B Time C Time
A Time B Time C Time Total Expense
Weekday hours 8:00-17:59 18:00-23:59 0:00-7:59
Weekend hours 13:00-17:59 18:00-12:59
Rates Full 2/3 of A rate 1/3 of A rate
JEEVES Fileserver (Sun-3/Unix)
Account charge 5.00/month
Disk space 1.08/megabit-mo.*
NAVAJO Computer (DEC VAX-780/Unix)
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time .72/minute .48/minute .24/minute
Disk space 1.18/megabit-mo.*
LABREA Archive (DEC VAX-750/Unix)
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 1.44/minute .96/minute .48/minute
Disk space .44/megabit-mo.*
SAIL (DEC-10/Waits) & SCORE (DEC-20/TOPS-20) Computers
Account charge 5.00/month
Connect time 1.00/hour .67/hour .33/hour
CPU time 2.22/minute 1.48/minute .74/minute
Disk space 1.99/megabit-mo.*
----------
* Note that a "megabit" is precisely 1,000,000 bits. Storage is allocated
in blocks whose size is system-dependent.
----------
Printers
Dovers .09/page
Imagen/Apple .09/page
Boise .07/page
Phototypsetter
Page charges 4.50/page
Ethernet Maintenance
Workstations 30.00/month
& minis
Mainframes & 300.00/month
bridges
SUSHI Computer (DEC-20/TOPS-20) maintenance and depreciation
DEC-20 8,420.00/month
VAX-750 Computer Maintenance
Basic VAX-750 450.00/month
RA81 Disk Drive 100.00/month
Ken. 9300 Tape 200.00/month
Fujitsu M2351 Disk 50.00/month
TU78 100.00/month
CDC 9766 Contrl. 100.00/month
Emulex SC758 66.00/month
8 line term. MUX 16.00/month